The herald., 1894-11-29

In the suit OF @. J: Haettel W. George
]. Ainsworth, wherein certain stock in
terests in the Centinsla Inglewood COM
psny were concerned, Judge York yes
terday rendered the following opinion,
in which no reviews the various steps
taken since the action was first insti'
tuted;
This Is an action against defendant
as q stock holder of the Centinela 1ngle-
wood company, q corporation, by
Judgment creditor OF the corporation.
The plaintiff in hic complaint alleges an
indie btedness OF the defendant to the
corporation for balance unpaid on his
stock, and seeks to obtain satisfaction OF
said judgment from the amount 30 due
said corporation from defendant. The
Centinela Inglewood company was in-
corporated on November Z, 1887, with
capital stock of $1,000. 900. divided into
10, 600 shares of the par value OF 500
per share. The defendant became Q
stakeholder in said corporation on Aug
ust 18th, 1883. by the purchase OF loo
shares of said stock and the transfer OF
same to him. Tho stock was transferred,
to him as George j. Ainsworth. trus-
tee, but the name OF the beneficiary
was not disclosed. There was paid to
said corporation, prior to the assign
ment to defendant. for said stock OF
defendant, $40 per share, and there re-.
mains due to said company thereon tho
sum of $4,000. All OF the stock of
said ompany was issued TO various peI-
sons. Said corporation has no property
except amounts due to it on unpaid
subscriptions. Plaintiff recovered said
judgment December 10. 1892, aud the
same is wholly unsstisfed. An execu-'
ton iseued on said judgment to the
sheriff OF this county was returned by
him nulla bona before the commence
ment OF this action. The corporation
has never made any 'call" on defend-
ant for his unpaid subscription. The
defendant admits that the assignee OF
stock in corporation assumes the bur.
den of paying the balance of the sui b.
ecription price remaining unpaid at the
time of the assignment, but contends
that unless the corporation can collect
the debt the plaintiff 10 without rem
edy against the stockholders. That
az the original liability OF defendant
to the corporation had its inception in
1888. elk years before the commencement
of this action, the corporation should
uhV0 uhuo u CRil AOI bAo uuPUiO uuU-
ecription not later than four years there
after, and bscauee The corporation did
not do 60, but ceased to be q going
company in 1890, the right to recover
the remainder Of the unpaid subscrip-
tions is barred by the statute of limita-
tions. But while the corporation ceased
in 1899 to do the business it had been
engaged in prior to that time, it ID not
shown that the plaintiff knew of such
cessation of business. He commenced
his action againet the corporation April
16, 1892, and the corporation answered
June z, 1892. In its answer in tina. case
the corporation specially admitted that
it was then a corporation duly organized
and existing. That action seems, from
the record introduced in this case, to
have been vigorously contested. After
judgment against the corporation in
the JUSTICES court, whore the case was
pending, it appealed to this court. Here
on December 10, 1892, . judgment was
entered in favor OF the plain.
tiff and against said corporation.
the defendant. In the findings of
fact in that case the court finds. that
during all the times hereinafter men
toned defendant has been and still ia
corporation organized and existing un-