Stevens v. Washington Loan Co.

152 A. 20, 107 N.J. Eq. 94, 6 Backes 94, 1930 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 55
CourtNew Jersey Court of Chancery
DecidedOctober 21, 1930
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 152 A. 20 (Stevens v. Washington Loan Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stevens v. Washington Loan Co., 152 A. 20, 107 N.J. Eq. 94, 6 Backes 94, 1930 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 55 (N.J. Ct. App. 1930).

Opinion

After a summary hearing an injunction issued against the Washington Loan Company and the Washington Loan Company ofAtlantic City, John W.R. Doyle and his son, Charles R. Doyle, forbidding them from selling securities in this state, and especially the securities and capital stock of the two companies, and receivers were appointed for the companies, for having violated the New Jersey Securities act, laws 1927, chapter 79, as amended in 1929 by chapter 344 and in 1930 by chapter 57 and supplemented by chapter 51.

Section 2 of the act provides:

"2. The use or employment by any person, partnership, corporation, company or association of any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, fraud, false pretense, false promise or fictitious or pretended purchase or sale, in connection with the issuance, sale, offer for sale, purchase, offer to purchase, promotion, negotiation, advertisement or distribution within or from this state of any stocks, bonds, notes, debentures, evidences of indebtedness, certificates of interest or participation, interim certificates or receipts, foreign currency orders or calls or options therefor, or other instruments commonly known as secuities, hereinafter called securities, are hereby declared to be illegal practices and are hereby prohibited.

"The term `fraud,' as used in this act, in addition to the usual construction placed on it and accepted in courts of law and equity, shall include the following:

"(a) Any misrepresentation by word, conduct or in any manner of any material fact, either present or past, and any omission to disclose any such fact;

"(b) Any promise or representation as to the future which is beyond reasonable expectation or is unwarranted by existing circumstances;

"(c) The gaining of, or attempt to gain, directly or indirectly, through a trade in any security, a commission fee or gross profit so large and exorbitant as to be unconscionable and unreasonable;

"(d) Generally any course of conduct or business which is calculated or put forward with intent to deceive the public or the purchaser of any security as to the nature of any transaction or as to the value of such security;

"(e) Any artifice, agreement, device or scheme to obtain money, profit or property by any of the means hereinbefore set forth or otherwise prohibited by this act." *Page 96

Sections 6 and 7 read:

"6. Whenever it shall appear to the attorney-general from any report or statement filed, from any examination made as provided for in this act, or from any other source, that any person, partnership, corporation, company, or association has engaged in, is engaging in, or is about to engage in, any practice declared to be illegal and prohibited by this act, he may by petition or bill of complaint setting forth the facts and circumstances of the case, apply to the court of chancery for a writ of injunction, or the appointment of a receiver, or both, and the court being satisfied by affidavit or otherwise of the sufficiency of said application and the truth of the allegations contained in the petition or bill, and upon such notice as the court may by order direct, may proceed in a summary way to hear the affidavits, proofs and allegations which may be offered on behalf of the parties, and if upon such inquiry it shall appear to the court that any such person, partnership, corporation, company or association has engaged in, or is engaging in, or is about to engage in any practice declared to be illegal and prohibited by this act, the court may issue an injunction restraining such person, partnership, corporation, company or association, and any agents, employes, brokers, partners, officers, directors and stockholders thereof, from continuing such practices or engaging therein or doing any acts in furtherance thereof, and the court may also issue an injunction restraining the issuance, sale, offer for sale, purchase or offer to purchase, promotion, negotiation, advertisement or distribution within or from this state of any securities by such person, partnership, corporation, company or association and any agents, employes, brokers, partners, officers, directors or stockholders thereof until the court shall otherwise order. In any action or proceeding brought under the provisions of this act, the attorney-general shall be entitled to recover costs and the court of chancery may also award to the attorney-general a counsel fee, said costs and counsel fee to be paid by the defendant or defendants for the use of the State of New Jersey.

"7. (a) Whenever the court of chancery shall issue any injunction provided for in section six, against a person, partnership, company or association, it may appoint a receiver with power to sue for, collect, receive and take into his possession all the goods and chattels, rights and credits, moneys and effects, lands and tenements, books, records, documents, papers, choses in action, bills, notes and property of every description, derived by means of any practice declared to be illegal and prohibited by this act, including also all property with which such property has been mingled, if such property cannot be identified in kind because of such commingling, and sell, convey and assign the same, and hold and dispose of the proceeds thereof under the direction of the court of chancery for the equal benefit of all who establish an interest therein by reason of the use and employment by the defendant of any practices herein declared to be illegal and prohibited; and the court shall have jurisdiction of all questions arising in said proceedings and may make such orders and decrees therein as justice and equity shall require." *Page 97

These facts are established by the proofs annexed to the bill, and by the answering affidavits.

The Washington Loan Company was organized early in 1928 by John W.R. Doyle and his associates, through dummies, to deal in securities. The authorized capitalization at the filing of the bill was ten thousand shares of no par value. Of this John W.R. Doyle subscribed for five thousand shares, payable within three years, at $1 per share for three thousand five hundred shares, $2.50 for seven hundred and fifty shares, and $5 for the remaining seven hundred and fifty shares, and the directors resolved to sell the remaining five thousand shares to the public for $10 per share for the first one thousand, $12.50 for the second, $15 for the third, $17.50 for the fourth and $20 per share for the last thousand shares. Shares were sold for as high as $17.50 per share. Doyle paid $1 per share for three thousand five hundred shares and issued one thousand one hundred of his shares, at that rate, to sixteen, as he says, "responsible and important men in the community," where they would do the most good. He and his son now hold two thousand seven hundred and seventy-five shares for which they paid $3,337.50. The total issue of stock was seven thousand six hundred and thirty-five shares; the public holds the balance at fancy prices. The company also created a $2,500,000 eight per cent. debenture bond issue of which $160,000 has been sold to the public. The bond and stock issues are payable in installments. The cash receipts from stock and bond sales to February 28th, 1930, were $71,392.09, and all but $1,289.84 had been spent in commissions, salaries and organization and other expenses. That is what was left of the stock and bondholders' money, and it was the company's only working capital remaining. This depletion was brought about to the extent of $46,716.43 by the payment of twenty per cent. commission on sales of bonds and stocks as soon as twenty-five per cent. of the subscription to stocks and bonds was paid in, and son Charles had the commission contract.

The Doyles formed the Washington Loan Company

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

Related

SEC v. Guy Gentile
939 F.3d 549 (Third Circuit, 2019)
Stevens v. Washington Loan Co.
156 A. 420 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
152 A. 20, 107 N.J. Eq. 94, 6 Backes 94, 1930 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevens-v-washington-loan-co-njch-1930.