Press enter after choosing selection

Two Directors Claim Suit Against Argus Is 'Baseless'

Two Directors Claim Suit Against Argus Is 'Baseless' image
Parent Issue
Copyright Protected
Rights Held By
Donated by the Ann Arbor News. © The Ann Arbor News.
OCR Text

Two Directors Claim Suit
Against Argus Is 'Baseless'

A point-by-point denial of a motion to dismiss the bill of
charges made against, Argus,Inc., complaint. There has been no ac-
and its directors in the $T^TSn;3S? lion on the motion.
damage suit has been filed by two No answer has yet been filed by
of the firm's board members with Preston R. Bassett, Leiand S.|
the Wayne county circuit court. Bisbee, William E. Brown, jrJ

The answer — made by board D. Howse, the other directors at!
members H. L. Frisinger, an Ann William P. Harris, jr., and Robert;

Arbor contractor, and A. L. Ashby. the time of the suit's initiation:

president of Olivet College—asks Aug. 8. !
dismissal of Louis> M. Eston's G. Stanley Porter, former board
"baseless charges." chairman, died in a Sept. 11 fire

Eston, a Detroit investment at his Clark Lake summer home.
counselor and owner of 100 shares Six Charges Denied
of Argus stock, alleges in his suit The eight-page answer contains
that the "negligent actions" of a categorical denial of the follow-
(he local camera firm's directors ing Eston charges:

had resulted in the dissipation of (1) That "a general system"
the corporation's funds, had been established by which the
First Answer By Directors directors were benefiting financial-

The Frisinger-Ashby answer is iy from their connection with the
the first to be filed by any of the firm;

eight company directors named, (2) That the directors had "sub-
although Argus, Inc., has entered I jecf.ed themselves to the will and
——- — • --————- -———••domination" of Howse, forrnei"
; company president wW resiener'
; last.. June, and Jay H. L««w>on. fo'
"iDfi' vice-president who ivas kih-
. in a plane crash in Decemb''.

(3) That the alleged $100,000
loss in the sale of cameras to a
Hoboken, N. J., firm was the re-
sult of any failure of the defend-

Other Charges

(4) That the alleged $956,.^'
loss in the purchase and subs
quent sale of two Minnesota plai;

was caused by negligence;

(5) That the ".ownership ana
; operation of an airplane consti-'
ituted a negligent and reckless dis-
i sipation of the corporation's
[money"; and

: (6) That th. : "d TVz-cent-
per share di declared in
'1947-48 was unwarranted. The
! answer adds that the dividends
i "were far less than the corporation
! could have safely paid without
!; detriment to the stockholders."
'' Possible Influence Cited
' Beyond denying Eston's allega-
I lions, Frisinger and Ashby, assert
: that the Detroiter's charges "may
1 be disseminated to the stockhold-
i ers ... to influence the manage-
ment of the corporation . . . fo'-
(his) own purposes."

The answer was filed by Co>'
ilin. Conlin Sr Parker, Ann Arbor
ilaw firm representing Frisinger
-tand Ashby, as well as Bassett. .J