C. A. Lund & Company v. Richard S. Rolfe C. A. Lund & Company v. Richard S. Rolfe

C. A. Lund & Company v. Richard S. Rolfe

NH.8 , 41 A.2d 226, H. 280 (1945)(93 N)

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Beschreibung des Verlags

The C. A. Lund Company, predecessor of the plaintiff partnership, and a wholly owned subsidiary of the Northland Ski Manufacturing Company, a Minnesota corporation, commenced the manufacture of skis and allied equipment at Laconia in this state in October, 1937. By April 1, 1942, the Laconia plant employed one hundred and thirty-seven persons, with a monthly payroll of about $15,000. The agreed statement in regard to the stock ownership of the Northland Ski Manufacturing Company is not entirely clear, but the plaintiffs cannot be harmed if we accept the interpretation placed upon it by their counsel. We quote from their brief: ""The stockholders of the corporation consisted of the father, mother, and the children of the Lund family, namely: C. A. Lund, Emma A. Lund, Carl F. Lund, Ambrose C. Lund, Harriet M. Lund, and Alice J. Lilleburg."" By means of voting trusts, the control of the corporation was vested solely in Carl F. Lund and Ambrose C. Lund. On April 1, 1942, the plaintiff partnership consisting of Carl F. Lund, Ambrose C. Lund, C. A. Lund and Harriet M. Lund all stockholders of the Northland Ski Manufacturing Company, ""took over"" in an undisclosed manner, the Laconia plant and have since continued to operate it under the name of C. A. Lund and Company. Since April 1, 1942, there have been no changes in the personnel or type of business conducted before that date except such as normally occur in the operation of any manufacturing business. It is asserted in the plaintiffs' brief that ""actually, nothing has happened to this manufacturing business except that two members of the Lund family have withdrawn their interest in the Laconia plant."" For the first six months of 1943, C. A. Lund Company, if still in business and upon their experience, would have been ordered to pay contributions at the rate of 2.5%; for the second six months of 1943 at 2.3%; for the first six months of 1944 at the rate of 1.3%. These reductions would have arisen under the provisions of R. L., c. 218, with reference to merit ratings based upon the experience of the business for three years.

GENRE
Gewerbe und Technik
ERSCHIENEN
1945
6. Februar
SPRACHE
EN
Englisch
UMFANG
4
Seiten
VERLAG
LawApp Publishers
GRÖSSE
62,3
 kB

Mehr Bücher von Supreme Court of New Hampshire

A. Perley Fitch Company v. Continental A. Perley Fitch Company v. Continental
1954
George W. Roberts v. Tamworth & A. George W. Roberts v. Tamworth & A.
1950
Morris Rosenblum & A. v. John F. Griffin Morris Rosenblum & A. v. John F. Griffin
1938
Roy Rudolph v. Romeo J. Lavigne Roy Rudolph v. Romeo J. Lavigne
1943
State New Hampshire v. Virginia Renfrew State New Hampshire v. Virginia Renfrew
1982
Hydraform Products Corporation v. American Hydraform Products Corporation v. American
1985