From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mobley v. Smith

Supreme Court of Alabama
Dec 17, 1931
138 So. 550 (Ala. 1931)

Opinion

7 Div. 99.

December 17, 1931.

A. L. Crumpton, of Ashland, for petitioner.

Where a purely statutory right is created, and a special remedy for the enforcement of the right is provided by the statute, such remedy must be pursued, and the right will not be enforced in another jurisdiction in which such method of procedure is unknown. 12 C. J. 438; 14 C. J. 994; Stewart v. Baltimore, c. R. Co., 168 U.S. 445, 18 S.Ct. 105, 42 L.Ed. 537; Russell v. Pacific R. Co., 113 Cal. 258, 45 P. 323, 34 L.R.A. 747; Fowler v. Lamson, 146 Ill. 472, 34 N.E. 932, 37 Am. St. Rep. 163; Erickson v. Nesmith, 15 Gray (Mass.) 221; Crippen v. Laighton, 69 N.H. 540, 44 A. 538, 46 L.R.A. 467, 76 Am. St. Rep. 192; Stoddard v. Lum, 159 N.Y. 265, 53 N.E. 1108, 45 L.R.A. 551, 70 Am. St. Rep. 541; Wyatt v. Moorehead, 7 Ohio Dec. 380; Graham v. Monsergh, 22 Vt. 543. Section 5681 of the Code does not authorize the bringing of this suit. Jefferson Island Salt Co. v. Longyear, 210 Ala. 352, 98 So. 119.

Hardegree Dempsey, of Ashland, and J. F. Kemp, of Atlanta, Ga., opposed.

The superintendent of banks may also enforce assessments levied upon stockholders by plenary suit, the method by summary execution not being exclusive. Doster v. Mobley, 38 Ga. App. 508, 144 S.E. 385; Bennett v. American B. T. Co., 162 Ga. 718, 134 S.E. 781. The superadded liability of stockholders is not penal, but contractual, and may be enforced against a stockholder found in another state. Crawford v. Swicord, 147 Ga. 548, 94 S.E. 1025; McDonald v. Ala. Gold Life Ins. Co., 85 Ala. 401, 5 So. 120; 3 R. C. L. 418; 7 R. C. L. 354; 5 R. C. L. 988; Hancock National Bank v. Ellis, 166 Mass. 414, 44 S.E. 349, 55 Am. St. Rep. 414; Flash v. Conn, 109 U.S. 372, 3 S.Ct. 263, 27 L.Ed. 966; Whitman v. Oxford Nat. Bank, 176 U.S. 560, 20 S.Ct. 477, 44 L.Ed. 587.


The appellee, Smith, insists upon error in the holding of the Court of Appeals upon the ground that the Georgia statute prescribes a summary remedy for the collection of the supplemental subscription to the bank stock, and that this remedy is exclusive. The Supreme Court of Georgia has held otherwise. Bennett v. Am. Bank Trust Co., 162 Ga. 718, 134 S.E. 781.

It is next insisted that this supplemental assessment is a penalty, and that our statute (Code 1923, § 5681) and rule of comity. applies only to actions of contract and tort. The liability of the stockholder, though statutory in its origin, is contractual in its nature. Whitman v. National Bank of Oxford, 176 U.S. 559, 20 S.Ct. 477, 44 L.Ed. 587.

The writ is denied.

THOMAS, BROWN, and KNIGHT, JJ.,


Summaries of

Mobley v. Smith

Supreme Court of Alabama
Dec 17, 1931
138 So. 550 (Ala. 1931)
Case details for

Mobley v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:MOBLEY, Superintendent of Banks of Georgia, v. SMITH

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Dec 17, 1931

Citations

138 So. 550 (Ala. 1931)
138 So. 550

Citing Cases

Mobley v. Smith

Reversed and remanded. Certiorari denied by Supreme Court in Mobley v. Smith, 138 So. 550. Hardegree Dempsey,…

McKnett v. St. Louis S. F. Ry. Co.

The courts of Alabama will assume jurisdiction of any transitory cause of action, even though between…