after stating the facts: His Honor states that he finds by an examination of the affidavits that whatever equity is set out by the plaintiff is fully met and negatived by the defendants and the proofs offered. We have examined the affidavits in the record and concur in this opinion.
In regard to the issue of the 140 shares of stock to the defendants, Luelcer Bros., it appears that it is a fact accomplished. The money has been paid and the stock issued. The directors were authorized to issue and sell stock not exceeding the total amount of authorized -capital stock. It is doubtful whether this .express power conferred by the resolution authorized the sale at less than par. 10 Cyc., 763; Womack Pr. Corp., 208. However this may be, the sale having been made, it, is too late for interference by the in-junctive power of the court. 'If the plaintiff wishes to attack the issue, he is in a position to do so when the cause shall come on to a hearing. 1 Cook on Stock and Stockholders, 30-44; 26 Am. & Eng. Enc. (2nd Ed.), 842. If he desires to enjoin its transfer, pending the litigation, he may by motion in the cause, for good cause shown, do so.
We can see no reason why the operation of a solvent corporation shall be stopped and its affairs put into the hands of a receiver to enable the stockholder, who has deposited his stock as collateral for a debt, to have an account of its assets. It is elementary learning that a stockholder has no property in the assets of a corporation, in the sense that he may control it otherwise than as the charter directs. If he gives his note to the corporation in.payment of his stock, it is a debt due the corporation, which, until paid, is an asset. Womack Pr. Corp., 197. If the assets of the corporation are as valuable as the plaintiff avers, he has the benefit of them in the enhanced value of his stock' which he may redeem or if sold *446obtain a large price therefor. We are unable to perceive why he should be permitted to have the court place the corporate property in the hands of a receiver. It would seem that the appeal is a fruitless venture. The court having refused the injunction there was no legal reason why the corporation should not proceed with the sale. We forbear expressing any opinion upon the merits of the controversy. The judgment is
Affirmed.