Potts v. Wallace

At the trial of this cause a verdict for the plaintiff was directed, under the impression that recent decisions of the supreme court of the United States compelled such a determination. A more careful examination of those decisions, in the light of the argument addressed to me on the motion for a new trial, has shown that none of the decisions of the supreme court upon which the plaintiff relies has gone so far as to hold that a subscriber to the stock of a corporation is liable to the as-signee of the corporation after the insolvency of the corporation for the amount of his subscription, when he shows, as in this case, that during the solvency of the corporation he duly and in good faith tendered the corporation the full amount of his subscription, and demanded a certificate of stock to the amount; and that the corporation, being still solvent, without legal cause refused to receive the subscription, and issue the certificate.

*273Upon such a state of facts, in my opinion it should be held that the obligation to pay the subscription had been extinguished, and T find no case that compels a different decision. As the verdict was directed upon this point alone, the result is that the verdict must be set aside, and a new trial had.