Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hill v. Atoka Coal & Mining Co.

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided July 9, 1894Published

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.—Hon. James E. Withrow, Judge. (1) The objection to the introduction of testimony under the petition should have been sustained, because there is no averment therein, charging that a dividend had been declared by the board of directors of the defendant company. Until that is done, the relation of debtor and creditor does not subsist between the corporation and its stockholders.

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.—Hon. James E. Withrow, Judge. (1) The objection to the introduction of testimony under the petition should have been sustained, because there is no averment therein, charging that a dividend had been declared by the board of directors of the defendant company. Until that is done, the relation of debtor and creditor does not subsist between the corporation and its stockholders. Cook on Stock and Stockholders, sec. 544. (2) The plaintiff can not recover, because the resolution declaring the dividend excepted from the benefits of such declaration,…

1DissentBurgess, J.

(dissenting.)—This is a suit brought by plaintiff to recover a dividend of $30 per share upon one hundred shares of stock included in certificate number 14, issued to E. J. Crandall and by him assigned to plaintiff.

The petition is as follows: ‘‘Plaintiff states that defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Illinois having property in the state of Missouri, and an office in the city of St. Louis in said state for the transaction of its usual and customary business. Plaintiff further states that defendant is indebted to plaintiff in the sum of $3,000 for dividends…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Merchants' National Bank v. RichardsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1879
  2. Merchant's National Bank v. RichardsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
  3. Durfee v. MoranSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
  4. Ryder v. Alton & Sangamon RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1852
  5. Alling v. WenzellAppellate Court of Illinois · 1888

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API