| Show RAISED THEIR THEm SALARIES Anil Nut Laundry All Aro I A 4 suit stilt between certain directors director and ni stockholders of ot the th Royal Laun Laundry Laundry dry r and other director directors of ut tho thin Institution WIN WS lied iliad iad today In tho tue cBs dis district court The he case Is la WIN WINHam Wi hunt Ham H 11 1 Ray Huy Vili Van an Colt Col and amid Harold Van Colt Cott ol plaintiffs versus Albert Iberl Van Yun Cott Col Charles Charlea II ir 1 Miller 11 I or William H Ii Caleb h W u Chap Ohl Chapman man lImit William Lake 1110 Hoba Hobe Sela Chapman John T J 1 Smith David Oil I I I font John Jo un Williams nod and the Ih Royal Laundry a 1 corporation de Ilc defendants Tile Thu hl plaintiff allege In ln effect that the II Royal Laundry Into pel G si II of oC time tho pro orly and 1111 plant of ot tile tho Hand Laundry Sept J I IO that n a corporation wim Wil fanned ti macil vie etc and tua it nt u I of o the directors hold held tile tho suburbs salaries of till all stockholders cru aro fixed o n it I Is further alleged In Inthe Inthe inthe the complaint thud that on nit two Vito occasions thereafter nt itt lt meetings or nr o which Ul UI victors W H 11 I le and Ray JIltS 1 totI hUll hud no lii 10 1100 slit tho tl said O raised 5 1 I per item il w weak oK In tui ouch each In III hiatt nil mill of o 0 C la lu III to tl tl 11 hel in Itt violation of ot thu th duty lot of It f the tho directors who iI made modo thy tho th Increase bo lie 0 ro cc Plaintiff a ni ask k that defendants SI fr m drawing or receiving out alit of or tho tile unis Pf of p ho tile corn com puny any ally In salary Hilary over and above Iho the tho I ILium oi oil finally a I via fly fixed and 1111 slit that up upon II on I U I determination tet ti on ot Il f C the ho o el I 9 defendants defendant ho hu compound Jo Itt tl pay brick back into tho the treasury of or tHU HIO lt till nil money wrongfully and i 01 by each taken and atud appropriated of Os a defendants |
