Pfister v. Milwaukee Electric Railway Co.
Cases that cite this one
12 later published cases cite this decision.
- In re Progressive Ware Paper Corp. (District Court, N.D. New York 1915)
- First Savings & Trust Co. v. Waukesha Canning Co. (7th Cir. 1914)
- Hinkley Co. v. Gerlinger Electric Steel Casting Co. (Wis. 1929)
- Batz v. Edgerton (7th Cir. 1923)
- National Bank of La Crosse v. Warner (7th Cir. 1917)
- In re Valecia Condensed Milk Co. (District Court, W.D. Wisconsin 1916)
- Mudge v. Black, Sheridan & Wilson (8th Cir. 1915)
- Kemmerer v. St. Louis Blast Furnace Co. (8th Cir. 1914)
- Nichols v. Waukesha Canning Co. (District Court, E.D. Wisconsin 1912)
- Andrews v. National Foundry & Pipe Works, Ltd. (7th Cir. 1897)
- Atlantic Trust Co. v. Woodbridge Canal & Irrigation Co. (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California 1897)
- Illinois Trust & Savings Bank v. Pacific Railway Co. (Cal. 1897)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The learned circuit judge held that the bonds in question were issued in violation of sec. 1753, R. S., and were therefore void. So much of the section as is applicable to this case is as follows: “ No corporation shall issue . . . any bonds . . except for money, labor, or property, estimated at its true money value, actually received by it, equal to seventy-five per cent, of the par value thereof; and all . . . bonds issued contrary to the provisions of this section . . . shall .be void.”
We are clearly of the opinion that the circuit judge ruled correctly. The object of the statute is to protect stockholders and bona fide creditors from the improvident issue of its bonds by the corporation, which might, and if allowed probably would, result in the wrecking of the corporation. Hence the statute requires that no corporate bonds shall be issued unless the company shall actually receive therefor seventy-five per cent, of their par value. When a corporation puts its bonds beyond its control by hypothecating them as security for loans, or for any other purpose, or in any other manner, it issues them, within the meaning and intention of the statute. If it so hypothecates them without stipulating that they shall be accounted for at not less than seventy-five cents on the dollar of their par value, it violates the statute, and the bonds thus is
The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
A printed document was presented on the argument by counsel for defendants, denominated “ An appendix to the case,” 134 pages of which consist of the pleadings in the action of the defendants Hinckley and the electric railway company against the present plaintiffs and others, above mentioned, and the examination of certain of the parties thereto, under sec. 4096, E. S. These proceedings have no significance in the determination of the demurrer as a demurrer to the complaint, and should not have been printed. The clerk will make no allowance therefor in the taxation of costs.
By the Court.— Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.