-
R-25 NEY GENERAL PRICh DANIEfL :‘ ATTORNEYGENERAL Fbbruary 5, 1947 Honorable Jeaas James Opimm No. V-26 8C8te Treasurer Abtin, Texar l&lb: Alrtlcle 096, RerfseQ Civil Statutea, National Savings Investment Co., Saa Houa ton Underwrit era, Inc., Sterling National :I., co., 2urthar procedure I and disposition ot securities on deposit or above naaed compaaiea. Dear Sir: You request the Opinion of this department in your letters of November 14, 1946, and January 3, 1947, .mopeotivelg, upon the questions therein presented, which for a statement of facts we quote ae followa: "Our recorda show that we hold a8 custodian securltier deposited by the above named companies u&er piwioiors of Article 095, aa lfsted below: Naticnal Savings Investment 00, ' Dallas , Teraa Deporltrd on April 11, 1930 City of Borger Funding Bonds Nos. 57/62 &p)l,OOO.OO each $6,000.00 Sam Houston Underwriters, Inc. R~IQJ``, Texas Eiaporited on August 13, 1931 9e1~Hou#toa Lire Ins. 00. Stook eertifioate 128 for 400 ihe. & awfmieate a 149 for 100 aim. at #lb,09 per ahero 5,OQO.OO Sterling Blatlena Oompaly Houston, Terar Deposited on April 3, 1QSS Sterlhg Nat'1 Life Ins. Co. tzek, Certificate #6 for 500 . at (IlO. per ahare 5~;000.00 Honorable Jesse James, Page 2 “To date, no other deposits have been made by said aompaniea as required under Artiale 696. On September 26, 1946, we wrote the Secretary of State asking if these companies had been issued charters to do business in Texas, and if so, to pleaee furnish us with the correot addreasea of each, We received a reply from the Secretary of State October 1, 1946, giving no post office addresses s and quoted in part as follows: “IWe find that NATIONALSAVINGS INVESTMENI COMPANY,Dallas, Texas has been for- feited July 2, 1932; SAM HOUSTONUNDER- WRITERS, Inc, , Ranger, Texas was forfeited July 2, 1932 because the Franchise Tax was not paid and was also forfeited April 25, 1933 because of failure to make proof of final payment; STERLIm RATIONAL COMPANY, Houston, Texas, was forfeited July 2, 1942. t *On October 14, 1946, we wrote to each of the companies named herein regardi% the require- ments of Artiale 696. Our letters to National Savings Investment Company and Sam Houston Und erwrlt ers , Inc o , were returned unclaimed, and no answer was received from Sterling Na- tional Company 0 Also no replies were re- ceived from the verificatioa letters sent out by the State Auditor’s Office ia oon- nection with the audit of this department e “Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Article 696, we kindly request your written advice regarding further procedure and diepmoitieB of securities on deposit .I) *January 3, 1947 “On November 14, 1946, we request& your written opinion on the further procedure and disposition of seourities on deposit with this Department under provisions of Artiale 696 ior Nstional Saviege Investment Conpang, Sam Houston Underwriters, Inc,, and Sterling Kational Co. “In conversation with C, K. Ri.chards, it was suggested by him that we try to obtain more information concerning said companies, and accordingly, wrote several letters but to no avail, Honorable Jesse James, Page 3 “Therefore, we hand you herewith copies and photostat4 of all information which we have be4n able to obtain, and await your further advice on these matters.” Conoretely, your problem is what disposition, if any, you should make et this time of the securities deposited by the resp4ctive companies mentioned in your letter, pursuant to the provisions of’ Article 696, R.C.S. You are governed in this matter solely by the provisions of Articles 696 to 700, inclusive, R. C. S., as we shall presently point out. These statutory pro- vision8 are as followe: "Artiale 696. Bach corporation, company or individual, doing business In this State as a bond investment company, or coapany to plac,e or sell bonds, certificates or debentures on the partial payment or installment plan, shall deposit with the State Treasurer, in cash or securities approved by said Treasurer, the 5um or five thousand dollars, and shall d4p,44~it sni-ennu4lly with said Treasurer, in o4.4.b or srmwritierp to be approved by said 4rnoer, t&a psr orsft or cl1 m4t pruiums rr.rZted @Al tIw w d,#?oalit,d uowits to on4 hundred thous4nd dollar+. “Article 697 a If any swh doPurstio cor- poratlon, shnll fail, for sfxtf day4 after ito organization, to make with the State Treeaurbr the ,deposit rscuired by thir title, it shel? be oesst$ezed to bras irnW~&e8 ita charter; and the Attorney General shall upon information therror, bring suit In the name of the State to Hera such oharter or certifiaate of incorpor- atlo@ drelared forf4it.4d, @ the oourt, upon w $iaQfql, sbak3. Qaelore a4gsfi charter fer- tiit# aaQ app&nt 4 r,4ast?4* for su4h cempany, w4~ duby it shsll be, uaftJr the order of the 04**, to distrWute to $W rh4r4holUer4 ‘th4 awe.ti# oi the co&span T&s oourt shall out sf 1u4pqilua44ta maka equ,r tebllr oompensation for the r4o4irer, “Articls 898. In 4444 or ths failure of any suoh aompanys the dirtrict court of tka csurtty in whiah the prinbipal offioe ia lobated, upon the appliaation of one or more shareholders, Honorable Jesse James, Page 4 shall appoint a receiver for auoh oompany, whose duty it shall be to wind up its affairs, liqui- date its debts, and distribute its assets, using therefor, upon the order of the court, the deposit previously made with the State Treasurer to se- cure the shareholders. Said Treasurer is author- ized to pay out such deposit upon the warrant o? the Comptroller in accordance with requisitions made upon the Comptroller by said receiver, ap- proved by the court, “Article 699. On request of any such company, the State Treasurer is authorized to permit snoh company to interchange cash for the securities or securities for the cash deposited by such company under the provisions of this title with said Treasurer, such securities always to be approved by said Treasurer on the written advice of the Attorney General, “Article 700, If any such company shall oease to do business in this State and satisfy the Comptroller and the Attorney General that it has no liabilities in this State, the Comptroller ahall issue his warrant to the State Treasurer; and said Treasurer upon such warrant of the Comp- troller, shall return to such oonpeny the cash or seouritiee deposited by it under the provisiona 0r this title.” Justice Sharp, of the Supreme Court in the case of Bankers Union Life Insurance Company v. Sheppard,
117 S.W. 26770,
116 A. L, R. 961, stated the main objec- tive of these statutory provisions ia lsn&uage as fol- low0 : “(1) To require each corporation doing business in this State as a bond investment oompeny to place oash or certain securities with the State Treasurer, in the sum of $5,000, es a deposit; and to deposit semi-aniwlly ten per c4nt. of all net profits receirod, until the sum of $100,000 is deposited. I’(2) To require the Attorney General, in the event any such corporation shall fail to make such deposit as required, to bring suit to have the charter of such company declared for- feited, and to have a receiver appointed for Honorable Jesse James, Page 5 such cempanys whose duty it shall be, under the orders oi the court, to distribute to the share- holders the asseta of the oompany. “(3) To provide, in case of the failure of say ruoh company, that upon applioation or one or more shareholders the district oourt shall appoint a receiver for suoh oompang, whore duty it shall be to wind up its af’fairs, liquldate ita debts, and distribute its assets, using therefor, upon the order of the court, the de- posit previously msde with the State Traasurer. “(4) To permit the interohange of the do- post 0 “(!I) To provide, in the event any suah eon any shall oeaae to do business in this Sta &e and shall satisfy the Comptroller and the Attorney General that it has no liabilities in this State, that the Comptroller shall issue his warrant to the State Treasurer, and aaid Treasurer upon euoh warrant shall return to rush oomprny the cash or seourities depoaitsd $9 it under the previeienr of law.” It will be observed that Article 6.96 desaribes how the deposit shall be made. Articles 697 and 698 pro- vide for the appointment of a receiver in the event that the oompany feils to make suoh a deposit, or in the event or the raflure or such ooapany. It doea not appear ,from the information before us that any reoeivershlp prooeed- ings ,have, up to this time, been instituted as to .any of the oompauiea in question, hsnos Artioleo 6.97 and 698 are not epplloabls and need not , for the punpose or this o ,inion, be rurther oonridered. The same``is true or Art ,!010 698 whiah rovidss ror lntarohange end rub- ~;titt,iu0sr or se0wit P OS. Whether or not the quartion di golve,noy or insolvency or there ‘oompanler ir *new prorent or may arise in the future, we do not find it nroesrery to deoide, nor could wo deoldo this qu@rtion W n bhu mt0 subrnltted. It dso8 appaar, howevrr, t r at t’$cir right tc continue their oerporata a6t ri- tier have bew forreited for railurn to psy rran his0 *axes or 0Oh~rr raaaenai , and that they are net ns E ao- tire eorporate ooneerna, b,ut the fact still remains that t&y are not in reoeivershlpO Thora romaine, therefore, the quastibn Of -. Honorable Jesse James, Page 6 whether you are authorized under the provisions of Art.
