Nortmann-Duffke Co. v. Federal Crushed Stone Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Nortmann-Duffke Co. v. Federal Crushed Stone Co.

209 N.W. 17, 167 Minn. 333, 1926 Minn. LEXIS 1325

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedMay 21, 1926

DocketNo. 25,316.

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 209 N.W. 17 (Nortmann-Duffke Co. v. Federal Crushed Stone Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nortmann-Duffke Co. v. Federal Crushed Stone Co., 209 N.W. 17, 167 Minn. 333, 1926 Minn. LEXIS 1325 (Mich. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Wilson, O. J.

Action to enforce constitutional liability of the stockholders in defendant corporation. Certain stockholders appealed from an order of assessment.

Appellants claim that the corporation is a manufacturing corporation within § 3, art. 10, of the state Constitution. The general purpose clause in the articles of incorporation reads:

“The general nature of its business shall be to mine, quarry, cut, saw, crush, finish, set, dress, purchase and prepare for market, stone, marble, limestone and other minerals and manufacture the same into various products thereof, and transport and sell the same in crude or manufactured form, and as incident to such business to *334 acquire, lease, hold and sell real estate, and to have, own, hold, maintain and operate all of the necessary tools, plant, machinery, devices and appliances in connection therewith.”

In Graff v. Minn. Flint Rock Co. 147 Minn. 58, 179 N. W. 562, this court said: “Operating a stone quarry is not manufacturing” within the definition of a “manufacturer” as therein announced. It may be when coupled with the finishing of the product. The articles give the corporation the power to “quarry” stone and to “sell the same in crude or manufactured form.” The word “crude” usually means raw or unfinished. As here used it is plain that it meant other than a manufactured product. It therefore necessarily follows that the corporation may do some business that is not manufacturing. If its business is not exclusively manufacturing, liability attaches. We think the Graff ease is controlling and that it has not been overruled by the case of C. D. & F. Co. v. Kensington Mills, Inc. 152 Minn. 258, 188 N. W. 270, as claimed by appellant. The constitutional exemption does not apply if the corporation may, under its articles, engage in any business other than manufacturing. Kremer v. Tellin, 154 Minn. 267, 191 N. W. 735; State ex rel. v. Mortgage S. Co. 154 Minn. 458, 192 N. W. 348; Phelps v. Consolidated V. & E. Co. 157 Minn. 209, 195 N. W. 923.

Affirmed.

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

Wilson, O. J.

Action to enforce constitutional liability of the stockholders in defendant corporation. Certain stockholders appealed from an order of assessment.

Appellants claim that the corporation is a manufacturing corporation within § 3, art. 10, of the state Constitution. The general purpose clause in the articles of incorporation reads:

“The general nature of its business shall be to mine, quarry, cut, saw, crush, finish, set, dress, purchase and prepare for market, stone, marble, limestone and other minerals and manufacture the same into various products thereof, and transport and sell the same in crude or manufactured form, and as incident to such business to *334 acquire, lease, hold and sell real estate, and to have, own, hold, maintain and operate all of the necessary tools, plant, machinery, devices and appliances in connection therewith.”

In Graff v. Minn. Flint Rock Co. 147 Minn. 58, 179 N. W. 562, this court said: “Operating a stone quarry is not manufacturing” within the definition of a “manufacturer” as therein announced. It may be when coupled with the finishing of the product. The articles give the corporation the power to “quarry” stone and to “sell the same in crude or manufactured form.” The word “crude” usually means raw or unfinished. As here used it is plain that it meant other than a manufactured product. It therefore necessarily follows that the corporation may do some business that is not manufacturing. If its business is not exclusively manufacturing, liability attaches. We think the Graff ease is controlling and that it has not been overruled by the case of C. D. & F. Co. v. Kensington Mills, Inc. 152 Minn. 258, 188 N. W. 270, as claimed by appellant. The constitutional exemption does not apply if the corporation may, under its articles, engage in any business other than manufacturing. Kremer v. Tellin, 154 Minn. 267, 191 N. W. 735; State ex rel. v. Mortgage S. Co. 154 Minn. 458, 192 N. W. 348; Phelps v. Consolidated V. & E. Co. 157 Minn. 209, 195 N. W. 923.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 N.W. 17, 167 Minn. 333, 1926 Minn. LEXIS 1325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nortmann-duffke-co-v-federal-crushed-stone-co-minn-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack