Schmidt v. Hennepin County Barrel Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, to recover the value of four shares of the stock of the defendant, alleged to have been unlawfully appropriated by the defendant. The action was tried by Lochren, J., who found the facts to be as follows: On May 25, 1883, one Beach, being the owner of the shares in question, assigned them to the plaintiff as security for a debt.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Hennepin county, to recover the value of four shares of the stock of the defendant, alleged to have been unlawfully appropriated by the defendant. The action was tried by Lochren, J., who found the facts to be as follows: On May 25, 1883, one Beach, being the owner of the shares in question, assigned them to the plaintiff as security for a debt. This indebtedness not being paid, plaintiff recovered judgment against Beach, and caused the shares in question to be levied upon and sold on execution, the plaintiff becoming the purchaser.…
1Opinion of the CourtGileillan, C. J.
The defendant is a corporation, created under Gen. St. 1878, c. 34, title 2. It issued stock (four shares) to one Beach, who, as is found by the court below, and is clearly proved by the evidence, prior to that time owed, and continued to owe, the company an amount exceeding considerably the par value of the stock. The only question made in the case is, had the corporation a lien on the stock for its debt?
It is difficult to see how it can be made a question, under the definite language of the statute:
“Sec. 114. * * * Such corporation shall, at all times, have a lien upon the stock or property…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Dorr v. Life Insurance Clearing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Benson v. Saffert-Gugisberg Cement Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Benson v. Saffert-Gugisberg Cement Con. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1924