Ewald Iron Co. v. Commonwealth

131 S.W. 774, 140 Ky. 692, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 350
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)
DecidedNovember 22, 1910
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 131 S.W. 774 (Ewald Iron Co. v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ewald Iron Co. v. Commonwealth, 131 S.W. 774, 140 Ky. 692, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 350 (Ky. 1910).

Opinion

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Hobson

Reversing.

Arthur E. Hopkins, as revenue agent, instituted this action in the Lyon circuit court against the Ewald Iron Company -to list for taxation $1,800,000 in money as omitted property as of September 1, 1909, for the year 1910. The county court entered a judgment in favor of *693 the plaintiff; an appeal was taken to the circuit court which sustained the county court. From this judgment, the appeal before us is prosecuted.

The case was submitted in the county court and in the circuit court on an agreed statement of facts, which are in substance as follows: The Ewald Iron Company was incorporated under the General Statutes of Kentucky on November 5, 1880, for a term of twenty-five years with its principal office and place of business in Lyon county as specified in the articles of incorporation. The company conducted its business in Lyon county for a number of years, but prior to the year 1900, it removed its active place of business to the city of Louisville and thereafter continued its business operations at Louisville, retaining but not using its property in Lyon county. Prior to November 5, 1905, L. P. Ewald became and continued to be the sole stockholder of the company. He resided in Louisville and died there in July 1909, leaving a will which was afterwards probated. All the capital stock of the Ewald Iron Company outstanding, came into the hands of his executor. The business of the Ewald Iron Company was continued after the expiration of the charter, on November 5, 1905, in its corporate name in all respects as if its corporate existence had continued until September 1, 1909, when the company was formally dissolved, and its affairs have since been practically wound up. There was until then no change of title to any of its extensive and valuable properties in Lyon county, and Jefferson county, Kentucky, and in St. Louis, Missouri. It continued to make contracts, incur debts, and carry on a large business after its charter expired in exactly the same way as it had done before it expired. For some time prior to November 5, 1905, and continuously until his death, it was the purpose of L. P. Ewald to reincorporate the Ewald Iron Company, and for. this purpose he caused articles of incorporation to be prepared which he repeatedly declared his intention to have executed. But this he neglected to do, and the business was continued in the name of the old company until his death, and until the company was dissolved after his death, subsequent to September 1, 1909. On September 1, 1909, the Ewald Iron Company had on deposit in various banks in St. Louis, Missouri, the sum of $1,800,000, which represented and was in fact the accumulated earnings and profits of the company which had never been distributed. *694 For more than half of this sum, interest-bearing certificates of deposit had been issued to the Ewald Iron Company payable to it, and the balance was deposited as an open account in the name of the company bearing interest and payable only on the check of the Ewald Iron Company. The books of the Ewald Iron Company showed all of these deposits and they were carried on the books as assets of the company on the first day of September, 1909. In October, 1909, the deposits were all paid by the banks holding them to the treasurer of the Ewald Iron Company, and were afterwards disposed of by the directors of the company in liquidating its affairs, until which time there had been no change of title to any of the money from the Ewald Iron Company. The executor of L. P. Ewald had transferred some shares of stock of the company to other persons, and caused a board of directors and all necessary officers to be elected, so that the company had an effective corporate organization. This was done with a view to dissolving and winding up the company, but after September 1, 1909. The assessors of the city of Louisville and of Jefferson county claiming that the money on deposit in St. Louis in the name of the Ewald Iron Company was in law and in fact, the money of L. P. Ewald’s estate, assessed it, as of September 1, 1909, for the year 1910, in the name of L. P. Ewald’s executor, and tax bills based on these assessments were placed in the hands of the collector of taxes for collection. ■ No other property of the Ewald Iron Company except this money has been omitted from taxation for the year 1910. Its other properties have all been assessed in its name in Lyon county, and in Jefferson county.

There is no dispute between the parties that the property is liable to assessment. The only question made is whether it should be assessed as the property of the Ewald Iron Company in Lyon county or in the name of L. P. Ewald in Jefferson county. It is agreed that Lyon county was the residence of the corporation, and .if the property should be assessed in its name, it must be assessed there. It is also agreed that Jefferson county was the residence of L. P. Ewald, and if the property should be assessed in his name it should be assessed in Jefferson county. The city of Louisville has appeared in the case by its attorney, insisting that the Jefferson county assessment should be sustained. Ewald’s representatives have brought the *695 case to this court; that they may not be taxed twice; although it is to the interest of the estate that the judgment of the circuit court should be sustained as the rate of taxation is lower in Lyon county than in Louisville.

Section 561, Ky. Stats., among other things provides: “And when any corporation expires by the terms of the articles of incorporation, * * * it may thereafter continue to act for the purpose of closing up its business, but for no other purpose; and it shall be the duty of the officers to settle up its affairs and business as speedily as possible, and they shall cause notice to be published for at least once a week for four consecutive weeks in some newspaper printed and published in the county, if any,of the fact that it is closing up its business; and all debts and demands against the corporation shall’be paid in full before the officers receive anything.”

Practically the same provision was contained in the General Statutes under which the corporation was formed. (General Statutes, page 766, section 13.) When the charter of the Ewald Iron Company expired, it wholly disregarded the statute. It did not proceed in any sense to close up its business, and took no steps in this direction but continued to do business just as it had before in disregard of the statute. It is earnestly insisted for appellee that the corporation does not die when its articles of incorporation expire, but that it continues in existence for the purpose of winding up its business, and that so the title to its property remains in it until its business is wound up. The statute provides that the corporation shall continue to act for the purpose of closing up its business but for no other purpose. When, as in this case, the corporation continues to act and carry on its business as before, taking no steps to close up after the articles of incorporation have expired, the stockholders are simply doing- business as partners. They are personally liable for all debts made, and acts done are not the acts of tl^e corporation but the acts of the stockholders.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Spector v. Hart
139 So. 2d 923 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1962)
Leiserson & Adler, Inc. v. Keam
266 S.W.2d 352 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1954)
Blackerby v. Monarch Equipment
259 S.W.2d 683 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1953)
Leibson v. Henry
204 S.W.2d 310 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1947)
Greene v. Stevenson
175 S.W.2d 519 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1943)
Wells-Elkhorn Coal Co. v. Commissioner
27 B.T.A. 198 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1932)
Steele v. Stanley
35 S.W.2d 867 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1931)
Holliday v. Cornett, Sheriff
6 S.W.2d 497 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1928)
Shadoin v. Sellars
4 S.W.2d 717 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1928)
M. H. McCarthy Co. v. Central Lumber & Coal Co.
215 N.W. 250 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1927)
George Wiedemann Brewing Co. v. Commissioner
4 B.T.A. 664 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1926)
Highbaugh v. Huff
265 S.W. 816 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1924)
Commonwealth v. Fidelity & Columbia Trust Co.
215 S.W. 42 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1919)
Young v. Fitch
206 S.W. 29 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1918)
Smith v. Commonwealth Land & Lumber Co.
189 S.W. 912 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1916)
Ewald's v. City of Louisville
181 S.W. 1095 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1916)
Stearns Coal & Lumber Co. v. Van Winkle
221 F. 590 (Sixth Circuit, 1915)
Ewald Iron Co. v. Commonwealth
134 S.W. 481 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
131 S.W. 774, 140 Ky. 692, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 350, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ewald-iron-co-v-commonwealth-kyctapphigh-1910.