Sturgis v. Roche

122 Misc. 779
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1924
StatusPublished

This text of 122 Misc. 779 (Sturgis v. Roche) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sturgis v. Roche, 122 Misc. 779 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1924).

Opinion

Mitchell, J.

This action is brought by the trustees for a judicial settlement of their accounts under the will of Frank Work, deceased, and particularly for a judgment directing how a stock dividend of 100 per cent, paid by the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company on or about July 28, 1921, shall be apportioned between capital and income. There are five separate trusts. One of them was created as of the date of the death of the said Frank Work, March 16, 1911, and the others were created subsequently. An issue is raised by the life beneficiaries and remaindermen under the several trusts involved, with respect to the disposition as between capital and income of the 100 per cent stock dividend paid by the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company. This question would present no great difficulty if it were not complicated by a transaction, the details of which are set forth in a statement prepared by William S. Jenney, the vice-president and general counsel of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company, which appears in evidence as defendants’ Exhibit A. This statement is entitled, Memo with respect to the organization of the Glen Alden Coal Company,” and is as follows: The Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company was organized under various special acts of the legislature of the State of Pennsylvania during the years from 1840 to 1870. Special charters were granted for various railroad and coal companies, which companies were merged into the parent company, so that for upwards of fifty years the parent company owned and operated both the coal mines and the railroads. Our books do not show the capital expenditures made in the acquisition of the coal properties, but it is estimated that the cost of the coal acquired by the company in fee was in the neighborhood of ten million dollars. During the last twenty years prior to the sale of the coal properties approximately a million dollars a year were expended thereon, chargeable to capital account. The capital expenditures prior to that time on the property we have no record of, but the same are estimated at some figure between five and ten millions of dollars. Under the laws of Pennsylvania, taxes must be paid on the coal as real estate, from year to year, although the coal may not be mined for years thereafter. We have probably paid twenty million dollars in taxes on the coal, three-quarters, at least, of which had not been mined at the time of the sale of the property. There are also many other matters, such as [781]*781advance payment of royalties, which make it very difficult to determine just what the book costs of the coal properties were at the time of the sale. It having been determined by our people that the coal properties should be segregated, the plan which was adopted was the following: Major Inglis, our vice-president and general manager in charge of our coal properties, was invited to promote a new coal company, which should make us an offer for the coal properties. For local reasons, it was important to acquire an old charter, so that, on behalf of the new company, he acquired an old coal charter, the name of which was changed to the Glen Alden Coal Company. All the stock of this company was acquired in the name of Major Inglis and several of his associates. It offered our company sixty million dollars for all the coal properties, which offer was accepted by our board of directors, subject to the approval of the stockholders. Thereupon a contract was prepared for the sale of the property. There was no express agreement on the subject, but it was, of course, understood that Major Inglis would invite all of our stockholders to subscribe to stock in the Glen Alden Company on the basis of their stock holding in the Lackawanna Company. This was essential to the successful organizar tion of the Glen Alden Company because otherwise infinite questions would have arisen which would have resulted in litigations. It was also essential to obtain the approval of our stockholders, and if they were to be invited to subscribe to the stock the questions, such as the adequacy of the consideration and terms of sale, were of little consequence if they availed themselves of the right to subscribe. Accordingly, the Glen Alden Company sent to our stockholders, on May 16, 1921, a circular notice, of which the attached is a copy. On the same date our company sent a notice to stockholders, copy of which is attached. At the close of business on June 15 we gave the Glen Alden Company our stock fist, whereupon it prepared subscriptions for the stock of the company to the amount of one share of new Glen Alden stock for one share of Lackawanna stock, which it sent to all of the stockholders of the company on June 18 in the attached form. A considerable number of the stockholders did not at first subscribe, but eventually practically all did so. At the meeting of our stockholders on July 21 the contract for the conveyance of the coal properties, copy of which I also attach, was duly approved by resolution of the stockholders. Under the terms thereof deeds were prepared of the coal properties, which were duly executed, and the Glen Alden Coal Company started doing business on September 1, 1921. The notice by the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company to their stockholders, above referred to, advised [782]*782them that the interstate commerce commission had approved the issuance of $45,000,000 of additional capital stock and that a special meeting of the stockholders would be held on July 21, 1921, to authorize the proposed increase in the amount of capital stock and that, if approved by the stockholders, a stock dividend of 100 per cent would be declared. It also advised the stockholders of the railroad company that a contract for the sale of the anthracite coal properties of the railroad company had been prepared and would be submitted to them at the special meeting for their approval. The proposed consideration therefor,” this notice informed the stockholders, “ is the sum of sixty million dollars, with interest at four per cent, to be secured by a purchase money mortgage upon the real estate conveyed.” .The notice sent out by the Glen Alden Coal Company to the stockholders of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad, Company dated May 16, 1921, referred to in the above statement, advised the said stockholders of the proposal by the coal company to purchase the aforesaid coal properties and that it would offer its stock for subscription to the stockholders of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company of record at the close of business June 15, 1921, on the basis of one share of Glen Alden Company stock for each share of railroad company stock at five dollars ($5.00) per share, payable on or before August 20, 1921.” This notice contained the further information that the Glen Alden Coal Company will be operated by officials now employed in the coal mining department of your company, the vice-president and manager of such department having been selected as its president.” Both of these notices (plaintiff’s Exhibits 10 and 11) were received by the trustees, the plaintiffs herein. On or about August 19, 1921, the plaintiffs as trustees and as stockholders of the railroad company availed themselves of the invitation to subscribe to the stock of the Glen Alden Coal Company, and subscribed for and purchased 14,434 shares thereof at five dollars per share. On the same day, in order to provide themselves with funds to pay for the stock so subscribed for, the trustees cold 2,200 shares of said coal company stock at the market and realized the sum of $35.35 for each of said shares, which was the prevailing market price at that time.

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

Related

In Re the Accounting of Osborne
103 N.E. 723 (New York Court of Appeals, 1913)
Baker v. . Thompson
120 N.E. 858 (New York Court of Appeals, 1918)
United States Trust Co. v. . Heye
120 N.E. 645 (New York Court of Appeals, 1918)
Baker v. Thompson
181 A.D. 469 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
122 Misc. 779, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sturgis-v-roche-nysupct-1924.