Case Name: Hunt, Receiver, v. O'Shea, Assignee; Hunt, Receiver, Ap't, v. Same
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire
Decision Date: 1899-06
Citations: 69 N.H. 600
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hunt, Receiver, v. O’Shea, Assignee. Hunt, Receiver, Ap’t, v. Same.
Judges: All concurred.
Reporter: New Hampshire Reports
Volume: 69
Pages: 600–601

Head Matter:
Belknap,
June, 1899.
Hunt, Receiver, v. O’Shea, Assignee. Hunt, Receiver, Ap’t, v. Same.
A stockholder of an insolvent corporation will not be preferred over general creditors for the amount of uncollected dividends upon his shares when no specific sum of money has been set apart for their payment.
Assumpsit and Probate Appeal, to recover for the same cause of action. Facts agreed. The plaintiff is the receiver of the People’s Fire Insurance Company, and as such, on July 1, 1894, was the holder of one hundred and fifty shares, of the capital stock of the Laconia Car Company, as collateral for anote which i/has not been paid. The Car Company before that time had legally declared a dividend payable on that date, which on this particular stock has not been paid,
t/ January 25, 1897, proceedings were instituted upon which the Car Company were decreed insolvent debtors, and the defendant ^was appointed their assignee. The plaintiff’s claim for this dividend was allowed in the probate court, but that court denied his motion to order it paid in full.
Jexoeit Plummer, for the plaintiff
Jewell, Owen £ Veazey, for the defendant.

Opinion:
Young, J.
This court has no original jurisdiction of claims against the estate of an insolvent debtor (P. S., c. 201, s. 1), so the action of assumpsit must be dismissed; for the defendant has no money in his hands which equitably belongs to the plaintiff. Simply declaring a dividend does not create a trust fund. Lowne v. Insurance Co., 6 Pai. 482. To create such a fund, some specific sum of money must be set apart for the purpose of paying the dividend. Until this is done, the relation of the corporation to its stockholders in respect to dividends is that of debtor and creditor. King v. Railroad, 29 N. J. Law 82; 1 Mor. Corp., s. 445. No sum of money having been set apart to pay this dividend, and the claim not being one of those named in s. 82, c. 201, P. S., the appeal should be dismissed, and judgment entered for the defendant in the action at law.
Case discharged.
All concurred.