Milliken v. Steiner

56 Ga. 251
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 15, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 56 Ga. 251 (Milliken v. Steiner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Milliken v. Steiner, 56 Ga. 251 (Ga. 1876).

Opinion

Warner, Chief Justice.

This was a claim case, and the record shows the following facts:

On the 19th day of September, 1865, suit was instituted in Richmond superior court on bills of the Mechanics’ Bank, „and service was perfected on Thomas S. Metcalf, president, personally, on September 23d, 1865. Judgment was rendered January 15th, 1867, for $8,839 00, based on a verdict of a jury, without any plea, and levied February 20th, 1875, there being on the execution a return of no property, December 9th, 1869 ; claim was interposed February 23d, 1875.

The following were admissions on the trial;

1st. That the lot of land in controversy was, on the 4th of January, 1866, and for many years before, the property of the Mechanics’ Bank, and was so at the date of the levy, unless it had ceased to be by virtue of the facts and proceedings hereinafter shewn.

2d. The deed of assignment, dated January 4th, 1866, from the Mechanics’ Bank to William T. Gould, signed by Thomas S. Metcalf, as president, and John A. North, as cashier, with the corporate seal affixed, with acceptance of the trust [253]*253by the assignee on January 4th, 1866, and recorded January 5th, 1866. The deed is without preference, conveys the lot levied on, with all other property of the bank, in trust for the creditors of the bank, and authorizes it to be sold in such manner and on such terms as the trustee may deem most for the interest of the trust.

3d. The Mechanics’ Bank was incorporated by the act of the legislature, approved December 21st, 1830: Pam. 34, Prince’s Digest to 1837, page 94.

4th. The charter of said bank was extended by act approved February 20th, 1854, to 1880.

5th. Notice was given December 2d, 1865, by an advertisement signed by J. A. North, cashier, by order of the directors, of a general meeting of the stockholders, December 20th, 1865, to consider the condition of the institution.

6th. At the meeting held December 20th, 1865, the following resolutions were passed:

“JResolved by this meeting, being a representation of a majority of the stock of said bank, that a general meeting of stockholders be called, to be held on the 20th day of February next, to consider the propriety and necessity of surrendering the charter.

" Resolved, that in the meantime, and to avoid unjust preferences among the creditors of the bank, the board of directors be requested forthwith to cause the president and cashier, under the corporate seal of the bank, to execute and deliver to such person or persons as they may select, a deed of conveyance and assignment of all and singular the estate, goods, moneys, evidences of debt, and property of every description, real and personal, in possession and in action, belonging to this bank, reserving what may be necessary to pay officers’ salaries, incidental expenses and attorneys’ fees, up to the completion of said assignment, in trust for the payment of all the indebtedness and obligations of said bank, without any distinction, except as is provided by law.”

7th. On the same day the directors met and ordered the assignment to be made as soon as deemed advisable.

[254]*2548th. The assignment was made Thursday, January 4, 1866, by the president and cashier witli the corporate seal affixed, to William T. Gould, with no other preferences than is or may be authorized by law, and with authority to sell in such manner as the trustee may deem most for the interest of said trust.

9th. A notice was published December 21, 1865, signed by twenty-one of the stockholders, being the owners of over two hundred shares, notifying the stockholders to assemble in general meeting, February 20,1866, to consider the propriety of surrendering their charter and attending to any other matter touching the interest of said bank.

10th. The stockholders met in convention on February 20, 1866; they ratified and confirmed the proceedings of the preceding meeting, surrendered their charter and ceased to do business, of which action of the stockholders a copy was sent to the Governor of Georgia, who, in his message of March 1, 1866, informed the Senate “that a copy of the proceedings of a meeting of the stockholders of the Mechanics’ Bank, ratifying and confirming the proceedings of a previous informal meeting (heretofore communicated) and surrendering their charter,” was of file in his office.

11th. The trustee accepted the trust, took possession of the property, held possession until July 6, 1869, when he sold the same at public outcry, at the place of public sales, after due notice of forty days in the public gazettes, to H. H. Steiner, for the sum of $7,700 00, who has been in quiet and undisturbed possession ever since, under deed from the assignee, recorded July 24, 1869.

12th. There was no election of directors of the Mechanics’ Bank, or president of the bank, after January, 1865, and the first Monday in January, 1866, was the first day of the month.

13th. The following are the provisions of the charter of the Mechanics’ Bank of December 21st, 1830, relating to the qualifications and authority of the directors and stockholders:

“ Section 5. For the well ordering of the affairs of the said corporation, there shall be nine directors, who shall be elected [255]*255as soon as gold and silver coin to the amount of twenty per cent, of the subscriptions for said stock shall have been received, and in each and every year thereafter, the directors shall be cho.sen by the stockholders or proprietors of the capital stock of said corporation, when a plurality of votes given in shall be required to make a choice; and those who shall be duly chosen at any election shall be capable of serving as directors, by virtue of such choice, until the end of the first Monday in January next ensuing the time of such election, and no longer; and the said directors, at their first meeting after each election, shall choose one of their number as president, and in case of his death, resignation, removal from the state, or from the board of direction, the said directors shall proceed to fill the vacancy, by a new election for the remainder of the year.

“And provided further, that in case it should at any time happen that an election of directors should not be made upon any day when, pursuant to this act, it ought to have been made, the said corporation shall not for that cause .be deemed to be dissolved; but it shall be lawful on any other day to hold and make an election of directors in such manner as shall have been regulated by the rules and by-laws of said corporation.”

Fundamental articles of the constitution of said corporation :

“ Section 7, Article 4. Not less than five directors shall ■constitute a board for the transaction of business, of whom the president shall always be one, except in case of sickness or necessary absence, in which case his seat may be supplied by any director appointed by the board of directors present for that purpose.

“ Article 5. A number of stockholders,.not less than twenty, who together, shall be proprietors of two hundred shares, or upwards, shall have power, at any time, to call a meeting of stockholders for purposes relative to the institution, giving at least sixty days notice in one of the public gazettes of the city of Augusta, specifying in such notice the object of such meeting.

[256]

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

Related

White v. Davis
67 S.E. 716 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1910)
Seay v. Bank of Rome
66 Ga. 609 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1881)
Gresham v. Crossland
59 Ga. 270 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 Ga. 251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/milliken-v-steiner-ga-1876.