Prince Investment Co. v. St. Paul & Sioux City Land Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment for defendant entered in the district court for Ramsey county, pursuant to the order of Otis, J. Registration of transfers of stock is for the benefit of the corporation alone. Baldwin v. Canfield, 26 Minn. 43; Joslyn v. St. Paul, 44 Minn. 183. The lien of a corporation upon shares of its stock for debts due it, under G. S. 1878, c. 34, §§ 114 and 135, attaches whether the debt accrued before or after the debtor acquired the stock.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment for defendant entered in the district court for Ramsey county, pursuant to the order of Otis, J. Registration of transfers of stock is for the benefit of the corporation alone. Baldwin v. Canfield, 26 Minn. 43; Joslyn v. St. Paul, 44 Minn. 183. The lien of a corporation upon shares of its stock for debts due it, under G. S. 1878, c. 34, §§ 114 and 135, attaches whether the debt accrued before or after the debtor acquired the stock. Schmidt v. Hennepin, 35 Minn. 511. Notice, if given, would not defeat the lien. Upon the question of who is entitled to vote…
1Opinion of the CourtBuck, J.
The following are the stipulated facts upon which this controversy depends. On November 14,1891, one Moore purchased of the Prince Investment Company 56 shares of the capital stock of that company, of the par value of $50 each, and paid therefor by conveying to that company certain land of which he held the legal title. He was thereupon duly registered as a stockholder in that company, and a certificate for said shares was duly made out in his name, and executed by the proper officers of the company, but he never requested or received a delivery thereof. Prior to his purchase of said stock…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Baldwin v. CanfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879
- Nicollet National Bank v. City BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Joslyn v. St. Paul Distilling Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- McLachlan v. BranchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
3Cited by12 opinions
- Young v. New Pedrara Onyx Co.California Court of Appeal · 1920
- Ardmore State Bank v. MasonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Geo. A. Hormel Company v. First National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- Just v. State Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Benson Lumber Co. v. ThorntonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.