Court Opinion

ID: 8378116
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-24 18:53:19.15254+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:46:37.659777
License: Public Domain

Where shares in a corporation were sold by the United States marshal, under a decree of confiscation rendered under like circumstances to those condemned by the United States supreme court in Windsor v. McVeigh and Gregory v. McVeigh, 93 U. S. 274, 284, and the corporation had denied the purchaser’s title, and that purchaser had sold the stock to the plaintiff, Held,, in an action of trespass on the case for value, that the corporation was not liable to the plaintiff for the stock or unpaid dividends. if his vendor’s title was under a confiscation sale, and the corporation had denied its validity, and the plaintiff had had such notice of these facts before his purchase as should have put him upon inquiry.At the trial, the court instructed the jury that if they believed that W. A. Duncan’s title was obtained through a confiscation sale that was not legal, in May, 1864, and that there had been a continual denial of the validity of Duncan’s title by the defendant company since June, 1867, and that the plaintiff had such notice of this fact as should have put him upon inquiry as to the character of that title before purchasing the shares of stock in question, they should find for the defendant. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant; and judgment was rendered accordingly.