The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1902-07-04
ASSESSED TOO HIGH
s11sas
Supreme Court Supports Po-
5 sition Taken by Alleman-
s~ * e. e
MIA Stockholders
:e.t 'easssss q
NEED NOT PAY TWICE
Receivers Action in Calling for Full
Assessment From Those Who Had
Paid so Per Cent Illegal :.
Other Decisions.

In his appeal to the supreme court
from the ruling of the Ramsey county
district court in the Allemannia bank
cases, w. F. Hunt, receiver of the
bank, has gained nothing. The higher
tribunal, In a decision handed down
yesterday. upholds the trial court in
the Judgment that the stockholders of
the bank who paid half of the amount
of their liability for the reorganization
of the institution after it's first failure
are liable only for the remainder of
their stock liability. This point was
tested upon the question of the liabil-
ity of Charles c. Roosen, who held $500
or stock in the bank and paid $3.50 to-
ward the reorganization. Mr.. Hunt,
who was appointed receiver of the
bank subsequent to this reorganiZa-
ton, sued all of the stockholders for
the full amount of their statutory LA
bility, and on behalf of the plaintiff a
question was raised as to the legality
OF the reorganization. The amount in
Volved in this decision Of yesterday Is
approximately 100000.
Another highly important decision of
yesterday is that in the case of the
Minneapolis Fire and Marine Insur-
ance company, in which also the court
af11rmS the order of the trial court.
The purpose of this suit was to enforce
the liability of stockholders of the Min
neapolis Fire and Marine Mutual In
surance company, and by reason of
the fact that the receivers of the COM
pany, William S. Dwinnell and John C.
Sweet, were unable to produce a GER
tain note Of $1,000, which was claimed
10 nave been part of the company's
guaranty fund, it could not be proven
that the company had ever been legally
authorized to do a marine insurance
business, and therefore it was held by
both trial and the supreme court that
the stockholders could not be held to
be liable under $199, 900 of similar notes
which went to make up the remainder
OF the, guaranty fund. The note in
question was said to have been signed
by Frank Haywood, business man of
Minneapolis, and one of the stockhold-
ers of the company.
The syllabi in the above, and other
cases decided yesterday, are as fol-
lows:
Cannot Be Assessed Twice.
VIM F: Hunt, as Receiver Of the Allie
MAMMA Bank, Appellant, vs. Charles G.
ROoSen, Respondent.
banking corporation organized under the
. J. The Allemannia Bank of st. Paul a
laws of the state, became insolvent in
1897, and receivers were appointed to
take charge of and wind up its affairs
Subsequently,, in April following, the APP
po1ntment OF receivers, a majority of the
creditors petitioned the district court of
ramsey county to permit and authorize,
under chapter SO, Laws 1897, reorgan-
-ization of the bank on the terms and
conditions of that statute, but was after
due hearing ordered dismissed. Some
four months subsequently, but without no
the same petition was again presented to
that court, but to judge other than the
Judge who had previously ordered its
dismissal, granted its prayer and ordered
the entry of final judgment approving and
adopting the proposed plan of reorganiza
ton, and adjudging: and determining
who should pay any portion of their liabil-
ity as such to aid and assist In the pur-
poses of the reorganization should be re-
leased from-their statutory liability to
the extent of the amount so paid The re-
ceivers were thereupon discharged, and
the officers of the bank resumed control
itors, payable in five equal annual in
stal1ments certificates of deposit for the
amount of their respective claims which
the creditors accepted and retained and
at no time did any of them. who are now
creditors, in any way call in question
the validity Of the reorganization or the
Judgment authorizing it. Defendant was
a stakeholder Of the corporation and paid,
In reliance upon the terms of judgment,
half the par value of the stock held
by him to aid in the reorganization; which
is held: "a. that the findings Of the
trial court to the effect that all the cred
itors of the bank acquiesced in and sus-
tanned by the evidence; and (2), that
though the judgment adopting and ap-
proving the, plan of reorganization was
had been dismissed, the creditors who ac-
guessed therein and accepted and re-
tanned benefits accruing therefrom are
estopped from now calling the validity Of
nrnCPQ61nQS question.
2. Section 4, c. SO, Laws 1897, con-
strued and held to preserve and continue
standing sale of their stock, to a period
on one year beyond the time fixed for the
payment of debts in proceedings under
reorganization Of banks authorized by
that statute.
8. Whether the, court would, If proper
objections were made, have authority an
der said statute, to provide for the. pay
ment by stockholders of a portion of their
liability as such to aid in the reorganiza-
ton Of the bank, and relieve them from
subsequent liability. to the extent SO paid,
this case, for the acquiescence of the in
terested parties rendered the Judgment
and proceedings Hereunder valid on the
principles of eStoppel.
Order affirmed Brown J.
Stockholders Not Liable.
William S. Dwinnell and John c. Sweet,
as Receivers of the Minneapolis Fire and
Marine Mutual Insurance Company, APP
pellants, vs.. The Minneapolis Fire and
Marine Mutual Insurance Company ct
al. Defendants; Frank Haywood, Re-
spondent.
l. The Mutual Fire Insurance Company
of Minnesota was duly. incorporated I'M
der and pursuant to chapter It's, Laws.
1895, for the purpose of doing general
fire Insurance business on the mutual plan.
Thereafter an attempt was made to
change the character of the corporation
by amendments to its articles to au-
thorize and empower it to do a marine
insurance business, but the statutes on
the subject were not complied with and
gally to issue marine policies. In con-
nection with the attempted change in
the character of the corporation, the Of
ficers undertook to create and provide
a capital stock or guaranty fund and
defendants in this action, for that pur-
pose, signed and delivered to the cor
poration a subscription contract where
by they promised to pay to the compa-
ny the sum set opposite their names at
such times and in such amounts as might
from time to time be required by the
giving standing and credit to the cor
poration and inducing persons to take
its policies. the officers thereof represent
ed by public advertisements. extensive
or guaranty fund. But it does not APP
pear that any of the present creditors of
the concern were induced thereby to in
sure their property with the company:
nor does it appear that the company act
ually engaged in a marine insurance BUSH
ness, or issued other than mutual poll
cies, payable in case of loss by assess
ments upon policy holders in proportion
each. The company became insolvent,
and this. action was brought by the re-
ceivers to recover against the subscrib-
ers to the guaranty fund for the full
amount subscribed. 1t Is held:
i. That mutual fire insurance COM
pany is not authorized, as an incident to