Skip to main content
Taylor & Francis Group Logo
Advanced Search

Click here to search books using title name,author name and keywords.

  • Login
  • Hi, User  
    • Your Account
    • Logout
Advanced Search

Click here to search books using title name,author name and keywords.

Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.

Book

Law and Accounting (RLE Accounting)

Book

Law and Accounting (RLE Accounting)

DOI link for Law and Accounting (RLE Accounting)

Law and Accounting (RLE Accounting) book

Nineteenth Century American Legal Cases

Law and Accounting (RLE Accounting)

DOI link for Law and Accounting (RLE Accounting)

Law and Accounting (RLE Accounting) book

Nineteenth Century American Legal Cases
Edited ByJean Reid
Edition 1st Edition
First Published 1988
eBook Published 3 December 2013
Pub. Location London
Imprint Routledge
DOI https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315867113
Pages 244
eBook ISBN 9781315867113
Subjects Economics, Finance, Business & Industry
Share
Share

Get Citation

Reid, J. (Ed.). (1988). Law and Accounting (RLE Accounting): Nineteenth Century American Legal Cases (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315867113

ABSTRACT

This book contains 53 nineteenth century American legal cases in which courts discussed accounting issues. Some are well known: Wood v. Drummer (1824) was the foundation for the idea that capital could not be returned to shareholders and it was this restriction which made it necessary to distinguish between income and capital. The famous case of 1849, Burnes v Pennell is often cited as the source of the rule that dividends cannot be paid except from profits. However, many of the cases covered in this book are not well-known. It is often assumed that few American legal cases on accounting matters were decided in the nineteenth century. However, many of the 53 cases included here preceded the earliest British legal cases that discussed accounting issues and they are interesting for several reasons. They show that government regulation of accounting pre-dated the modern regulatory ear. They also illustration that sometimes private contracts specified a particular accounting treatment and that accounting, therefore, served to define private rights. They also illustrate that American courts discussed accrual accounting problems as early as 1837 and that a cash concept of profits was not the norm.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

chapter |1 pages

not been for the year, am not at the

in the receipt of any income; in other words, that in operation. question then presente:! before the board, upon the affidavit, involve:! the true construction of this section: whether, the terns "any profit or income," the legislature intende:! net profit or not. first act this ect passe1 23d April , also that any turnpike or bridge company, any canal or company employe:! wholly or principally in elect to pay five per cent. upon "the profits or income" made them; but that no such "net incorre or profits" exceede:! five per
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

prescribes the mode of ascertaining whether the net falls short of the five per

annual income exceeds cent. The proper officer shall an affidavit stating capital stock paid in secured to be paid in, together with the income and profits, the total ex- t ures during the preceeding year, by section the proper officers of each corrpany electing apparent from the various above referred to, that the legislature, in using the phrase profits or income," did not interd to corrvey the idea as that in::licated by the "net income." the assessment of the tax to deperrl upon the clear profit arising fran the employment of the capi- taxing skill industry used in the employment of the capital, rather than the capital itself. comptroller, in a letter of instructions to the several boards of supervisors, 23d September, 1826, ex-
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |7 pages

but fNery company deriving an incorre, fNen

this is less preliminary objections taken to this proceeding, that the court could not interfere in this consistent with the exercise of the discretion of the board, under the 1st section cited, or
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |2 pages

ex. reI. MCMASTER & HARVEY THE BOARD THE COUNTY OF NIAGARA of the State of New York

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |2 pages

bank" of

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |4 pages

Gratz v. Redd, 43 Ky. (4 B. Mon.) 178 (1843)

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |10 pages

in Chancery, New York contract creditor claimed that bonds and mortgages issued by the that specified in the charter and also be- divide profits

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

it is

qualified ani defined to mean clear annual profits, or as declared fram time to time, which declara- tion of profits, as declared fram time clear annual profits by the charter. then appears, that they the term as contradis- profits, or clear annual profits, or in the honest discharge of its duties, under the charter, ap- propriate the net revenue of to the of the charter; appropriated the net revenue of the to the of the charter, designing at the
Byis, think equally clear, that they

chapter |9 pages

to carry out their design of dividing the said their coffers, until the

their abstain from the ap- propriation of any part of the net profits temporarily to that object, ani resort to a loan for the purpose, keep- ing the net profits idle in period of the declaration of a dividend should arrive. cent., but of one cent. only,-- that the plaintiff certainly no staniing in court, except upon the dividend. '!he relation of debtor ani creditor cannot exist as the ani the stockholder this respect, until the plaintiff, by the institution of this action, affinns it is ....
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

against this result the directors desire to provide. Their its general features, is to retain out of the price

plan, received from the coal as taken out of the lard, a small of money, aCClII!lUlate the same, shall amount par of the outstanding certificates of the capital stock. A careful estilnate has made by their engineer of the anomt of coal in their calculation this estilnate as to entire coal will be
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |2 pages

