Legal Opinion

Minnesota Thresher Manufacturing Co. v. Langdon

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 11, 1890PublishedCited by 34 opinions

In each of these cases the plaintiff appeals from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, sustaining a demurrer to the amended complaint.

1Opinion of the Court

Mitchell, J.1

While the complaints state two causes of action, yet both are for the recovery of the same thing, to wit, dividends declared and paid to the defendant stockholders by the Northwestern Manufacturing & Car Company, a manufacturing corporation, no *38part of which had been earned, and which were, therefore, just so much of the capital withdrawn and refunded to the stockholders; the corporation being then, as alleged, insolvent. The dividends were paid between May 10, 1882, and May 10,1884,, while the corporation was still an active and going concern. In May, 1884, in an action…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Vose v. GrantMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1819
  2. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. Minneapolis Engine & Machine WorksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  3. Patterson v. StewartSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
  4. Dickinson v. SeaverMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Hospes v. Northwestern Manufacturing & Car Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Summer Cottagers' Ass'n of Cape May v. City of Cape MaySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1955
  2. Hospes v. Northwestern Manuf'g & Car Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  3. Bell v. KirklandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  4. Cushing v. PerotSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  5. Colton v. MayerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1900

29 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