Farjeon v. Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co.
Opinion of the Court
This is an' appeal by some of the defendants from an interlocutory judgment, which adjudges that the plaintiff is entitled to twenty per cent of the 3,000,000 shares of the capital stock of the- defendant Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Company, and to any. profits, emoluments or dividends thereon, and requires the defendants to account therefor. The plaintiff bases his right to recover upon the following paper writing:
“Referring to our various conversations on the subject of securing, through you, either a purchaser of all of the stock of the Osage Oil Company and a controlling interest in the stock of the Phenix Oil Company, which companies together control the Indian lease of the Osage Nation; or securing for us a financial negotiation whereby we can more fully develop the territory embraced in the said Indian lease; we hereby authorize you to secure for us either a purchaser for said stock or sufficient capital for development as before referred to, and we hereby agree that should we sell or conclude any financial arrangement'with or through the parties you introduce, we-will pay you a commission of twenty (20$) per cent on any sums we receive, whether in money, stock, bonds or other securities, the said commission to be paid to you as and when we receive the. consideration for said stock or funds to develop the. said-lease or leases, it being understood that during your negotia- ■ tions, we are to have the privilege of -seeking elsewhere for a purchaser, or for funds to develop as aforesaid and if we are successful in securing a purchaser before you do, we are simply to. notify you of the fact, which notification shall act as cancellation of this authority.
“PHENIX OIL COMPANY,
“June 5tii, J. A. S. By J. A. Simmons, President.
: “ 1901. E. B. F.
“Witness, 1 “H. L. JoueeriOu.”
It is claimed that that was delivered to him by the said Simmons, who was president of the Phenix Oil Company, soon after the 5th day of June, 1901, pursuant to a letter, of like, tenor, written to him on said date by said Simmons. The
The contract with Bates and McCarthy did not amount either' to a sale of the stock of the' Phenix Oil Company and of the Osage Oil Company, or to the procurement of capital ■with which to develop the properties of the said companies. It provided merely for their merger into a third company and for the exchange of their capital stock for the capital stock of the new company. Nothing was sold by that exchange or merger. The stockholders oJ: the old company acquired nothing whatever. Indeed, they parted with two-thirds of their property, one-third to Bates and McCarthy, and one-third to the treasury of the new company-to procure funds. By that contract they were to procure in exchange for their certificates, certificates evidencing a lesser interest in the property and, when it was made, they were no nearer a sale of their stock or the procurement of capital with which to develop their properties, than they were before. If the plaintiff’s construction of the contract, upon which he sues, is correct, the defendants agreed to' part with a controlling interest in their property, thirty-three and
While it was unnecessary for the defendants to do so, they showed that Bates and McCarthy failed to perform their contract. Soon after it was made Bates died, and McCarthy undertook to sell his interest in it on-January 25, 1902, to third parties, who obtained control of the corporation, and from whom the original owners regained control only after instituting suits in Oklahoma and New Jersey, and after parting with part of their property in compromise. While McCarthy claims to have expended some money in procuring the incorporation of the new company and in advertising, it does not appear that one dollar of capital was ever brought into the treasury by him or Bates, although they succeeded in disposing to bona fide purchasers of nearly 100,000 shares of stock. It is said that the properties were developed. The development appears to have consisted of a survey made, while the corporation was in the control of said third parties, for the purpose of enabling them to sell leases.
It- is unnecessary to consider the other questions involved in the case. The plaintiff failed to show either that he procured a purchaser of the stock of the said Phenix Oil Company and the said Osage Oil Company, or that he introduced any one who provided capital to develop the territory embraced in the Indian lease owned by said companies. There was, therefore, no basis whatever for any judgment in his favor, and the inter
Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin and Dowling, JJ., concurred.
Judgment reversed, new trial ordered, costs to abide event.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.