The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-03-17
..B:|G VOTING TRUST
A.l.L [ / J / TO EXIST J
Important Case il Supreme Court
Said to Involve Mil
lions.
TIE. RIM ENDS NEXT w Ell
Several Important Litigations
Are Argued and Sub
n,itted.

Literally involving millions OF money,
tho case or tho Carnegie Trust COM
pany and others against tho Security
lLifc insurance Company Of America,
Incorporated, and others, was submit
ted yesterday to the Virginia Supreme
Court OF Appeals. It had previously
been argued by, John Pickrell and
Wyndham r, Meredith. for the appel
ilants and by Ex-Governor Andrew
jackson Montague and Alien Caperton
Braxton. for the appellees.
This suit, which was appealed from
the Chancery Court OF the city OF Rich
Inond, had to do with an alleged vot-
ing trust agreement said to cover q
majority OF the cntire capital stock OF
Tho Security Company and to have been
made irrecoverable for the period OF
twenty-five years. In their petition the
appellants stated that this voting trust
agreement Separates absolutely the
voting power from the real ownership
Of the stock. and lodges said voting
power. or, in other words. the absolute
control of said Insurance company. In
five named trustees and their success
sors In Office, who have, or need have.
no interest whatever In the insurance
company. It's stock or In the voting
trust certificates.
"A
surancc company, which is a Virginia
corporation, is situated. in Richmond. Its
chief executive offices. 1t Is stated, are
established In Chicago. Laws made by
the State OF New York figure largely
in the litigation.
Decides for Defendants.
"Upon consideration OF the plead
ings,'' said Judge Daniel Grlnnan in
his decree. II am of opinion that the
case is with the defendants. have
examined each position of the COM
iplainants, but find none OF them ten-
able
From this decision an appeal was
taken to the Supreme Court, and now
rests finally with 1t.
This court will probably adjourn for
tho term some time next week. Not
many moro cases remain on the docket
for argument. Some cases previously
submitted may be decided to-day.
Other proceedings yesterday were as
follows:
Fisher vs.. Borden and others. Ar
gued by N. II. Green. for the appellces.
and submitted.
Johnson vs.. Williams and others
Argued by John N. Sebrell, for the
appellant, and by Robert ". Withers
for the appellee. and submitted.
Minick vs.. Woods. Submitted or
briefs.
Langford VS.. Virginia Air Line Rail.
way Company. Continued.
southern Railway Company VS.. Eos
ters administrator. Continued.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Com
pany VS.. Mary f. Hayslett. Continued
Holdsworth vs.. G. w. Crowder & Bro
Their. Continued.
Norfolk and Western Railway Com
pany VS.. Stone. Continued
Other Gases In Call.
The next cases to be called are:
voolfolk and others VS.. Graves and
Others. City Of Richmond and others
vs.. schonberger, Monk VS.. Exposition
Pier Corporation and oth-
ers. Edmonson G. Reeks, receivers, VS..
Potts's administrator. Lane Brothers
Company VS.. Bernard's administrator,
Norfolk and Ocean View Railway Com
pany VS.. Consolidated Turnpike Com
pany. yvickham and Northrop, receiv-
ers, VS.. Green. These are Nos $40
90, inclusive, on the argument docket