Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Building And Loan Association Of Dakota v. Price

• 1897 • 169 U.S. 45 • Fuller Court
In the case of Building and Loan Association of Dakota v. Price, 1897, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving a building and loan association in South Dakota that had issued shares to one Mr. Price. The association later went bankrupt and sought to recover money from its shareholders, including Mr. Price who refused to pay his share claiming he was not properly notified about his obligations as per state law requirements at the time he purchased his shares. The court held...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Fuller Court
Term: 1897
Docket: 158
169 U.S. 45
18 S. Ct. 251
42 L. Ed. 655
1898 U.S. LEXIS 1472

Building And Loan Association Of Dakota v. Price

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Building and Loan Association of Dakota v. Price, 1897, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving a building and loan association in South Dakota that had issued shares to one Mr. Price. The association later went bankrupt and sought to recover money from its shareholders, including Mr. Price who refused to pay his share claiming he was not properly notified about his obligations as per state law requirements at the time he purchased his shares. The court held that even though there may have been irregularities in how Mr. Price was informed about his responsibilities as a shareholder, these did not exempt him from liability for debts incurred by the company during the period when he owned shares in it. This ruling established an important legal precedent: Shareholders cannot escape their financial obligations towards a corporation simply because they were inadequately informed about them at purchase time; rather they are bound by what is known as "constructive notice," meaning they are assumed to know certain basic facts related with owning corporate stock such as potential liabilities associated with it.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Building and Loan Association of Dakota v. Price, it was argued that the majority's decision failed to adequately consider the rights of creditors in bankruptcy proceedings. The dissenting justices believed that a debtor should not be allowed to retain property by claiming an exemption under state law when federal law did not provide for such an exemption. They contended that allowing this would undermine the uniformity intended by Congress in enacting bankruptcy legislation, as exemptions could vary widely from state to state. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential abuse of these exemptions by debtors seeking to shield their assets from creditors. Ultimately, they felt that protecting creditor rights was paramount and should take precedence over any perceived benefits derived from granting additional protections or privileges to debtors beyond those provided under federal law.

Opinion written by Justice RWPeckham
Decided: Jan 10, 1898
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms