TRIPLEX SHOES v. RICE & HUTCHINS, INC. et al.

(Delaware, 1930) HELD 1: All the no par value stock that were issued both before and after the amendment was invalid because therefore was never fixed as required by law. HELD 2: No proper and lawful consideration was given for the common shares of stock issued to the Dillmans and Solly at the first board meeting. (Delaware, 1930) HELD 1: All the no par value stock that were issued both before and after the amendment was invalid because therefore was never fixed as required by law. HELD 2: No proper and lawful consideration was given for the common shares of stock issued to the Dillmans and Solly at the first board meeting.