700, supra, to dispose of these securities as therein provided 0 This Article does not purport to provide that the deposit made under Article 696 be retained for the benefit of the shareholders of the corponstions. Bank- ers Union Life Insuranoe Co. v.
Sheppard, supra. It ia to be returned by the State Treasurer upon the oertiri- oate of the Ooaptroller or Pub110 Acoounts only upon a showing that the depositor has no liebilirties in thi4 State which have not been fully discharged, and this must be to the setiafaotian of the Coaptroller and the Attorney General. We bhink the burden rests upon the shareholders or the part148 claiming the return of suoh seourities to present sufficient evidence and 1nrorm.e tion to the Comptroller and the Attorney General to, Qustiiy them in restohing a ocnolusian aa to whsther or not the provisions of Article 700 have been met. From the information contained in your opinion request, it does not appear that eny demand haa bee4 made. for the return of these aeourities by any party au- thorized under th4 stmtute te make 4 damand ard reeefre them, or that thera has heretofore been preset&ad to the Comptroller and the Attorney General any iaieraeti~n upon which the Attorney General could recommend te the Comptroller the issuance of his certificate upen you for the disposition of the seouritiea to anyone at this time, and until this has been done, you are authorized to retain these securities as you have in the pan,t. We think the case of Bankera Union Life Insu- rance Company v,
Sheppard, supra, affords a safe guide ror us in this matter; and while in that case the Carp- troller was ordered to return the seou,rities by a arnda- mu4 prooeeding instituted for that purpQae, the u&d:iaplr- ted facts in that case justified the o4urt’s asti44~ But here we are net able te 441 tWt Ok r4et8 jruttiy you iI& t&king a#y retf6n la ragera $6 thea~a aemi*iw**, ot&ar t&4 ta ke4p thrm aea@W&g 4s gem have In the Mast titil r4ecir4~hip proceedings are instituted as pr4rid- ed for in Articles 697 and 69S, supw, Or until a proper #&owiag has been dlade to the Qomp~tro&lar. and Attorney General as provided for in Artlola
106, supra, whiah would justlip the Comptroller in i$suing his certificate for your direction in the diapeaitisn ef the seourities. We take your letter, lieweve2, es suffia$at& not- ice to this Department to justify appropriate leg41 ao- tion under Articles 697-698 or 7095, R. C. S., end expect to prooead accordingly. You will in due course be ad- Honorable Jesoe James, P8ge 7 vised as to th% rurther dirpooitisn rt tL0s.e secufi- ties upon the sulminatiog of our 4fferts ts clear this matter up by apprepriata lags& aotfm. The State Traaoursr is not authorized to nf turn securities deporit4d with him by oorpohtioU doing bwineso in this State aa a bond itiv%rtm%M company, or company to place or ssll bonds, cetiff- icates or debentures on the psrti%l payment or in- stallment plan, as required by Artiolo 696, R.C.S., except in reoeiverohlp pxowedi*err %a p*vi(d far in Artioles 697, 69&8T 709?r, RICiSI, or upcn a showing satisraotorg to t&4 Comptrsllsx and th% Attorney General t&at ,gha 6o~r@aTatlcn haol o%ssed to do bu&&nsso In tih@ Stat,r 8Bd has &w lieb1’1ltiu unsatirfi5d as requihd by Ortidla 760, R. C. S. Your8 vary truly ATTORBBY0-L OF TBXAS LPL:AldM:jrb Approved Opinion Committee By BWB, Chairman
Document Info
Docket Number: V-25
Judges: Price Daniel
Filed Date: 7/2/1947
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017