Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Ham

114 U.S. 587

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1885-05-04
Topic
general

Mb. Justice Gbay, after making the foregoing statement of facts, delivered the opinion of the court. The claim of the holders of the equipment bonds to a lien on the property of the Toledo, Wabash and Western Railway Company was asserted upon several grounds. 1. It was contended that the property of the Toledo and Wabash Railway Company was a trust fund for all its creditors, and that upon the consolidation the Toledo, Wabash and Western Railway. Company took the property of the Toledo and Wabash Railway Company charged with the payment of all its debts.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Ham. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
92 opinions

Headnotes

  1. Business & Corporate Law — Consolidation — Rights of Creditors While corporate property is a trust fund for creditors in the sense that on lawful dissolution or insolvency creditors may in equity have their debts paid from corporate property before distribution to stockholders, and a conveyance in fraud of existing creditors is void as against them, the consolidation of solvent corporations under express statutory authority does not wind up their business or sequestrate their property; whether the consolidated company takes the old corporations' property charged with a lien for the debts of each depends on the terms of the consolidation agreement and of the statutes authorizing it. 114 U.S. at 593–94
  2. Business & Corporate Law — Consolidation — Effect of Statutes on Unsecured Creditors Under consolidation statutes providing that all rights of creditors and all liens upon the property of the consolidating corporations shall be preserved unimpaired, and that all debts of the old companies shall attach to and be enforced against the new corporation to the same extent as if it had contracted them, the new corporation's liability for old debts is neither greater nor less than the old corporations'; such provisions distinguish secured from unsecured debts and do not create a new lien in favor of creditors who had none before, but merely preserve to each class the rights it previously held. 114 U.S. at 594–95
  3. Business & Corporate Law — Consolidation — Vendor's Lien The consolidation of the stock and property of several corporations into one, even where unsecured bonds of an old company are enumerated in the basis on which it enters the consolidation, is not a sale, and the doctrine of vendor's lien for unpaid purchase money—which applies only to sales of real estate—has no application to it. 114 U.S. at 596–97
  4. Business & Corporate Law — Consolidation Agreement — Promise to "Protect" Debts A stipulation in a consolidation agreement that specified bonds and debts of the former companies shall "be protected by the said consolidated company," limited as it is to principal and interest as they fall due and to the true meaning and effect of the instruments evidencing the debts, and covering secured and unsecured debts alike, creates only a personal obligation to see that the debts are paid at maturity and does not create a lien in their favor. 114 U.S. at 595–96
  5. Business & Corporate Law — Mortgages — Rights of Holders of Unsecured Bonds A consolidated corporation's mortgage of all its property to secure new bonds, issued partly to retire earlier bonds and reciting an intent to consolidate all existing debts, including unsecured ones, into one mortgage debt on equitable principles, secures only the bonds actually issued under it; the company cannot compel a holder of earlier unsecured bonds to accept as a substitute new bonds maturing much later, and a holder who takes no steps to obtain an exchange and does not surrender his bonds before the foreclosure sale of a subsequent mortgage does not acquire a lien on the property. 114 U.S. at 597–99
  6. Business & Corporate Law — Mortgages — Priority A lien created by a later mortgage takes precedence over claims not already secured by any prior mortgage, and where the property is sold under a foreclosure decree subject only to prior mortgages and liens, the purchasers take it free from all debts not so secured. 114 U.S. at 599