Fisher v. Reorganization Inv. Co.

31 F. Supp. 553, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3420
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri
DecidedFebruary 23, 1940
DocketNo. 11494
StatusPublished

This text of 31 F. Supp. 553 (Fisher v. Reorganization Inv. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fisher v. Reorganization Inv. Co., 31 F. Supp. 553, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3420 (E.D. Mo. 1940).

Opinion

MOORE, District Judge.

The plaintiff, as receiver of the Grand National Bank, seeks to recover from the defendant, Reorganization Investment Company, a corporation,- $246,700 and interest thereon from May 31, 1934, at the rate of six per cent per annum, the same being an assessment of one hundred per cent on 2,467 shares of stock of the said Grand National Bank which closed on March 3, 1933, at which time, and ever since July 29, 1929, had been registered in the name of Ben G. Brinkman.

The suit was brought not only against the Reorganization Investment Company but also against certain individuals alleged to have been partners of Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company, a brokerage firm, which, prior to its failure in January of 1931, had been engaged in the brokerage business for several years in the City of St. Louis.

Some 'of these individual defendants were admittedly partners, and it was alleged that certain other defendants were also partners by virtue of their connection with a corporation which furnished capital funds to Lorenzo E. Anderson.

The plaintiff has taken the position in this case that, at the time of its failure, the partnership of Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company was the beneficial owner of the 2,467 shares of Grand National Bank stock mentioned above, and that shortly after its failure the defendant Reorganization Investment Company acquired and became the beneficial owner of the stock, and remained such beneficial owner of the stock until after the failure of the Grand National Bank in March, 1933, and after the assessment on the stock referred to hereinafter.

In view of this position taken by the plaintiff, it is unnecessary for the court to determine or make any finding as to who were the partners of Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company at the time of its failure in January, 1931.

The sole question for the court to determine in this case is whether, at the time of the failure of the Grand National Bank and the one hundred per cent assessment upon its stockholders, the Reorganization Investment Company (a corporation) was the beneficial owner of this stock. If it was, there should be a decree against it; if not the bill should be dismissed.

The Grand National Bank mentioned above, was organized on June 15, 1922, as a National banking association, under the laws of the United States, and it continued to do business as a national bank in St. ■ Louis until March 3, 1933, at which timé it failed. Sometime later the Comptroller [555]*555of the Currency of the United States took charge of the Bank in accordance with the law, and a receiver was appointed; and sometime thereafter the plaintiff in this case was appointed successor receiver of the Bank, and has continued as such ever since.

After the Bank closed on March 3, 1933, the Comptroller of the Currency of the United States reached the conclusion that it was necessary to enforce the individual liability of the stockholders of the Bank to the extent of the par value of each share of stock of the Bank held and owned by the stockholders on the date of its failure, March 3, 1933.

The Comptroller of the Currency made an assessment and requisition on the stockholders of the Bank for a one hundred per cent assessment to be paid on or before May 31, 1934, and demanded of each stockholder an amount equal to the par value of the stock owned at the time of the failure of the Bank, together with six per cent interest thereon, and the Comptroller directed that suits be brought to recover the assessment against the stockholders who failed to pay.

The defendant, Reorganization Investment Company is now, and was at the time the suit was instituted, a corporation which was organized "in the early part of 1931. It was organized for the purpose of acquiring all the assets which had been owned by the partnership firm of Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company, which at that time had been engaged in the general brokerage business, dealing in stocks and bonds in the City of St. Louis for several years.

On the failure of Lorenzo E. Anderson in January, 1931, a receiver was appointed by the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis to take charge of its affairs. This receiver took possession of all the assets of the partnership firm of Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company, and very shortly thereafter, and during the first part of the year 1931, under the orders of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, the receiver sold and transferred all of these assets in his possession to the said Reorganization Investment Company, defendant herein. In this way the Reorganization Investment Company became the owner of all the property which had belonged to the partnership firm of Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company, and if the partnership firm of Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company had been the beneficial owner of the Grand National Bank stock involved in this case, it is assumed the ownership of it would have passed to the Reorganization Investment Company together with all of its other assets.

The plaintiff takes the position that the partnership firm of Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company at the time of its failure was the beneficial owner of these 2,467 shares of Grand National Bank stock and that the Reorganization Investment Company acquired it in the first part of 1931 and wag the owner of it at the time of the failure of the Grand National Bank two years later, March 3, 1933.

The Reorganization Investment Company, on the other hand, takes the position that Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company, at the time of its failure, did not own this stock, but held it, together with the stock of three other banks, as pledges to secure a large indebtedness owed to Lorenzo E. Anderson & Company by the Vandeventer Securities Corporation (a' corporation), and that this account against the Vandeventer Securities Corporation, so secured by their bank stocks, was acquired by the Reorganization Investment Company which continued to own the account and to hold the bank stocks as collateral security to the account; hence that the Reorganization Investment Company did not acquire and become the owner of this 2,467 shares of Grand National Bank stock and never was the beneficial owner thereof.

The Reorganization Investment Company further takes the position that this Grand National Bank stock, together with the other three bank stocks held as collateral aforesaid, belonged to the Vandeventer Securities Corporation and that it continued to own it and owned it at the time of the failure of the Grand National Bank and the assessment hereinabove mentioned.

The Reorganization Investment Company further takes the position that the Vandeventer Securities Corporation acquired this 2,467 shares of Grand National Bank stock together with the three other bank stocks in the latter part of May, 1930, from the Sheridan Securities Company (a corporation), which at the time owned the bank stocks.

In these cases it is quite clear that the person in whose name the stock is registered is liable for the assessment, and the actual beneficial or true owner of the [556]*556stock is also liable for the assessment. Case v. Small, C.C., 10 F. 722.

The evidence offered at the trial for the purpose of showing the true ownership of this stock, while somewhat intricate, is quite clear when thoroughly understood and considered.

In the Fall and early Winter of 1928 the Liberty Central Trust Company of St Louis acquired and became the owner of this 2,467 shares of Grand National Bank stock.

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

Related

Amick v. Empire Trust Co.
296 S.W. 798 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1927)
Wood v. . Fisk
109 N.E. 177 (New York Court of Appeals, 1915)
Montgomery v. Van Ronk
195 A. 910 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1937)
Tompkins v. Morton Trust Co.
91 A.D. 274 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
In re the Assignment of Mills
125 A.D. 730 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)
George W. Van Dusen & Co. v. Arnold
59 N.W. 961 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1894)
Cowen v. Voter
80 N.Y.S. 29 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Perry v. Musser
68 Mo. 477 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1878)
McClintock v. Central Bank
24 S.W. 1052 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1894)
Nevius v. Moore
120 S.W. 43 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1909)
Schaaf v. Fries
90 Mo. App. 111 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1901)
Case v. Small
10 F. 722 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana, 1881)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
31 F. Supp. 553, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fisher-v-reorganization-inv-co-moed-1940.