Ralph Rogers & Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.
| Decision Date | 12 April 1956 |
| Docket Number | 12595.,No. 12594,12594 |
| Citation | 232 F.2d 930 |
| Parties | RALPH ROGERS & COMPANY, Inc., Appellant, v. RECONSTRUCTION FINANCE CORPORATION, Appellee. RECONSTRUCTION FINANCE CORPORATION, Appellant, v. CUMBERLAND PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Hugh C. Gracey, Nashville, Tenn., Gracey, Steele & Buck, Nashville, Tenn., on brief, for Ralph Rogers & Co.
A. Fred Rebman, III, Chattanooga, Tenn., W. D. Spears, Spears, Reynolds, Moore & Rebman, Chattanooga, Tenn., on brief, for Cumberland Portland Cement Co.
Roy A. Miles, Nashville, Tenn., Miles, Butler, Corbitt & McCall, Nashville, Tenn., on brief, for Reconstruction Finance Corp.
Before ALLEN, MARTIN and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
This action was filed by the appellee, Cumberland Portland Cement Company, hereinafter called Cumberland, to recover the sum of $14,767.23 for cement sold and delivered by it to the Tullahoma Continuous Mix Company, hereinafter referred to as Mix Company, between May 11, 1951 and July 23, 1951. The Mix Company on August 28, 1951 had filed a petition in bankruptcy. This action was directed against the appellant, Reconstruction Finance Corporation, hereinafter called R. F. C., on the theory that the R. F. C. in its servicing of a $70,000 loan which it made to the Mix Company, promised the appellee in writing that it would pay for the shipments above referred to out of funds received by it under contracts which the Mix Company had assigned to it as security for the loan. An intervening petition was filed by the appellant Ralph Rogers & Company, hereinafter called Rogers, seeking a recovery of $13,897.37 for materials sold and delivered by it to the Mix Company from May 31, 1951 through August 1, 1951, claiming that the R. F. C. promised to pay for these shipments out of the funds coming to it from the assigned contracts.
The R. F. C. received through payments under the assigned contracts $55,656.65, which was more than sufficient to pay the Cumberland claim of some $26,656.86 in full. However, it actually paid Cumberland only about $11,889.63. When this action was filed to collect the unpaid balance there was in the hands of the R. F. C. assigned funds in the amount of $12,234.91. In view of the claims of both Cumberland and Rogers to this balance, the R. F. C. paid it into court and asked that the creditors be required to interplead their respective claims. The Trustee in Bankruptcy also filed an intervening petition asserting rights to the fund in court and seeking recovery of payments made to the creditors of the Mix Company, claimed by him to be preferential payments.
The District Judge carefully analyzed in his opinion the transactions between the parties and the rights and obligations arising therefrom. D.C., 140 F. Supp. 739. He held that the R.F.C. made a positive and unequivocal obligation to pay the claim of Cumberland out of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Edwards v. Travelers Ins. of Hartford, Conn.
...222 (6th Cir. 1961); Cumberland Portland Cement Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 140 F.Supp. 739, 751 (E.D.Tenn.1953), aff'd 232 F.2d 930 (6th Cir. 1956). The representations made by Travelers through its claim representative Ray Davidson were ones of present fact. In March, 1972, David......
-
In re McGinty, Bankruptcy No. 97-25269.
...See also Cumberland Portland Cement Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 140 F.Supp. 739, 751 (E.D.Tenn.1953), aff'd. 232 F.2d 930 (6th Cir.1956). Thus, statements of opinion or intention are not actionable. See Fowler v. Happy Goodman Family, 575 S.W.2d 496 (Tenn.1978); Hamilton v. Galbrai......
-
Naifeh v. Valley Forge Life Insurance Company, No. W2003-02800-COA-R3-CV (TN 5/5/2005), W2003-02800-COA-R3-CV.
...at 232. See also Cumberland Portland Cement Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 140 F. Supp. 739, 751 (E.D. Tenn.1953), aff'd 232 F.2d 930 (6th Cir. 1956). Thus, statements of opinion or intention are not actionable. See Fowler v. Happy Goodman Family, 575 S.W.2d 496 (Tenn.1978); Hamilton ......
-
U.S. v. Starr
...L.Ed.2d 157 (1965); Cumberland Portland Cement Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 140 F.Supp. 739, 749 (E.D.Tenn.1953), aff'd, 232 F.2d 930 (6th Cir.1956). "There is abundant authority that a scheme to use a private fiduciary position to obtain direct pecuniary gain is within the mail fra......