Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1902-10-02
SENSATIONAL
CHARGES
MADE
ALLEGED THAT LIABILITIES OF
EQUITABLE LOAN AND Sc
cURITY COMPANY EXCEED
THE ASSETS.

A sensation was sprung in the Fulton
superior court Tuesday afternoon, when
Judge Lumpkin refused to change or mod
fly his original restraining order In the
case of P. A. Warlng and others against
the Equitable Loan and Security company
because Of an affidavit of A. L. Waldo
an expert accountant and examiner, VINO
swore that, according to the books of the
company, the liabilities Of the company
were Sol, 21l. 33, while the assets of the
company, according to the company
claims, were only $3.50. 7Sl.56. leaving S4O'-
47sT7 less than the redemption LIABILITY
OF the company.
The attorneys for the Equitable Loan
and Security company had asked for
modification of the restraining order,
which restrained the company from pro-
ceeding against members who refused TO
nav their regular monthly dues IL they
did not so desire. They asked that all
members be compelled TO pay their dues.
or that the company should fine them or
forfeit their stock.
When this modification was asked, the
attorneys for the plaintiffs. P. A. Waring
and others, introduced an affidavit from
A. L. Waldo. an expert accountant, VINO
had examined the books OF the company
at the request of the plaintiffs.
In HIS AFFIDAVIT. Mr. Waldo swore that
on September 18th, of this year, he had
begun an examination OF the books or
the Equitable Loan and Security compa-
ny, at the request of the plaintiffs.
He swore that he had not completed
an examination of the books, but that
he had completed an examination OF
every liability of the company, and had
found that the liabilities of the company
were S70-, 211.3S, as shown by the books OF
the company.
The afidavit gives the figures of all the
n ~. ~r.1 fhor. ca
Assuming that the books are correct,
and that the company now has all the as
sets disclosed by them, and crediting the
company with the assets at the valuation
placed up on them by the company, and
deducting nothing whatever for loss or
depreciation, the sum total OF the net as
sets thus shown by the company's books
amount to $3.50, 1926. Defendant company
claims there should be added to this
amount some earned interests and fines
not collected, but which are items which
do not appear upon the ledger"
He states that the liabilities of the COM
pany as shown are taken upon the basis
Of the amount paid in on the certificates,
with per cent interest on the INSTALL
ment
''The total amount of money required to
redeem all of the certificates upon the
basis of the redemption value, is SOL, 211. 33.
The total net assets of the company, as
shown by it's books, are sac, 479.77 less than
the redemption liability. Assuming that
the company possesses the assets disclosed
by the books, and that such assets are
worth 100 cents on the dollar. the company
would now need the additional sum of
S40,479.77 before 1t could fully discharge
the present obligations to the certificate
holders"
This affidavit shows that Mr.. Waldo has
examined all of the liabilities of the COM
pany, but has not gone through the assets
of the company, merely taking the figures
as shown by the company.
Mr. Ed r. Brown, one of the attorneys
for the plaintiffs, says that he will show,
when the matter is finally put on trial,
that the liabilities exceed the assets by
more than $4,000.
A temporary restraining order having
been previously secured, the defendant
moved to modify the order, and insisted
upon "a hearing of the case. declaring that
they were then ready. Owing to the
crowded condition of the docket, however,
Judge Lumpkin could not set an earlier
date than October 18th.
The afternoon session of the court was
taken up in reading the petition of the
plaintiffs and the answer TO this petition
made by the security company. In the
answer the defendant denies all the allie
cations Of the petitioners on which rest
the grounds for asking the appointment
Of a receiver.
Quite an array of counsel is concerned
in the case, the petitioners being rep
resented by Attorneys Brown & Randolph
]. L. Hopkins & Sons and Cam & Cam
of Savannah. and the defendant by Can
dler & Thomas. W. d. Thomson, Rosser
& Brandon, Hoke Smith & H. c. Peoples
and II. Z. w. Palmer.