Bisbee daily review., 1902-08-05
SOUTH BISBEE
 LAW SUIT
JUDGE ALLEN OF LOS ANGELES sUsTAINs DEMURRER TO
 PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT


 murrer ha4-
 There was furry created yester- day among the local stockholders of the South Bisbee Mining and Town site Development company, when it became known that a decision had been rendered in the superior court in Los Angeles adverse to their claims in lawsuit instituted in Los Angeles against the board of directors of the company in which an injunction was asked for to prohibit the board from issuing certain treasury stock of the company. When the time came or for the trial of the injunction proceed ings a demurrer was filed by the at torneys of the Los Angeles stockhold- CTS. The demurrer was argued early in June and submitted and decision was withheld till Friday last
 The stockholders in Cochise coun- ty. who brought this suit. or who are behind it, own about 300,000 shares of the stock, ranging in amounts of 25O to 1S6. 900 shares. MT Jos. Jetson is one of the largest stockholders. All the stocwholders seen yesterday ex- pressed the opinion that the decision rendered by Judge Allen would not end the lawsuit
 Messrs. Hunsaker & Witt are the Los Angeles attorneys for the plain tiffs in the case. Neale & Leaven- worth, of Bisbee. are the local attoT neys. The Los Angeles law firm are disposed. so it is said. to amend the complaint, but there is a decided opinion here that it would be better 70 get the case out of Los Angeles as soon as possible and believe it best to appeal to the supreme court of the state on the decision just rendered.
 The property owned by the South Bisbee company was recently sold to the Calumet X Pittsburg company, who are now in possession of it. A payment was made on the property and not long ago the money due the stockholders here according to their holdings. was sent them here This was after the institution of the suit. The local stockholders returned the checks sent them to. the secretary of the company. as they feared by ac- cepting any payment they might pre- judice their rights in court The amount of money returned by Bisbee stockholders amounted to about SlS,- GOO.
 Following is the decision of the court as rendered:
 Opinion of the Court
 In the superior court, in and for the county of Los Angeles, state ot California
 No. 3S866.
 Maurice Denn and Martin OHare plaintiffs. vs. South Bisbee Copper Mining, etc, Company, ct al, defend ants.
 This is an action for relief upon the ground of fraud and for the cancella- ton of certain shares of capital stock, heretofore issued by the defendant company The complaint approaches very nearly. in several instances, to a statement of facts indicating fraud, but in each instance. in my opinion, stops short of complete allegations. It alleges that the promoters of the cor poration caused the corporation to is sue out it's capital stock in such way that the parties to whom the stock was issued became trustees to said corporation; but fails to allege any contract. agreement or act of the par ties out of which such trust relation could grow. IL ayers that all o1 the property conveyed to the corporation by Martin was, at the time of it's con veyance. the property of the corpor- ation: yet. in previous ale gauons the complaint alleges that this property was acquired by Martin as the agent of the promoters and of the corpora tion.
 It alleges that the issuance of all oI the capital stock was for the pur- pose of wrongfully and unlawful!y che eating and defrauding the corpora ton. and yet it shows that at the time when all the stock was issued to those promoters. that they received a con veyance of property 10 wit: certain options and certain mining claims To cated by the agent of the promoters and of the corporation, which would be in effect, an allegation that the same was the property of the promot' CTS and the corporation Hence, the corporation obtaining the promoters interest in the options and locations did obtain property of value.
 And it further shows that. at the time it received the property and js sued the stock. there were no other stockholders. other than the promot CTS. and could be none. in that all ol stock of the corporation was issued to them: and it must follow that there was no one who could be defrauded if the property received by the cor poration was valueless. The stocl had no value.
 IL ayers that Martin. ss agent. never raid anything for the property con yeyed to the corporation. but rowh@ r' ayers that it was of no value.
 r s-e-s tha1 -.artin and the otheI promoters promised the plaintiffs when they obtained the option. tba- all of the capital stock not used in the