Sloan v. Kansas City State Bank

57 S.W. 1056, 158 Mo. 431, 1900 Mo. LEXIS 94
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedNovember 12, 1900
DocketNo. 1
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 57 S.W. 1056 (Sloan v. Kansas City State Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sloan v. Kansas City State Bank, 57 S.W. 1056, 158 Mo. 431, 1900 Mo. LEXIS 94 (Mo. 1900).

Opinion

MARSHALL, J.

This is a suit in equity instituted by S. A. Sloan and Chris Goodson (the latter has since died and the suit revived in the name of R. H. Ross, his administrator) as stockholders, directors and creditors of the Farmers and Merchants Bank of Creighton, against the Kansas City State Bank, W. O. Cox and í). B. Wallis assignee of the Creighton bank.

The petition is as follows:

“Plaintiffs state that at the time hereinafter mentioned and now, the Kansas City State Bank is a corporation organized under the laws of Missouri, and doing business in the county of Jackson, and State of Missouri, and the said W. O. Cox is and has been its president and agent. That the Farmers [432]*432& Merchants Bank, of Creighton, is also a corporation, organized under the laws of the State of Missouri, and was doing business in the county of Cass and State of Missouri about the thirtieth day of September, 1895, when it became financially embarrassed and made a general assignment for the benefit of all its creditors to the defendant, D. B. Wallis, who was then and for a long time had been its cashier.
“Plaintiffs state that they were and are interested in said Creighton bank as stockholders and directors and creditors; that the said Goodson owns stock in the same of the par or face value of $1,000 and at the time of the closing thereof he had on deposit therein to his credit the sum of $577.25, all of which is still due and unpaid; that the said Sloan owns stock in the same of the par value of $4,500 and at the time of the closing thereof he had on deposit to his credit the sum of $2,993.80, all of which is still due and unpaid.
“For their cause of action and complaint in this suit plaintiffs state that the management and credit of the said Farmers & Merchants Bank, of Creighton, has for many years been to a large extent in the hands of defendant, D. B. Wallis, its cashier; that said Wallis was the active business head of said incorporation, performing the duties of cashier, koepifig the books of said bank and carrying on its business generally according to his own ideas and without consulting or advising with the other officers on the board of directors of said institution; that many of the transactions of said cashier were without the knowledge or consent of said officers and were willfully and purposely concealed from them, so that neither these plaintiffs nor the other officers of the said Creighton bank knew of its failing condition until about the time it failed and ceased to do business as above stated. That sometime in the year 1893, the said defendant, Wallis, as cashier aforesaid, obtained a loan from the Kansas City State Bank to the amount of $20,000, for the use of said [433]*433Creighton bank, and executed its note or notes for the same to said payee, or some of its officers for its benefit (plaintiffs are unable to state which) ; and that said indebtedness at least in part, as plaintiffs are informed, remained unpaid at the time of the closing of said Creighton bank. That defendant, D. B. Wallis, together with his brother, I. D. Wallis, also borrowed from said Kansas City State Bank, in the year 1893, the sum of $15,000 for their individual use, and for which they executed their note or notes to said corporation payee, or to one of its officers for its use and benefit and for which loan the said defendant Wallis, and brother, executed several notes from time to time; that the money so borrowed by said defendant Wallis and his* brother was used by them for their own private purposes; and the said Creightoto. bank received no benefit therefrom, nor did it have any knowledge or 'connection with, or assume any liability, on account of said loan; that the name of said Creighton bank was indorsed upon the back of said Wallis notes without its authority. That afterwards, at what date these plaintiffs are unable to state, the said bank of Creighton out of its own money sent to the Kans'as City State Bank the sum of $5,000 which should have been applied on the $20,000 note of said Creighton bank, but which was wrongfully and without the knowledge or consent of plaintiffs or said last named bank through the connivance of said defendant Wallis, applied as a credit on the note of said Wallis and his brother, I. I). Wallis, thereby reducing their note to the sum of $10,000. That the payment of said sum of $5,000 ought properly to have gone to reduce the indebtedness of said Creighton bank, but was sent to defendant bank and applied as aforesaid wrongfully, illegally and without the consent or knowledge of said indebted bank or of these plaintiffs.
“Plaintiffs further state that at sometime between the [434]*434borrowing of the $20,000, by said Creighton bank, in 1893, and the closing of the said bank in 1895, there were large numbers of promissory notes owned and payable to said last named corporation amounting to about $21,000 turned over by said Wallis to the Kansas City State Bank as collateral security for the payment of the note or notes due to said last named bank from the Creighton bank aforesaid; that these plaintiffs are unable to state the amounts or give a description of said notes so turned over as collateral security, for the reason that plaintiffs have not access to the books of either of said banks and have no means of ascertaining with accuracy the particulars in regard thereto but plaintiffs are informed and they allege that there have been about $12,000 or more of said collateral notes collected by said Kansas City State Bank and which it has filed and neglected to credit on the indebtedness of said Creighton bank as aforesaid.
“Plaintiffs further state that in the months of June, July and August and September, 1895, the said defendant bank, acting in concert with the said D. B. Wallis, but without the knowledge or consent of the plaintiffs or of the bank of Creighton aforesaid, or of the board of directors, did illegally and wrongfully take and convert to its own use a large number of notes of said Farmers & Merchants Bank, the assets and property of said last named corporation, the particular description of which said notes are unknown to plaintiffs, but plaintiffs are informed and so charge that said notes so wrongfully taken and converted did amount in face value to about the sum of $30,000, of the value of ^ 30,000.
“That the notes of the bank of Creighton taken and kept by said Kansas City State Bank amount in all to the face value of $51,535.72 and are particularly described and set out in a statement hereto, attached and herewith filed and marked “exhibit A.” But as to when said notes were taken by defendant bank plaintiffs can not state particularly, for the [435]*435reason that they have not the means of knowledge at their command, and the transaction was without their knowledge at ' the time.
“Plaintiffs-further state that on or about the sixteenth day of July, they being in ignorance of the true state of the business of said bank, and being informed by the said cashier, Wallis, and one Adams, the agent of the Kansas City State Bank, and W. O. Oox, the defendants herein, that the said! Creighton bank was in debt to the Kansas City State Bank in the sum of $21,000 and believing said statement to be true and relying thereon, they made and executed their separate promissory notes to W. O.

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

Related

California Bank v. Daniel
288 P. 7 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1930)
Powers v. Woolfolk
111 S.W. 1187 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 S.W. 1056, 158 Mo. 431, 1900 Mo. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sloan-v-kansas-city-state-bank-mo-1900.