State v. Arthur Greenfield, 19145.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Citation205 S.W. 619
Docket NumberNo. 19145.,19145.
PartiesSTATE ex rel. LAY, Pros. Atty., v. ARTHUR GREENFIELD, Inc.
Decision Date05 July 1918

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cole County; J. G. Slate, Judge.

Action by the State, on relation of James H. Lay, Prosecuting Attorney of Cole County, against Arthur Greenfield, Incorporated. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The state, at the relation of the prosecuting attorney of Cole county, brought this suit against the defendant to recover a forfeiture of $1,000 under the provisions of section 3040, R. S. 1909, for failure to comply with section 3039, R. S. 1909, requiring foreign corporations doing business in this state to file a copy of their charter, a statement of their capital, to take out a license, etc. The trial resulted in a judgment for the state for $1,000, and the defendant duly appealed the cause to this court.

The facts are undisputed, and are stated by counsel for the state in the following language:

"Defendant is a corporation for pecuniary profit formed in the state of New York, with a capital stock of $15,000, and it began business with a capital of $1,000. It was organized for the purpose of razing and improving buildings and general construction and to build fireproof ceilings, partitions, elevator, and dumb-waiter shafts, etc.

"About January, 1914, defendant entered into contract with the John Gill & Sons Co.. by the terms of which defendant agreed to erect, set in place, and completely finish in the state capitol building certain fireproof construction and reinforced concrete, for which it was to receive $120,000 upon completion of said work. The contract was not binding until approved by the State Capitol Commission Board at Jefferson City, Mo., and was approved by said board on March 20, 1916.

"The defendant came into Cole county, Mo., to do the work contracted for, employed a superintendent, erected an office, and proceeded to carry on its business in Cole county. The superintendent took charge of the office, employed the men necessary to do the work, agreed with them upon the price of their labor, kept an account for the corporation, and deposited money in the Central Missouri Trust Company at Jefferson City, on which he drew checks and pail the men that he employed. He kept books, plans, and specifications at the office at Jefferson City and paid the men at that place. The defendant employed between May, 1914, and the time this action was commenced, from 5 to 70 men on the job.

"The defendant ordered material from Kansas, Pennsylvania, and other places, to be shipped and used at Jefferson City, Mo., purchased the lumber necessary for the work from the Allee-Jordan Lumber Company at Jefferson City, Mo., and the evidence shows that defendant used in said work 8 or 9 car loads of reinforced iron and from 40 to 60 cars of cement and other material.

"The defendant maintained an office at Jefferson City, which was in charge of the superintendent and foreman, and where the business of the corporation...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Johnson v. Waverly Brick & Coal Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • July 5, 1918
    ...... other freight to and from Waverly to and from other points in the state; and the plaintiff was an employé of the Coal Company, engaged in ......
  • Moffett v. Commerce Trust Co., 39509.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • February 11, 1946
    ...94 S.W. 855; State ex rel. Jones v. Howe Scale Co. of Illinois, 253 Mo. 63, 161 S.W. 789; State ex rel. Lay v. Arthur Greenfield, Inc., 205 S.W. 619; State on inf. McKittrick v. Wiley, 349 Mo. 239, 160 S.W. (2d) 677; Kopp v. Moffett, 167 S.W. (2d) 87; State ex rel. L.J. Mueller Furnace Co. ......
  • Clark v. Atchison & Eastern Bridge Co., 31102
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • August 24, 1933
    ......Ransom, 79 S.W. 260; Spohn v. Railroad, 87 S.W. 84; State v. Prim, 11 S.W. 732; Haynes v. Trenton, 18 S.W. 1005; Burdict v. ......
  • National Refrigerator Company v. Southwest Missouri Light Company
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 6, 1921
    ......1909,. relating to the licensing of foreign corporations in this. State, because the contract and the evidence adduced. regarding the performance ...500;. Browning v. Waycross, 233 U.S. 16; State ex rel. v. Arthur Greenfield Co., 205 S.W. 619; City of St. Louis v. Parker-Washington ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT