TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bicknell v. Altman

George Bicknell v. J. E. Altman

Bicknell v. Altman, 105 P. 694 (Kan. 1909)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 11, 1909
Docket
No. 16,184
Citations
105 P. 69481 Kan. 4361909 Kan. LEXIS 384
Disposition
Reversed.
Syllabus
Corporations — Liability of Stockholders. Holders of fully paid' up stock held not to be individually liable to the creditors of a corporation, in the absence of a statute creating such liability.
Summary
Appeal from Barton district court; Jermain W. Brinckerhoff, judge.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam:

Several stockholders of a Kansas corporation which was organized in 1905 guaranteed its notes, and on its default were compelled to pay them. The corporation being insolvent, its affairs were wound up by a receiver. Some of the stockholders, including the guarantors of the notes, voluntarily contributed an amount equal to their stock to increase the fund from which the corporate debts were to be paid. The assets of the corporation, with this increase, being insufficient to meet its obligations, the guarantors brought action against the stockholders who had refused to make any such contributions, seeking to recover from each a sum *437 equal to the amount of his stock (which was fully paid up), so far as might be necessary for their own reimbursement. The trial court overruled a demurrer to a petition stating these facts and the defendants appeal.

The present constitution limits the liability of stockholders for the debts of a corporation to the amount of their stock. (Laws 1905, ch. 542.) In 1905, when the corporation in question was created, the former constitutional provision (original § 2, art. 12) relating to an additional liability was still in force, but was not self-operating, and required an act of the legislature to give it effect. (Woodworth v. Bowles, 61 Kan. 569 .) All the statutes on the subject had been repealed. (Laws 1903, ch. 152.) In the absence of any legislation the stockholder’s responsibility to the creditors of the corporation ended when his stock had been fully paid up. (10 Cyc. 649.) The petition therefore stated no cause of action.

The judgment is reversed, with directions to sustain the demurrer.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1922: 21928: 11931: 119222026peak 1922 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Kansas State Bank v. Laughlin207 P. 435 (Kan. 1922)
  2. Thompson v. Beyer4 P.2d 426 (Kan. 1931)
  3. Zander v. Peterson219 N.W. 466 (Minn. 1928)
  4. Kansas State Bank v. Laughlin207 P. 433 (Kan. 1922)

Most recent

  1. Thompson v. Beyer4 P.2d 426 (Kan. 1931)
  2. Zander v. Peterson219 N.W. 466 (Minn. 1928)
  3. Kansas State Bank v. Laughlin207 P. 435 (Kan. 1922)
  4. Kansas State Bank v. Laughlin207 P. 433 (Kan. 1922)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Woodworth v. Bowles, 60 P. 331 (Kan. 1900) 48

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list