State v. Ogden, 23264.
| Court | Supreme Court of Minnesota (US) |
| Citation | 191 N.W. 916,154 Minn. 425 |
| Docket Number | No. 23264.,23264. |
| Parties | STATE v. OGDEN. |
| Decision Date | 02 February 1923 |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Hennepin County; Frank M. Nye, Judge.
J. B. Ogden was convicted of selling investment contracts without a license, and he appeals. Affirmed.
The owner of a leasehold of oil lands executed an instrument, called a ‘statement and purchase,’ wherein purchasers subscribing were to have certain units, the moneys derived to be used in development, and finally a corporation was to be organized in which the unit holders were to be proportionately interested, and in the profits of which they were to share proportionately. It is held that these instruments were investment contracts within Laws 1917, c. 429, Laws 1919, cc. 105, 257, and not contracts for the sale of undivided interests in land.
An indictment charging that the defendant sold to a person named ‘and others certain investment contracts issued by him without first having obtained a license,’ he ‘being engaged in business within the state of Minnesota of selling investment contracts issued by him,’ sufficiently alleges a prohibited sale, and that such sale was not an isolated or single transaction excepted from the penalty of the statute by Laws 1917, c. 429, § 2, Laws 1919, c. 105, § 3; and the evidence sustains the allegation. H. M. Farnam and C. H. Slack, both of Minneapolis, for appellant.
Clifford L. Hilton, Atty. Gen., Montreville J. Brown, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Floyd B. Olson, Co. Atty., of Minneapolis, for the State.
The defendant was convicted in Hennepin county of the crime of selling investment contracts without a license. He appeals from the judgment.
1. The instrument claimed to be an investment contract is styled ‘statement and purchase.’ It recites that the defendant subdivided a leasehold of an 80-acre tract of land in Big Horn county, Wyo., into 4,800 equal, undivided units or fractional interests and is offering 3,000 for sale at $120,000, and that each purchaser purchased separately the number of units set opposite his name. This instrument was signed and acknowledged by the defendant. Following his acknowledgment was a statement, with indicated places for signatures of the purchasers and other data, as follows:
The said treasurer is bonded by Lion Bonding & Surety Company, to Forest Secor, President Fourth Avenue State Bank, Minneapolis, Minnesota, as obligee for the benefit of the undersigned.
+------------------------------------------------------------+
¦Name. ¦Address. ¦Units. ¦Amt. ¦When Payable. ¦
+---------+-----------+----------+-------+-------------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
+---------+-----------+----------+-------+-------------------¦
¦.........¦...........¦..........¦.......¦...................¦
+---------+-----------+----------+-------+-------------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
+---------+-----------+----------+-------+-------------------¦
¦.........¦...........¦..........¦.......¦...................¦
+------------------------------------------------------------+
The purchase was subject to the condition that all money paid was to go to the defendant, as treasurer, to be disbursed for obligations incurred or to be incurred in connection with the leasehold. This included the obligation on the defendant's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COM'N v. Crude Oil Corp., 6208.
...Similar holdings on quite similar contracts wherein avoidance of the state Blue Sky Laws was sought, appear in State v. Ogden, 154 Minn. 425, 191 N.W. 916; People v. McCalla, 63 Cal. App. 783, 220 P. Contracts of widely varying content which have been held under the state Blue Sky Laws to b......
-
State v. Heath, 276.
...S.E. 858]a bonus of $70 for each $1,000, from the profits obtained on the sale of contracts. It was adhered to in State v. Ogden, 154 Minn. 425, 191 N. W. 916, in which the "unit holders" were to participate in profits in proportion to their holdings, and in State v. Bushard, 164 Minn. 455,......
-
Stern v. National City Co.
...Corp., Mass., 10 N.E.2d 472. That the security involved required registration under the Minnesota Blue Sky law, see State v. Ogden, 154 Minn. 425, 191 N.W. 916; State v. Nordstrom, supra. See also Commissioner of Banks v. Chase Sec. Corp., Mass., 10 N.E.2d 472, appeal to U. S. Supreme Court......
-
State v. Heath, 276.
...[153 S.E. 858.] a bonus of $70 for each $1,000, from the profits obtained on the sale of contracts. It was adhered to in State v. Ogden, 154 Minn. 425, 191 N.W. 916, in which the "unit holders" were to participate in profits in proportion to their holdings, and in State v. Bushard, 164 Minn......