directors of the Locust Mountain Coal am Iron

in the exercise of their discretion, to create a sinking to secure the par value of the capital stock of the out of their annual receipts, that they have not to pay Oller or transfer any of or assets to any persons as tnlstees in injunction issue to restrain them fran any such transfer or payment.
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |2 pages

last over four or five

wells generally. in stock for the lam, am the holders realized over a million. '!he actually paid a million. Some stock sold per share; original shares sold low--lam had not been developed satisfied that all of the oil will soon extracted from this lam, then the divides not its net profits its capital. * * * In assessing the actual profits in business of the character umer consideration, must look to probabil- ities, as demonstrated experience.
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |2 pages

this case treasurer, to have been paid to the shareholders as

the testi.m::>ny of the div idenjs, ani no daJbt advertiSEd as such, thus en- hancin; largely the value of the stock in the market. capital stock poration, authorized business whether of stock into which rise or fall ac- to the success of the enterprise. In banks, for instance, the profits be largely renrunerative, or unfortunate, the capital be utterly lost. 'Ibis theory of incorporated ~es, the capital in- vested remains either really or naninally to their close,
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

is not taxable its stock

then judg- to be rendered in favor of the the reserved p::>int for the commonwealth for $6564.89. writ of error, assigned the to establish general invariable rule-that the net or in- are the product of the bJsiness deducti.rq the ex- basis the settlement was made by the Auditor~ and the state Treasurer. venire Qi novo awarded.
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |3 pages

THE COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

business, an:l paid certain expenses necessarily incurred. in the prosecution thereof. April 30, 1865, the shop

with certain articles of furniture and goods, which were a part of the stock in trade, am were in his said business. On May 1, the plaintiffs procured another shop the same street, that both parties into this the defen::lant con-
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

or arrt part thereof, in defenUng against in the said report, ought to

prosecution, mentioned auditor, then the case to ascertain their losses paid." superior court ordered for the plaintiffs without arrt deduction for either of the causes specified in the agreement, the •••• J. '!his case, sent back for a more to responsible for any part of the expenses. Nor did in evidence that the criminal procedure arose or grew out of the acts or doings plaintiffs, or the acts or doings of with their or consent." The report fails, therefore, to that the plaintiffs in any for those costs expenses; or that the should affect the profits of the business while carried on. The fin:ling of the auditor upon this point is therefore affinned. loss by fire, that the loss of "certain articles of furniture ani part of the deferrlant' s stock in trade, ani
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

is not

to that which results fran sales. or advance in value of the stock unsold must also be taken into accoount. Depreciation come fran fluctuation of prices in the market, fran deterioration in quality, or ctilninution in quantity, occasioned the incident to the business; which, in anythirq.
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |8 pages

United States

.• tax
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |4 pages

earnings, and out of them pay the floating debt, and the further fact, that the contract, statute, the certificates state that the

earnings, ings,) "of mortgage considerations, that the bill costs.
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

profits that account. This item is $1,489.48.

to the partnership, from November 5th, 1870, to March, 1871, for the reason that the house was in November, with the other assets of the firm, articles of copartnership under the complainant business, were, in substance, as follows: 1st. partnership in the firm of "William Tutt and Land." contributes $29,815.00 in stock.
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

sation. hold as claimed by plaintiff in error,

that other partner the net not the contract. Net profits of adventure not is over the losses, expenses and interest the invested. that accrues on the invest- after deducting the losses expenses of the busi- three per cent. is realized the still profits, legal rate of interest cent. or greater fixtures constituted the stock furnished by Tutt. At the dissolution he claimed that there depreciation of the stock, and that he should be paid for
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |4 pages

isted the part of unless

specified "in the this contract settles this question, also as the question of the right of Dr. Tutt to interest his original capital. That item is: is agreed the parties that the said gains, increase profits shall only be reckoned, after deducting business, among which expenses is included the of $2,500.00 per year to be paid to the said W.H. Tutt for rent of the store on Broad street, supplied to partnership for carrying on the business." The proper construction of this item excludes the idea of his claim for
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |4 pages

Court of the United States

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

.•..

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |2 pages

GRANT v. HARTFORD AND NEW HAVEN RAILROAD COMPANY United States

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

of New York

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |6 pages

of Appeals, New York

.•••
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |7 pages

THE UNITED STATES

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

It "dtue

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |4 pages

McQUADE

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |11 pages

the" street connec-

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |12 pages

JENNERY v. OLMSTEAD

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |3 pages

it would be bound, in

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |3 pages

& TEXAS RAILWAY CO. United States Circuit Court of New York

fin\. mon. ••. the
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

It ~

buis of a fina14ecree appNpriat- -ail,...,
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |4 pages

of Alabama in equit),.

