Lancaster v. Tri-State Transit Co. of Louisiana, Inc.

161 So. 321, 182 La. 185, 1935 La. LEXIS 1590
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedApril 1, 1935
DocketNo. 33868.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 161 So. 321 (Lancaster v. Tri-State Transit Co. of Louisiana, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lancaster v. Tri-State Transit Co. of Louisiana, Inc., 161 So. 321, 182 La. 185, 1935 La. LEXIS 1590 (La. 1935).

Opinions

LAND, Justice.

The Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Company, Inc., with its principal office in the city of Shreveport, La., was engaged in the carriage of passengers and freight in local, intrastate, and interstate business.

This company was chartered June 3, 1914, W. H. Johnson, one of the defendants in this suit, being the principal stockholder and president.

On March 1, 1928, the Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Company, Inc., organized the TriState Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., to carry on its passenger or “bus business,” *187 transferring to the new corporation all of the assets with which it was to begin business, and receiving in exchange certain shares of preferred and common stock of the Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc.

On March 9, 1930, the Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Company, Inc., was placed in receivership, W. H. Johnson being named as receiver.

On September 26,1932, W. H. Johnson was removed as receiver, for failure to render an account of his gestión, and L. T. Lancaster was appointed receiver in his stead, with full and complete power to carry on the business of the corporation as a going concern.

Plaintiff alleges that, from the time the TriState Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., was organized until the appointment of a receiver of the Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Company, Inc., both corporations were operated by the defendant Johnson as president and general manager; that he practically owned both of the corporations; arid that, after the organization of the Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., the defendant Johnson conceived a scheme to acquire for himself, and without payment therefor, the stock of the Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., which was held by the Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Company, Inc.

Plaintiff then sets forth the various steps taken by Johnson to accomplish his alleged design, and prays for judgment against the Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., and W. H. Johnson, individually, in solido, decreeing the Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Company, Inc., to be the owner of all of the capital stock of the Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., from its organization to the present time.

The ease was tried by jury, which returned a verdict in favor of defendants; and from the judgment rendered upon this verdict, rejecting the demands of the receiver of theCaddo Transfer & Warehouse Company, Inc., an appeal' has been taken to this court.

(1) The main issue in this case is: Did the Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Company,. Inc., originally subscribe for and pay for alL of the stock of the Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc.?

Dor sake of brevity, we shall hereafter in-this opinion refer to the former corporation as the Caddo, and to the latter corporation as the Tri-State.

None of this stock has ever been delivered to plaintiff, receiver of the Caddo, amicable demand upon the defendants for the return, of the stock having been made in vain.

The various steps taken and transactions- \ had by and between Johnson and the Caddo, on the one hand, and the Caddo and the TriState, on the other, by which the Caddo was-apparently divested of all of its stock, are alleged by plaintiff to be parts of a fraudulent scheme conceived by Johnson and executed by him and his subordinates, for the purpose of taking away the Tri-State from theCaddo and surrendering it to Johnson.

That the Tri-State was carved bodily out of' the assets of the Caddo is not open to dispute. The defendant Johnson in his testimony admits that he practically owned and managed both corporations.

On March 1, 1928, the board of directors of the Caddo adopted the following resolu *189 tion: “Be it resolved that whereas this corporation is the owner of the Tri-State Transit Company, which is its bus division, and whereas it is to the benefit of this corporation to separately incorporate its bus lines:

“Now, therefore, be it resolved that W. H. Johnson, President of this corporation (the Caddo), be and he is hereby authorized to employ counsel and to organize a corporation to be known as the Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., with 15,000 shares of no par value stock and 2,500 shares of preferred stock with a par value of One Hundred & no/100 ($100.00) Dollars per share, which stock shall bear seven per cent per annum accumulative dividends; further that he be authorized to transfer to said corporation all of the assets of the Tri-State Transit Company and receive in exchange therefor 1,252 shares of said preferred stock and 13,748 sha/res of said common stock of no par value.” Tr., p. 86. (Italics ours.)

The same day that this resolution was adopted by the board of directors of the Cad-do, March 1, 1928, the Caddo transferred by notarial act to /he Tri-State “all of and singular of the assets of the Tri-State Transit Company, being the bus division of the Cad-do Transfer & Warehouse Co., Inc., vendor herein.” (Italics ours.)

It is stated in this notarial act of transfer or sale that: "The consideration of this sale is 1,252 shares of the preferred stock and 13,74S shares of the common stock, of no par value, of the said Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged; and the assumption of all liability of the said Tri-State Transit Company, in amount of Seventy-five Thousand, Ninety-two and no/100 ($75,092.00) Dollars, by the vendee herein.” (Italics ours.)

The articles of incorporation of the TriState were duly subscribed by the incorporators on March 1, 1928, with W. H. Johnson, president; E. H. Crain, vice president; C. E. Beard, secretary; and R. F. Hemperley, treasurer. Tr., p. 82, Art. IT.

, The charter of the Tri-'State is signed by the above incorporators, and by the Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Co., Inc., W. H. Johnson, president. Tr., p. 83.

Article VII of the charter of the Tri-State reads as follows: “The incorporators and subscribers to these articles of incorporation, * * * and the number of shares subscribed by them, are as follows: Caddo Transfer & Warehouse Company, Inc., Shreveport, Louisiana, 1,252 shares of preferred stock, 13,748 shares of common stock; W. H. Johnson, Shreveport, Louisiana, 1 share of common stock; E. H. Crain, Shreveport, Louisiana, 1 share of common stock; O. E. Beard, Shreveport, Louisiana, 1 share of common stock; R. F. Hemperley, Shreveport, Louisiana, 1 share of common stock.” Tr., p. 83. (Italics ours.) None of the stock of the individual incorporators had been paid for.

On March 1, 1928, Johnson, Crain, Beard and Hemperley, the incorporators of the TriState, made an affidavit before a notary: “That the assets of the Tri-State Transit Company of Louisiana, Inc., taken in by said corporation for stock has a net worth

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

Related

Lancaster v. Johnson
167 So. 435 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
161 So. 321, 182 La. 185, 1935 La. LEXIS 1590, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lancaster-v-tri-state-transit-co-of-louisiana-inc-la-1935.