Sterling-Midland Coal Co. v. Chicago-Williamsville Coal Co.

253 Ill. App. 36, 1928 Ill. App. LEXIS 4
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedFebruary 8, 1928
DocketGen. No. 8,148
StatusPublished

This text of 253 Ill. App. 36 (Sterling-Midland Coal Co. v. Chicago-Williamsville Coal Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sterling-Midland Coal Co. v. Chicago-Williamsville Coal Co., 253 Ill. App. 36, 1928 Ill. App. LEXIS 4 (Ill. Ct. App. 1928).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.

The controversy in this case concerns the allegations of an amended bill in equity, filed in the circuit court of Sangamon county by the Sterling-Midland Coal Company as judgment creditor against the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company, and against William Ryan, John W. Kapp, Jr., John Sankey, George W. Hatch, Harry D'everaux, Eugene Colgin and Edgar H. Buckley, alleged to be directors and stockholders of the company. Deveraux and Colgin were after-wards dismissed from the case as defendants in the bill. The bill alleges that on, to wit, May 29, 1920, the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company owned a coal mine which was situated in Sangamon county; and that on the date mentioned the company sold it to Leslie J. Pulliam; and upon information and belief it is stated that the amount received from this sale was in excess of $100,000; and that the company by this sale divested itself of its entire property and thereby became insolvent. The bill further alleges that, at the time of the sale referred to, the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company was indebted to the complainant company in the sum of $4,617.06, and a judgment was rendered on April 14, 1924, in favor of the complainant company in the circuit court of Cook county against the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company; and that no part of this amount has been paid; and that the entire amount was due and owing. The bill further alleges that the defendants William Ryan, John W. Kapp, Jr., John Sankey, George W. Hatch, , Harry Deveraux, Eugene Colgin and Edgar H. Buckley were directors and stockholders in the Chieago-Williamsville Coal Company at the time of the sale of the property mentioned, and that it was their duty to use the money obtained from said sale to pay the debts of the Chieago-Williamsville Coal Company, but that instead of doing so, the entire proceeds of the sale were distributed among the above-named defendants. The prayer of the bill is that the defendants, the Chicago-Williams-ville Coal Company, William Ryan, John W. Kapp, Jr., John Sankey, George W. Hatch, Harry Deveraux, Eugene Colgin and Edgar H. Buckley, be required to account for the money received from the sale of the property of the Chicago Williamsvillé Coal Company, and may be compelled to pay the complainant company the amount due it; and that the complainant company may have such other further relief as equity may require. The defendants in the bill filed an answer admitting that the Chieago-Williamsville Coal Company is an Illinois corporation and had owned a mine situated in Sangamon county, and sold the mine to Leslie J. Pulliam. They neither admitted nor denied that they were directors and stockholders in the Chieago-Williamsville Coal Company on May 29, 1920, but asked that strict proof be made thereof; they neither admitted nor denied that the amount of money received from the sale was in excess of $100,000, but asked for strict proof of the fact; they denied that by the sale mentioned the Chieago-Williamsville Coal Company divested itself of its entire property; and denied that said company became or was insolvent; and they denied that at the time of the sale said company was indebted to the complainant company in the sum of $4,617.06, and that said amount was due and owing to the complainant company; and denied that the entire proceeds of the sale of said coal mine was distributed among the defendants. They admit that on April 14, 1924, judgment was rendered in favor of the complainant company against the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company in the circuit court of Cook county for the sum of $4,617.06, and admit that no part of said amount has been paid the complainant company by the ChicagoWilliamsville Coal Company, but assert that said judgment was obtained by the complainant company through fraud, concealment and improper doings on the part of the complainant company. In the answer of the defendants there are also a number of general averments in reference to business transactions between the complainant company and the ChicagoWilliamsville Coal Company prior to the recovery of the judgment referred to, in reference to the sale of coal shipped by the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company to be sold by the complainant company for the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company, and that the complainant company practiced a fraud on the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company in not making a proper or correct accounting to the Chicago-Williams-ville Coal Company, not reporting the correct amount of prices at which it sold the coal to the various purchasers thereof. But there are no allegations of fact to sustain the averment that the judgment was obtained by the complainant company through fraud, concealment and improper doings on the part of the complainant company. The defendants also filed a cross-bill containing averments of the character and effect referred to concerning certain business transactions involved in the sale of the coal shipped by the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company to the complainant company, and that the complainant company committed a fraud upon the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company by not making a proper and correct accounting in reference to the sales of such coal, prior to the recovery of the judgment referred to, and the prayer of the cross-bill is that the complainant company may be compelled to make a true and correct account of the transaction referred to. A demurrer was sustained to the cross-bill, and no further proceedings were had in reference thereto. The issues involved on the original bill were referred to the master, who heard the testimony of the witnesses and reported the same to the court. Upon a hearing of the case, the court found the equities in the cause in favor of the defendants, and dismissed the bill for want of equity. An appeal is prosecuted from the decree dismissing the bill.

On the hearing before the master it was stipulated that the records of Sangamon county showed a “deed of conveyance from the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company, a corporation, to Leslie J. Pulliam; and that this deed bears date the 29th day of May, 1920; and was executed by the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company, by Edgar H. Buckley, President; and attested by John W. Kapp, Jr., Secretary;.and that it bears United States Revenue Stamps for the amount of $200,000.00 consideration; and that it consisted of mine property located in the county of Sangamon.”

John W. Kapp, Jr., was a witness on the hearing before the master, and testified concerning the controverted matters in issue as follows: “I live at Springfield and am one of the defendants. On May 29, 1920, to the best of my recollection, the directors of the Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company were Edgar Buckley, George W; Hatch and John E. Sankey, . . . and William Ryan. I was Secretary of the corporation. . . . We hhd an office in the Booth 'building. . . . Ed Buckley was one of the directors, John Sankey was one of them, I was one, and Mr. Ryan was one, and George W. Hatch. The Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company sold the mine to Leslie J. Pulliam. I do not know how much they received for it. I was one of the directors and one of the stockholders. I do not know how much money they received. I know how much I received. I received about $22,000.00. Mr. Ryan was treasurer at that time. I don’t think the money was paid to him. The Chicago-Williamsville Coal Company did not own any other property except this mine on May 29, 1920, that I know of. . . . The ChicagoWilliamsville Coal Comapny after that never transacted any business that I know of.” The witness also testified, concerning the books of the corporation after the sale referred to: “We put the books in the Chatterton building for storage.

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

Related

Sanger v. Upton
91 U.S. 56 (Supreme Court, 1875)
Beach v. Miller
22 N.E. 464 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1889)
Atwater v. American Exchange Nat. Bank
152 Ill. 605 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1894)
Singer v. Hutchinson
56 N.E. 388 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
253 Ill. App. 36, 1928 Ill. App. LEXIS 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sterling-midland-coal-co-v-chicago-williamsville-coal-co-illappct-1928.