Majority — Butler J.
Syllabus
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI.delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is an action brought by the defendant in error in the Circuit Court of Jackson County,' Missouri, for money paid by his assignors for annuity certificates issued by the Great Western Life Insurance Company, the predecessor of plaintiff in error. Judgment for $47,463.90, with interest and costs, was affirmed in the State Supreme Court. That court allowed writ of error bringing the case here. A petition for writ of certiorari also has been presented. The federal question asserted is that the state court, in violation of the Constitution and acts of Congress defining the jurisdiction of federal courts, failed to give full faith and credit to certain provisions of a decree of the United States Circuit(now District) Court for the Western District of Missouri, set up in the answer, purporting to cancel and annul the annuity certificates. The defendant in error moves to dismiss the writ of error and opposes the granting of certiorari on the grounds, among others, that the United States court was without jurisdiction to decree the cancellation of the certificates assigned to defendant in error, and that the provisions of the decree relied on by plaintiff in error are void.
We are of opinion that the asserted federal right is so obviously devoid of merit and frivolous that the writ of error must be dismissed and certiorari denied.[2]
" In 1906 the Great Western Agency Company was incorporated under the laws of Colorado. In 1907 those
“ F. M. Pearl and other stockholders of the Great Western Agency Company and annuity certificate holders of the Great Western Life Insurance Company who are similarly situated, appearing by B. P. Waggoner and James W. Orr, . . . etc.”
“ Now on this 27th day of August, 1908 . . . came on further to be heard the objections and exceptions of F. M. Pearl and other stockholders of the Great Western Agency Company and Annuity Certificate holders of the Great Western Life Insurance Company to the confirmation of the sale of the assets . . . A. F. Sherman appearing for himself and certain other annuity certificate holders . . . and all parties being before the court and being heard and the court being fully informed and advised, it is considered, ordered, and decreed: ”
The decree approved the reorganization plan presented and directed the return of all property to the company, immediate payment of approved death claims, and the giving of a bond to. indemnify the receiver from such claims as might be presented and approved. The plan of rehabilitation was that annuity certificate holders should pay $37.50 on each certificate, surrender the same for cancellation and then receive stock of the insurance company of par value equal to one-half of the payment, and gave those who had not availed themselves of this privilege 20 days within which to do so, and declared those failing to make such payment and surrender their annuity certificates for cancellation, “ barred and estopped from making any claim of any kind whatsoever against said Life Insurance Company or officers or stockholders thereof, or against any assets of said company, and such annuity certificates will then and thereby be fully canceled in law and in equity, and such annuity certificate holders will have no further rights, claims or demands against said company, its officers, stockholders, assets or property on account thereof.”
The decree directed the sale by the receiver of the agency company of the 992 shares of stock of the insurance company to a trustee for those so contributing to
No further proceedings were had, and on November 29, 1912, an order was filed relinquishing jurisdiction and discontinuing the case.
The insurance company resumed business and continued until its merger with the plaintiff in error, December 7, 1912. By the articles of consolidation, the latter agreed to pay all debts, liabilities and obligations of the former. The claims of the certificate holders were specifically referred to, and the plaintiff in error agreed to pay the annuities provided for in such certificates or refund the amounts paid for them if they should be held by the Supreme Court of Missouri to be valid obligations of the Great Western Company at the time of the merger. The state court found that the certificate holders who assigned to defendant in error were not original parties to the suit; that they did not subsequently intervene or appear in person or by counsel; that no relief was sought
The provisions of the decree, attempting to bar and estop certificate holders from making any claim against the insurance company, its officers, stockholders or assets, and attempting to cancel their certificates and determine that they had no further rights, claims or demands unless within the specified 20 days, they should pay in $37.50 per share, and, upon surrender of their certificates, take stock in the insurance company of par value of one-half the amount so paid, were without jurisdiction. The company could not thus be relieved of its obligations to non-consenting annuity certificate holders and have its property returned to it exempt from their claims. Their rights could not be so disposed of. As to them the decree was not a judicial determination, and the courts of Missouri were right in holding it to be a nullity. See Hovey v. Elliott, 167 U. S. 409 ; Windsor v. McVeigh, 93 U. S. 274 , 277; McVeigh v. United States, 11 Wall 259 .[2]
Writ of error dismissed.
Writ of certiorari denied.
1 Cf. Reynolds v. Stockton, 140 U. S. 254 , 264; Rev. Stats., § 737; Equity Rules 47 and 48, in force in 1908.
Footnotes
- 1 Missouri Pacific R. R. Co. v. Clarendon Boat Oar Co., 257 U. S. 533 ; Piedmont Power & Light Co. v. Graham, 253 U. S. 193 ; Toop v. Ulysses Land Co., 237 U. S. 580 , 583; Fay v. Crozer, 217 U. S. 455 ; Goodrich v. Ferris, 214 U. S. 71 , 79; Farrell v. O’Brien, 199 U. S. 89 , 100. See also decisions per curiam: Nesmith v. Ohio, 257 U. S. 622 ; Pueblo of Laguna v. Candelaria, id. 623 ; Harvey v. Union Traction Co., id. 624 ; Winehill & Rosenthal v. Louisiana, 258 U. S. 605 ; Hartford Life Insurance Co. v. Johnson, id. 612 ; Lindsey v. Allen, id. 613 .
Cases cited
- Hovey v. Elliott 167 U. S. 409 p. 351
- Windsor v. McVeigh 93 U. S. 274 p. 351
- McVeigh v. United States 11 Wall 259 p. 351