McCoy v. World's Columbian Exposition

57 N.E. 1043, 186 Ill. 356
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedJune 21, 1900
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 57 N.E. 1043 (McCoy v. World's Columbian Exposition) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McCoy v. World's Columbian Exposition, 57 N.E. 1043, 186 Ill. 356 (Ill. 1900).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Cartwright

delivered the opinion of the court:

Appellant subscribed for one thousand shares of the capital stock of appellee. The shares were $10 each, and at the time of subscription two per cent, or $200, was paid to meet preliminary expenses. Afterward, three calls, of eighteen, twenty and twenty per cent, respectively, of the capital stock were made, which appellant refused to pay. Appellee brought this suit to recover the amount of said calls, and at the trial the court directed a verdict for $7500, being the amount of the calls, with five per cent interest from the time when they became due. A verdict was returned accordingly and judgment was entered thereon. The Branch, Appellate Court for the First District affirmed the judgment.

To the declaration defendant filed twelve pleas. The first was the general issue, the second nul tiel corporation, and the remaining ten were substantially alike, and averred in different forms that the capital stock of the plaintiff had never been fully subscribed. When the case was called for trial no replications to these pleas had been filed, and defendant objected to a trial and filed his motion for judgment in his favor on each of the twelve pleas. Counsel for plaintiff stated that they would immediately file general replications to each of the pleas, and the court denied the motion for judgment and called a jury. The jurors were sworn to answer questions and examined by the parties, but before they were sworn replications were presented and leave was given to file them nunc pro tunc as of the time the case was called for trial. The defendant excepted to each ruling of the court, and the jury was sworn to try the issue. It would have been error to try the case without issues of fact being formed on the. pleas, and it may be admitted that the court had no power to order the replications filed nunc pro tunc when none had ever been filed and there had been no attempt to file them. The case, however, was not tried without being at issue, and when the jury were sworn to try the issues the latter were fully made -up. Defendant suffered no harm, being fully advised as to the issue to be joined when the jurors were examined as to their qualifications. The first two pleas only required the similiter, and the replications were general, alleging that the entire capital stock had been subscribed prior to the calls. When they were filed the jury had not been sworn and there was opportunity for any further examination, or, if there was good reason, defendant might have asked for time thereafter to prepare for trial, but he did nothing of the kind, and, it is apparent, had no reason to do so. The court was right in denying the motion for judgment and trying the case.

No complaint is made of anything that occurred on the trial up to the time the court directed a verdict, and that direction is attacked solely on the ground that the evidence showed the capital stock had not been fully subscribed at the time the calls were made. Plaintiff was incorporated under the general act concerning corporations, in force July 1, 1872. The capital stock was fixed at $5,000,000, and commissioners were licensed to open books for subscription to such stock. The commissioners took defendant’s subscription, with others, for the purpose of effecting the incorporation. In such case the contract of subscription is binding and enforceable only after the full capital stock has been subscribed. Until the whole amount has been subscribed the corporation cannot be organized or have a legal existence and the directors cannot make any call or assessment on the shares. The subscribers cannot be required to pay such assessments until the corporation is authorized by law to begin the prosecution of its business. (Allman v. Havana, Rantoul and Eastern Railroad Co. 88 Ill. 521; Temple v. Lemon, 112 id. 51; 1 Redfield on Railways, 175; Cook on Stock and Stockholders, sec. 176; Morawetz on Private Corp. sec. 137.) In such a case, after the capital stock has been fully subscribed the commissioners are authorized to convene a meeting of the subscribers, upon due notice addressed to each, for the purpose of electing directors or managers and for the transaction of other business. In this case the stock was fully subscribed in good faith, and it was not claimed that there was any nominal or fictitious subscription or any release of any subscriber from the obligation of his contract. The notice was given to the subscribers and a meeting held on April 4, 1890, when directors were elected for the term of one year. In pursuance of the statute, on April 8,1890, the commissioners made a report to the Secretary of State of their proceedings, signed and sworn to by them, including therein a copy of the notice to the subscribers of the meeting to organize, a copy of the subscription list and the names of the directors, with their terms of office. The Secretary of State thereupon issued a certificate of the complete organization of the corporation, making a part thereof a copy of all the papers filed in bis office, including the subscription list, and this was recorded in the office of the recorder of deeds of Cook county, where the principal office of the corporation was located. The records of the corporation are sufficient and competent evidence that the full capital stock has been subscribed. (Cook on Stock and Stockholders, sec. 180.) The final certificate of complete incorporation issued by the Secretary of State April 9,1890, and the proceedings attached thereto, were offered in. evidence and were prima facie proof that the full amount of the capital stock had been subscribed. Jewell v. Rock River Paper Co. 101 Ill. 57.

There is no claim that subscriptions to the entire amount of the capital stock were not made and accepted in absolute good faith, but it is contended that the prima facie case was overcome by the fact that in the subscription list there appear subscriptions in the names of the Chicago Gas Trust Company and the Nilsson Shirt and Laundry Company, corporations organized under the laws of the State of Illinois, charters of which were introduced in evidence. There were also subscriptions in the names of national banks, and it is said that these, from their names, must necessarily have been banks organized under the national banking law, and that as to all these corporations the act of subscribing to the capital stock of plaintiff was ultra vires and the subscriptions not binding. Corporations organized under the laws of this State cannot become stockholders in other corporations unless power is specifically given by their charters or necessarily implied from them, (People v. Chicago Gas Trust Co. 130 Ill. 268,) and national banks have no power to subscribe for capital stock of other corporations. It was proved that the Nilsson Shirt and Laundry Company had been sued by plaintiff and a judgment had been recovered against it for its unpaid stock subscription. So far as that corporation is concerned, the judgment established its liability and the validity of its contract. The subscription of the gas trust company or subscriptions of other corporations were illegal in the sense that they were ultra vires, and such corporations could make that defense or not, at their pleasure. The contracts may have been performed by the corporations, and there is no evidence that they were not performed.

We are of the opinion that the evidence was not sufficient to discharge defendant from the obligations of his contract.

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

Related

Israel v. Wood
27 P.2d 1024 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1933)
Hummel v. Shelby
2 F.2d 334 (Seventh Circuit, 1924)
In Re Hool Realty Co.
2 F.2d 334 (Seventh Circuit, 1924)
Spiegel v. Wolpers
226 Ill. App. 446 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1922)
Pierik v. Mueller
201 Ill. App. 108 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1915)
Cox v. Hardee
68 S.E. 932 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1910)
Edmunds v. Illinois Central Railroad
2 Ill. Cir. Ct. 423 (Illinois Circuit Court, 1908)
Pacific Mill Co. v. Inman
80 P. 424 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 N.E. 1043, 186 Ill. 356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccoy-v-worlds-columbian-exposition-ill-1900.