McCarter v. Ketcham
McCarter v. Ketcham
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
This action was brought by the receiver of the Clinton Hill Lumber and Manufacturing Company, an insolvent corporation, to recover, for the benefit of creditors, the unpaid portion of the subscription of William S. Ketcham
The trial judge held that in his opinion payment had been established, and that there was no question for the jury, and directed a verdict for the defendant.
It is contended, on the part of the plaintiff in error, that the action here was based upon a decree of the Court of Chancery; that it was the result of a hearing'before a Vice Chancellor on a petition, answer and replication; that said court took an account of all the assets of the insolvent corporation and of all its liabilities, ascertained the amount of unpaid subscriptions and who were the parties to be assessed, and directed the amount to be assessed against them, having also ascertained the amount of stock to be assessed, and that by said decree the non-payment of the stock subscription of William S. Ketcham, Sr., to the extent of sixty per cent, of the amount thereof, had been established.
The decree made on June 9th, 1903, directing the assessment was in evidence in this case, and it recited that it appears that sixty per cent, of the said several assessments remains unpaid, and that in order to pay the debts of the said corporation it would be necessary to call upon the said, sub
The defence made here is predicated entirely upon the following reservation, made at the end of the above decree: “This order is made, however, without prejudice to the rights^ of any person named in said petition or in this order to any defence which they may have to any actions, legal or equitable, which may be brought against them on such alleged stock subscriptions.”
There is certainly great merit in the contention of the plaintiff in error that this reservation must have no force because it reserves the whole cause of action and the whole defences, and that if it has any force at all it must only be considered as a reservation of such defences as arose since the date of the decree, which the defendant would have under any circumstances. Should it be held otherwise, and it be held a reservation of all defences, then the decree has no force what/ ever. The question whether the subscription of William S. Ketcham has been paid in full or only to the extent of forty per cent, was one of the very matters litigated in the Court of Chancery. The petition of the receiver avers that forty shares of the capital stock of the company had been issued to William S. Ketcham, forty shares to William S. Ivetcham, Jr., and two shares to George W. Ketcham, and that the said eighty-two shares so issued to them were part and parcel of the shares subscribed by them respectively in and by the certificate of organization; that the directors of the company
There is, in my opinion, no escape from the conclusion that, upon the issue then made, the decree of June 9th, 1903, is conclusive to the effect that William S. Ketcham, Sr., was a subscriber to the capital stock of the Clinton Hill Lumber and Manufacturing Company, and that the said subscription remained unpaid to the extent of sixty per cent, thereof. As was pertinently urged by counsel for the receiver, if the inquiry in the Court of Chancery is not conclusive, why should it have been made at all?
The judgment under review should be reversed.
For affirmance — Hone.
For reversal — The Chancellor, Oiiiee Justice, Garrison, Port, Hendrickson, Pitney, Swayze, Reed, Trenchard, Bogert, Yredenburgh, Yroom, Green, Gray, Dill, J.J. 15.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.