Reese v. Huron Grain & Coal Co.

287 N.W. 640, 67 S.D. 9, 1939 S.D. LEXIS 60
CourtSouth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 3, 1939
DocketFile No. 8232.
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 287 N.W. 640 (Reese v. Huron Grain & Coal Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering South Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reese v. Huron Grain & Coal Co., 287 N.W. 640, 67 S.D. 9, 1939 S.D. LEXIS 60 (S.D. 1939).

Opinion

POLLEY, -J.

The defendant, Huron Grain & Coal Company, hereinafter referred to as the company, .is a corporation engaged in the grain and coal business' in the city of Huron. . Plaintiff, Sheldon F.-Reese, is -a. competitor of the company dealing in coal, grain and feed on a large scale in Huron and vicinity. All of the. plaintiffs, and defendants, except the company, are stockholders in the-company. Differences, .arose among the stockholders that divided them into -two factions,, each faction desiring, control of-the. com *10 pany. The individual defendants constitute the present board of directors and officers of the company.

The plaintiffs, other than Sheldon F. Reese, are either in his employ or are using their endeavor in his behalf. They constitute the opposing faction and brought this action on the equity side of the court, asking the court, in effect, to oust the individual defendants, as directors and officers of the company, and install plaintiffs in their places.

Upon hearing the testimony the court invoked the ancient equity maxim: “He who comes into a court of equity must come with clean hands,” and held that Mr. Reese had acted in bad faith in his manner of attempting to acquire a controlling interest in the company, and thát he was not in court “with clean hands,” and dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint. The facts upon which the court reached its conclusions are set out in great detail in the following Findings of Fact made by the trial court:

1. “The defendant, Huron Grain & Coal Company is and at all times herein referred to has been a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws .of the State of South Dakota,- with its principal place of business in the City of Huron, Beadle County, South Dakota; and the business of said Company at all said times has been the purchase, sale, and dealing in, of grain, feed and coal.

2. “That since on or about January 12, 1935, the defendants T. H. Hill, Delbert E. McDaniel, W. H. Gamble, N. L. Swarm, and Otto Kuehn, have been and constituted the Board of Directors of said Corporation, and have conducted and had control of the management of its business and property. That during said period of time the defendant T. H. Hill has been the President of' said Company; the defendant Delbert E. McDaniel has been its Manager in actual and immediate charge of the conduct of its business; and the defendant Irwin A. Churchill has been the legal advisor of the Corporation and its Board of Directors.

“The said defendant Directors were also stockholders of the defendant Corporation, and they and persons in agreement with them as to the policy of the Corporation *11 were the owners of a majority of the stock of said Corporation. There was at said time some controversy among the stockholders of said Corporation, and holders of a minority of the stock-of said Corporation were dissatisfied with the management and policies thereof.

3. “That the said Corporation was organized on or about December 1, 1922, and its capital stock subscribed and issued at about that time, and subsequent to its said organization no additional stock in said Corporation was subscribed, sold, or issued until on or about January 15, 1936 and March 5, 1936, as hereinafter found. That from time to time certain of the capital stock of said Corporation has been acquired by the Corporation and from August 5, 1931 to January 15, 1936 the subscribed and outstanding capital stock of said Corporation other than such Company-held stock has been two hundred ninety-four (294) shares of the par value of Twenty-five dollars ($25.00) each.

4. “The plaintiff, Sheldon F. Reese, is and for a considerable time prior to the year 1935 was engaged in business in the City of Huron and elsewhere in buying and selling grain, feed and coal. The plaintiff, M. F. Reese, is the mother of Sheldon F. Reese; plaintiff, F. B. Reese, is the father of Sheldon F. Reese; and plaintiff D. McNallan is an employee of Sheldon F. Reese; and the stock in Huron Grain & Coal Company purchased by plaintiff McNallan was purchased in part with funds furnished to him by Sheldon F. Reese.

“In the conduct of his said grain and feed business, Sheldon F. Reese purchased a large amount of grain for resale as feed at the various places of business conducted by him; and in 1935 was desirous of purchasing from defendant Huron Grain & Coal Company the feed grain taken in by it. At this time, however, defendant Huron Grain & Coal Company,. had a loan of approximately $8,000.00 from a creditor in Minneapolis, and as part of its agreement in procuring said loan had agreed to market all of its grain through said creditor. In the Spring of 1935 plaintiff, Sheldon F. Reese, arranged to loan to defendant, Huron Grain & Coal Com *12 pany, the sum of approximately $8,000.00 with which to pay off its Minneapolis creditor and satisfy the claim of said Minneapolis creditor and discharge the control which said Minneapolis creditor had over the marketing of grain and the management of the business of Huron Grain & Coal Company. As security for said loan plaintiff Sheldon F. Reese, took a note of Huron Grain & Coal Company, secured by a chattel mortgage on its elevator warehouse and coal shed properties, and also as a condition to making said loan insisted that there be procured for him certain shares of stock in the defendant Corporation as hereinafter found.

5. “The arrangements for said loan were conducted by plaintiff, Sheldon F. Reese, on the one hand, and by defendants T. H. Hill, Delbert E. McDaniel and other of the Directors of the defendant Corporation acting on its behalf; and in conducting said negotiations and in making said agreement for a loan and for the purchase of grain by said Reese from the defendant Corporation, the plaintiff, Sheldon F. Reese, stated and represented to the officers and directors of the defendant Corporation in charge of such negotiations in effect that he wanted some of the stock of defendant Corporation to hold during the term of his loan in order to insure the continuance of the then management until his loan was .repaid; that he did not want to get control of the Corporation or a majority of its stock; and that when his loan was repaid he would return and reconvey to the said parties or someone designated by them the amount of stock which they procured for him, at the price which he had paid for it.

“Pursuant to said agreement, defendant officers and directors of defendant Corporation arranged for and brought about the transfer of twenty-four (24) shares of stock from Will Whitney, for $200.00, and twenty-four (24) shares of stock from the estate of L. C. Tredway, for $200.00. The transfer of all of this stock to plaintiff Sheldon F. Reese was made about March, 1935. The owners of this stock belonged to the group that supported defendant Directors in the management of the affairs of defendant Company, and said stock could not have been purchased by plaintiff, Shel *13 don F. Reese, except for the intervention arid persuasion of said defenciants., And plaintiff, Sheldon F. Reese, without the assistance of defendant Directors purchased other stock for himself or his co-plaintiffs from owners who were opposed to the management of defendant Directors, but not in such amount as to give plaintiffs control of the Corporation.

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

Related

H & M Parmely Farms v. Farmers Home Administration
127 B.R. 644 (D. South Dakota, 1990)
Tri-State Refining & Investment Co. v. Apaloosa Co.
452 N.W.2d 104 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1990)
Massey Ferguson Credit Corp. v. Bice
450 N.W.2d 435 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1990)
In Re H & M Parmely Farms
127 B.R. 639 (D. South Dakota, 1989)
Kane v. Schnitzler
376 N.W.2d 337 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1985)
Heylandt Sales Co. v. Welding Gas Products Co.
175 S.W.2d 557 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
287 N.W. 640, 67 S.D. 9, 1939 S.D. LEXIS 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reese-v-huron-grain-coal-co-sd-1939.