Court Opinion

ID: 6408929
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-06-25 11:51:08.280089+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:51:18.436726
License: Public Domain

Dewey, J.
The original contract was made by the plaintiffs with the Andover Mechanic Association. The plaintiffs received, for the money lent to that corporation, their negotiable note duly signed by their treasurer. Such was the form of the contract, and such has been the character given to the original promise, in the subsequent steps taken by the plaintiffs to enforce the collection of this demand. No liability, on the part of the defendant, arises from the force of the instrument given to the plaintiffs; but, if it exist at all, it is to be established by independent facts creating such liability, or by some legal enactment charging the defendant for the debts of the corporation.
Upon looking at the act incorporating the Andover Mechanic Association, (St. 1821, c. 40,) we find it in the usual form of acts of incorporation, giving a corporate name and corporate powers, but imposing no individual liability on its members for the debts of the corporation. Individual liability, as incident to membership of a corporation, arises only from express legislative enactment, either in the charter, or by some general law, to which all similar corporations and their individual members are made subject. But there is no general law applicable to this species of corporations, such as exists in *542reference to manufacturing corporations, or corporations foi banking purposes, providing certain liabilities on the individual stcckholders of such corporations, in certain specified cases.
The plaintiffs, aware of this difficulty in any attempt to charge the defendant, by force of the provisions in the act of incorporation, or by reason of any general law imposing such liability on the defendant for the debts of the corporation, seek to establish their right to recover, in the present action, upon other grounds. For this purpose they rely upon the eleventh article of the by-laws of the corporation, adopted by its members soon after the passing of the act of incorporation. That by-law is in these words: [Here the judge recited the by-law, as set forth, ante, page 539.] The only effect that can be given to this by-law is that of an act or vote of the members of the corporation acting in their corporate capacity. It is not the act of any individual member, nor does the fact of its being found upon the records of the corporation, as a vote duly adopted, authorize the inference that all or that any number greater than a bare majority voted for its adoption. The question then arises, whether it be competent for an aggregate corporation, whose act of incorporation imposes no individual liability upon its members for the debts and contracts of such corporation, to render, by force of a by-law, each individual member a guanrator or surety for all moneys lent to the corporation. It is clearly quite foreign from the general purposes and objects, in reference to which by-laws are authorized to be made by corporate bodies. See Rev. Sts. c. 44, § 2, giving authority to corporations to make by-laws.
It is not, iii the opinion of the court, within the corporate powers conferred upon this and similar corporations, to impose upon their members, by any such by-law, any personal and individual liability to third persons, beyond such as are specified in the charter, or in the general laws of the Commonwealth. Such a power would be liable to great abuse, and would subject every member of a corporation, however liberal *543its charter in excluding individual liability, to be made responsible for the entire indebtedness of the corporation by the act of a majority of those convened at a meeting of such corporation. Take the case of a bank in doubtful credit, and its active managers deem it useful to sustain it by pledging the individual responsibility of some of its more wealthy stockholders. Can they, by a corporate vote, impose upon all the stockholders a personal liability for all the debts of the corporation ? We think not, and are of opinion that each stockholder, by becoming such, subjects himself to no liability beyond that created by the force of the charter itself, or declared by other statutes of the Commonwealth.
Nor does the proposed evidence of the declarations of the defendant, that such individual liability existed in the present case, authorize the maintaining of this action. He might have mistaken his legal rights ; he might have supposed such would be the effect of the by-law referred to, and therefore have made the admission. It is to be borne in mind that these declarations of the defendant were not made to the plaintiffs, but to other persons. The proposed evidence would therefore be inadmissible on a trial of this case before a jury; as it would not tend to charge the defendant. Whether for such-false representations he may be held responsible to those to whom he made them, and who may have lent their money upon the faith of them, is a question' not now before us. It is a fatal objection to the maintenance of the present action, that the defendant has never, by any valid legal contract, bound himself individually for the payment of the loan made by the plaintiffs to the Mechanic Association. His name was never subscribed to the pledge of the corporation, that the individual members would guaranty the debts of the corporation. His oral promises, if made, would be inoperative and void, by reason of the statute of frauds. To give any legal effect to these pledges of individual -liability, they must have been the individual acts of the members, adopted and sanctioned by them by their signatures, under their own hands. Without this, the corporate act was a dead letter, and of no *544binding efficacy upon individual members in their personal capacity.
We see no ground upon which this action can be maintained.

Judgment for the defendant