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |3 pages

of California

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |26 pages

United States Circuit Court of Michigan

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

of Iowa

all the time the company carried on business .... they were and pay for may be up as follows: (1) That said corporation was well .... out to I
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

that

were must necessan trust the manage- but little of the affairs of the corporation, while its and should know them fully. One who
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

the general assets. The profit, if any,

part of the assets, and was included in the application thereof. To state it as a separate item it twice. in this statement of assets, "Moving account, 667.58;" and, in the statement for that it is money paid out for removing the that they represent the cost of bringing and made a
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

that loss could not be determined with exactness, experience would indicate about what it would be. 'Vithout such an approximation, the

any reasonable certainty state of the company's affairs. had been expended in the effort to perfect the new self-binder. Valuations in then than as oid whether it could be made not possible at that time to determine what its real value was, and hence it was put in at what it had the success of the invention no doubt valued it very not having such confidence might not give it any value. The object of valuing the assets
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

it has entered into the property on hand in the at its value. this item should not have been included.

"Bindery account, $2,919.59," is included in the that it was a total loss, and should have gone to thus making a difference that is, it was incomplete, and it had not yet been demonstrated it would be successful or not. While we are not prepared to say that this sum should have been the reasons that it shonld not have been included
Bystatus of the new binder

chapter |6 pages

ments . •• ,

Our conclusion, upon the whole case, is that the plaintiff Hubbard is entitled to recover the defendant Weare all amounts in cash for .stock, except the five hundred dollars pa:d July, with six per cent. interest from the time of pay-
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |2 pages

Court of the United States

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |13 pages

"net earnings/' all such expenditures as have the effect of by the Conrt of Claims rednced to that sum, most be in con-formity with thia opinion. 176

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

J. This is an action brought

that shall be contracted before such notice shall
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

that there was no

say: .. vVhether a claim or demand is a debt or not, 190 ment. A sum of money which is certainly and at all events
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

In Jones v. Barloll'. 62 Y. 202, which that they were only liable right of action

Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |9 pages

but the payment relates

We think it is clear that they could not. that, there being no debt either due or at the time of the filing of the certificate that the demurrers to the de-
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |8 pages

[affirmed on opinion below]

.•• we must
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

terest the am state the net earn-

or allowance for, in- as follows: In $64,868.77; in $269,202.30; in $100,628.81. In that deduc- tion of $247,324.88 is in for "depreciation," the arrount apportioned in that year to the loss by physical depreciation of the plant, capital intact. such deduction is in not shown in the books, although is in-
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

tive am expert, its contention

the part of carrplainant, which verifies substantially the disputed subjects that the so charged were largely, not wholly, of such nature as to justify tion for ''maintenance''; am that depreciation well- fact in plants, for which allowance must to save the capital from iIrpainnent, without to question of its enny the for maintenance alone, in accordance In 1896 -Mald.n; the per year, say $228,333. In reference to the of depreciation, the witness to be entirely renewed. The Milwaukee is in that to-day, because of the ferent periods that their track to the fact that all put at of necessity to lay miles of track an- nually, bein;J about one-twelfth its total
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

as a matter of fact,

last year,--in other words, put on not less than 20 of the most best-constructed equipments, thereby its staroard to the of 240 equipments; because I think is fair to that the average life of the double equipment, taken as a whole, will not exceed matter of sinple conp.1tation; but a just of physical depreciation seems, to some extent, partially, involved in provisions for main- the testi.nv::lny is very full am instruc- this ect, clear the case from
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |1 pages

of a large part was of such nature that

not count in the final inventoty. allowance en- ters in for the large arising out of the then state of the art of electric railways for large system, having reference to electrical equipment, rails, of cars, the like, of which striking instance appears in the fact that the electric the valuation of the investment is not sufficient for all the this case, but opinion in reference to the 'Ihird, '!he final inquiry, whether the net earnings or equal to a just return the invest- presents no serious difficulty, under the premises
Edited ByJean Reid

chapter |9 pages

cent.; for the third, .032 per cent. interest rate fixed in the issued the com-

per cent. '!he rate which prevails in as shown by the uncontroverted testirony, per cent. for basis be adopted, surely a better rate must be afforded for the risks of investment than can be obtained on securities of this class, in there risk. the basis of $7,000, 000, which is rore logical am just, the per cent. named in the is clearly not
Edited ByJean Reid
T&F logoTaylor & Francis Group logo
  • Policies
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Cookie Policy
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Cookie Policy
  • Journals
    • Taylor & Francis Online
    • CogentOA
    • Taylor & Francis Online
    • CogentOA
  • Corporate
    • Taylor & Francis Group
    • Taylor & Francis Group
    • Taylor & Francis Group
    • Taylor & Francis Group
  • Help & Contact
    • Students/Researchers
    • Librarians/Institutions
    • Students/Researchers
    • Librarians/Institutions
  • Connect with us

Connect with us

Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067
5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2021 Informa UK Limited