Pope v. Hinckley

95 N.E. 798, 209 Mass. 323, 1911 Mass. LEXIS 947
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided June 20, 1911·Published·Cited by 19 cases

Opinion

Morton, J.

This is a bill for instructions by the executors of the will and codicil of Albert A. Pope. The case was reserved* for the full court on the bill, answers and agreed facts, such decree to be entered as justice and equity may require.

The will was dated June 16, 1905, and the codicil May 28, 1906. The testator died August 10, 1909. At the date of the will he was the owner and holder of four thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight shares of the first preferred stock of the Pope Manufacturing Company, a New Jersey corporation with its principal office in Jersey City and its general offices in Hartford, Connecticut, and sixteen thousand four hundred and fifty shares of the second preferred stock and sixty-four thousand and twenty-four shares of the common stock. At the date of the codicil his holdings of first and second preferred stock had been somewhat increased. Those of the common stock remained the same. By his will, which in this respect was not changed by the codicil, the testator gave numerous legacies of shares of the first preferred stock, four hundred and eighty shares in all, to various persons and corporations. In August, 1907, after the execution of the codicil and about two years before the testator’s death, the corporation passed into the hands of receivers under proceedings-begun, prosecuted and concluded in New Jersey. In [325] consequence thereof another corporation was organized on or about December 12, 1908, under the laws of Connecticut, to which, after payment by the receivers of all the obligations of the New Jersey corporation and of the expenses of the receivership, the remaining assets were duly conveyed by the receivers pursuant to an order of the New Jersey court authorizing the same, dated November 19, 1908, and a decree dated December 29, 1908, was entered dissolving the corporation, and, in accordance with the- statute in New Jersey, declaring its charter forfeited and void.

The Connecticut corporation was formed in the interest of the testator and of such other stockholders of the New Jersey corporation as chose to come in for the purpose of acquiring the assets and succeeding to and carrying on the business of the New Jersey corporation. Pending the receivership proceedings and for the purpose of carrying out the plans thus instituted, the testator and other stockholders in the New Jersey corporation deposited their stock with the Central Trust Company of New York, and that company issued to them negotiable voting trust certificates which were to be exchanged, and' which eventually were exchanged, for stock in the new corporation at the rate of ten shares of first preferred stock of the New Jersey corporation for seven and one half shares of the preferred stock and eight and three tenths shares of the common stock of the new corporation; and at the rate of ten shares of the second preferred stock of the New Jersey corporation for two shares of the common stock of the new corporation. The exchange was not made by the testator during his lifetime, but was made by his executors shortly after his death, pursuant to the scheme that he and other stockholders of the New Jersey corporation had thus entered into. The number of shares in the new corporation received by the executors was four thousand and ninety and one-half shares of the preferred stock and six-thousand four hundred and fifty-eight and eighty-two one-hundredths shares of the common stock, and they still hold these shares with the exception of the fractions, which have been sold. Trust certificates representing two thousand shares of the common stock of the new corporation had been sold by the conservator of the testator before his death by order of the Probate Court of Norfolk County. Subsequent to the decree [326] dissolving the New Jersey corporation, a decree was entered on August 3, 1909, that there should be paid to the persons who had not deposited or should not deposit their first preferred stock with the Central Trust Company, but elected to take cash therefor, a dividend of $41,277 on each share of the first preferred stock of the New Jersey corporation, which the court found to be the value thereof based on the assets of the corporation after the payment of all its obligations and of the expenses of the receivership. Shortly afterwards, on August 10, 1909, an order was entered discharging the receivers from any further duty or responsibility in respect to their trust as receivers and thus terminating the receivership. The capital stock of the New Jersey corporation was $22,500,000, consisting of $2,500,000 first preferred stock, $10,000,000 of second preferred stock, and $10,000,000 of common stock. The capital stock of the new corporation is $6,500,000, of which $2,500,000 is preferred stock and $4,000,000 is common stock.

The first and principal question on which the executors desire instructions is whether the legacies of shares of the Pope Manufacturing Company of New Jersey were adeemed by what took place during the testator’s lifetime, and if they were not, in what manner and on what basis the legacies shall be satisfied.

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

Pope v. Hinckley, 95 N.E. 798, 209 Mass. 323, 1911 Mass. LEXIS 947 (Mass. 1911).

95 N.E. 798 (Pope v. Hinckley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. Labow
69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 417 (California Court of Appeal, 2007)
Day v. Brooks
224 N.E.2d 557 (Cuyahoga County Probate Court, 1967)
Igoe v. Darby
177 N.E.2d 676 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1961)
Saunders v. President & Fellows of Harvard College
61 N.E.2d 839 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1945)
Donath v. Shaw
29 A.2d 555 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1942)
Gorham v. Chadwick
200 A. 500 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1938)
Will of Hinners v. Hinners
257 N.W. 148 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1934)
First National Bank v. Charlton
183 N.E. 250 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1932)
First National Bank v. Perkins Institute for the Blind
176 N.E. 532 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1931)
Chase National Bank v. Deichmiller
152 A. 697 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1930)
Anderson v. Bean
172 N.E. 647 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1930)
Willis v. Barrow
119 So. 678 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)
Elwyn v. De Garmendia
128 A. 913 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1925)
Goode v. Reynolds
271 S.W. 600 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1925)
Johns Hopkins University v. Uhrig
125 A. 606 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1924)
Estate of Irwin
6 Coffey 359 (California Superior Court, 1915)
Bell v. Nesmith
104 N.E. 721 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1914)
Brighton Packing Co. v. Butchers' Slaughtering & Melting Ass'n
97 N.E. 780 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1912)