Appeal, No. 249, Jan. T., 1893, by Rose E. Lafferty and Patrick J. Corcoran, two executors and trustees of the will of Charles Lafferty, deceased, from decree of O. C. Phila. Co., ordering them to furnish a proxy to their cotrustee to vote certain stock belonging to the estate.

Petition by Charles H. Lafferty, an executor and trustee of Charles Lafferty, deceased, for an order to compel his cotrustees to give him proxy to vote stock. •

Tire petition set forth the death of Charles Lafferty on October 10, 1885, the probate of his will and codicil containing a clause directing a proxy to be given to petitioner; that Rose E. Lafferty, Patrick J. Corcoran and petitioner are trustees and executors of the will; that the estate owns 6900 shares of stock of The Hestonville, Mantua and Fairmount Passenger Railroad Company and that a demand was made by petitioner upon his cotrustees for a proxy to vote the stock at the annual election, which was refused. The petition contained a prayer for a decree to compel the coexecutors and trustees to execute a proxy to petitioner and to restrain them from interfering with his voting the stock.

The answer averred that, in proceedings in C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., and in the Supreme Court, [149 Pa. 70] the codicil was held not capable of enforcement against the dissent of respondents because it deprived them of the right of franchise which is one of the essential elements of ownership to the stock vested in them. The answer also stated that a letter signed by the other cestuis que trust had been received, requesting them to refrain from executing a proxy to petitioner, and that a copy was sent to petitioner. That petitioner caused the vote upon }1S,900 shares of stock belonging to the estate to be cast for himself as president and a board of directors who were entirely subservient to him; that he caused the affairs of the company to be corruptly and dishonestly mismanaged, caused his own salary to be doubled in amount, and kept the stock so depressed in the market that it was impossible for the estate to make sales thereof, and reaped for himself profits at the expense of the estate, which received no revenue from the stock during the period that he and his confederates were in control; that respondents attended the last annual meeting of the company and requested petitioner to join with them in voting for officers of recognized efficiency and probity, that petitioner declined to do so, but insisted upon voting the stock owned by the estate 4or himself. The stock was disfranchised, the stockholders were thereupon enabled to elect a president and board of directors, who assumed control and by honest and judicious management materially increased the earnings of the road, enhanced the value of the property of the company and of the stock in the market, whereby the estate of decedent was greatly benefited.

…

Citation profile

How this case has been treated — in progress