Source: https://www.legalcrystal.com/case/93929/ewen-vs-american-fidelity-co
Timestamp: 2018-06-18 03:32:42
Document Index: 539439478

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 102', '§ 12', '§ 102', '§ 12', '§ 12', '§ 3', '§ 13', '§ 14', '§ 3', '§ 4', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 12']

Ewen Vs American Fidelity Co - Citation 93929 - Court Judgment | LegalCrystal
Ewen Vs. American Fidelity Co. - Court Judgment
LegalCrystal Citation legalcrystal.com/93929
Decided On Mar-12-1923
Case Number 261 U.S. 322
Appellant Ewen
Respondent American Fidelity Co.
.....certiorari to the circuit court of appeals for the second circuit syllabus a surety company organized under illinois rev.stats., 1917, c. 32, § 102f, et seq., is thereby expressly made subject to the act of april 18, 1872, governing corporations for pecuniary profit, and under § 12 of that act, its dissolution does not take away or impair any remedy given against the corporation for liabilities incurred previously to its dissolution. p. 261 u. s. 324 . held, therefore, that a new york attachment suit against an illinois surety company did not fall by reason of the company's dissolution in proceedings in illinois and lapse of time, claimed to have extinguished the corporation for all purposes. 271 f. 848 reversed. certiorari to a.....
Ewen v. American Fidelity Co. - 261 U.S. 322 (1923)
U.S. Supreme Court Ewen v. American Fidelity Co., 261 U.S. 322 (1923)
A surety company organized under Illinois Rev.Stats., 1917, c. 32, § 102f, et seq., is thereby expressly made subject to the Act of April 18, 1872, governing corporations for pecuniary profit, and under § 12 of that act, its dissolution does not take away or impair any remedy given against the corporation for liabilities incurred previously to its dissolution. P. 261 U. S. 324 .
271 F. 848 reversed.
Certiorari to a judgment of the circuit court of appeals affirming a judgment for the respondent in an action brought against it as surety on an undertaking in attachment.
On April 19, 1916, a majority of the stockholders of the surety company filed a bill in Illinois alleging that the company was insolvent and praying that it be restrained from further prosecution of its business, that a receiver be appointed and that, upon final hearing, a decree might be entered dissolving the company and providing for the distribution of its assets. The answer of the company was filed with the bill. It admitted the allegations and submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. On the same day, an order was entered "without bond from the complainants and until the further order of the court" restraining the company from further prosecution of its business. Later on the same day, another decree appointed a receiver to collect the property, with power to institute and to defend suits and to apply to the court for
The act last mentioned allows a majority
of the stockholders of any Illinois insurance company to apply by petition to close its concerns, and authorizes the court, after due notice to all the parties interested, to proceed to hear the matter and for reasonable cause to decree a dissolution. Section 2 (Hurd, c. 73, § 12). It also provides in the next section that the charters of all such companies, which, either from neglect, or by vote of their members or officers, or in obedience to the decree of any court, have ceased for one year to transact the business for which they were organized, shall be deemed extinct, with authority to the court upon petition to fix the time within which the companies shall close their concerns: " Provided, that this section shall not be construed to relieve any such company from its liabilities to the assured or any of its creditors." § 3 (Hurd, § 13). The fourth section (Hurd, § 14) continues the companies for two years more for the purpose of prosecuting and defending suits, &c.;, but not for that of going on with their business. The facts that we have stated were thought to bring the case within this statute, and so make the New York judgment void.
We should hesitate long before deciding that the cessation of business for a year under the above mentioned decree fell within § 3 of the Insurance Act or that the proviso had no effect upon the following § 4, not to speak of other difficulties. But it is not necessary to stop at this point. The company, as has been shown, was subject also to the laws governing corporations for pecuniary profit. By § 10 of the Act of April 18, 1872 (Hurd, c. 32, § 10), these corporations are continued for two years for substantially the same purposes as are insurance companies, but it is explicitly provided by § 12 that the dissolution for any cause shall not take away or impair any remedy given against such corporation, its stockholders or officers, for any liabilities incurred previous to its dissolution. The argument seems to us strong that the