The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-03-06
INVOLVES HALF A MILLION.
Decision of Supreme Court Yester-
day Involving Liability.


The supreme court yesterday affirmed
the decision Of the district court In the
case brought by the receivers Of the
Bank Of Minnesota against the stockhold-
ers. TO many people in st. Paul the opin-
ion means great deal.
The action was brought by Frank A.
Seymour ct al. to enforce individual LA
billty of stockholders, under chapter las,
General Laws of 1886 Plaintiff claimed
a right to enforce liability double the
amount Of the stock holdings. To this
defendants resisted, their contention be-
ing that all but limited amount of the
banks Indebtedness was actually in
Cured after the provisions of chapter AS
took effect, and that consequently the
liability Of stockholders is reduced by
the terms Of the act from a double to a
single liability.
This, the court says in its opinion, is
the real contention in the cause At the
time OF the failure the Bank of Mime
sofas Indebtedness amounted to more
than s5S30O. Prior to Aug l. 1895. the
liability OF all stockholders was IN dou-
BILE the amount Of their holdings This
act, passed at that time, reduced the la
bility to a single one. It was set up
by the receivers that certain certificates
OF deposits were simply renewals of old
ones, and that ell liability for these was
OF 1895, and that the liability Of the stock
holders was not changed from a double
to a single liability.
The trial court below held adversely
to this contention of the receivers and
ordered judgment against the stockhOid-
ers only for the amount of holdings OF
each stakeholder up to the time OF the
passage of the act Of 1895, and making
them liable in double the amount only
GIIr1a NP
rulings are contained IN the syllabus, as
follows:
Frank A Seymour ct al, as receivers
or the Bank OF Minnesota. plaintiffs,
appellants VIZ. Sophie G. Greve ct al,
defendants. Bank of Minnesota Ell al,
respondents.
Syllabus-l. Laws 1895. chapter IA. be-
Ing an act to revise the laws relating to
banks of discount and deposit, he'd to
be valid and not In conflict with section
49, article 8. Of our state constitution
following Anderson VS. Seymour, 70
2 Held that by the terms of chapter
145, Laws 1895, the right of banks to
issue bills under articles of incorpora-
ton based upon the general laws of the
state previous to that act was revoked
8. The act of 1895, chapter 1i5, reduced
the liability OF all stockholders in banks
double to q single liability after Aug.
1. 1895.
4. Evidence In this case considered
with reference to bank certificates on
deposit, and the renewal Of the same by
issue of new ones in lieu thereof. Held
that such transactions constituted new
contracts upon which the statutory liza
bility of stockholders for the debts OF
the bank is to be based.
5. The act OF 1895 did not reduce the
liability Of stockholders upon any obli-
cation created between the passage of
such act and the time when by Its terms
twas to take effect. AS to such Obit-
cations the double liability under this
previous law applied. Judgment affirmed
Lovely. j.
Another decision filed yesterday was:
Thomas Gallagher. plaintiff, VS.. irish
American Bank ct al. defendants;
William d. Hale, as receiver of the
American Savings & Loan association
appellant: William F. Donahue, receIv-
er. etc. ct al. respondents.
Order affirmed. Lovely, J.