Texas Bank & Trust Company of Dallas v. Crippen, 15897.
Decision Date | 05 September 1956 |
Docket Number | No. 15897.,15897. |
Citation | 235 F.2d 472 |
Parties | TEXAS BANK & TRUST COMPANY OF DALLAS, and Republic National Bank of Dallas, Trustee, Appellants, v. Elijah CRIPPEN, Trustee of Bankers Discount Corporation, Debtor, Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
John B. Stigall, Jr., Larry DeBogory, DeBogory & DeBogory, Dallas, Tex., for appellants.
Thomas R. Hartnett, III, Dallas, Tex., for appellee.
Before TUTTLE, CAMERON and JONES, Circuit Judges.
This appeal had its origin in the proceedings for the reorganization under Chapter X of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. §§ 501-676, of Bankers Discount Corporation, herein called the debtor. The matters presented by this appeal were before us about a year ago. Republic National Bank of Dallas v. Crippen, 5 Cir., 1955, 224 F.2d 565. We there reversed the order by which the district court rejected the claims of the two banks which were appellants there and here. The appellant, Republic National Bank of Dallas, herein called the Republic Bank, had been the trustee under an open-end indenture dated March 24, 1952, securing an issue of collateral trust notes. The Republic Bank, as trustee, held from time to time under the pledge of the indenture a varying number in substantial dollar amounts of purchase money obligations which had been given by buyers in connection with the acquisition of motor vehicles, furniture, equipment and appliances, as well as some other intangible collateral. The indenture is a lengthy agreement between the debtor and the Republic Bank which covers fifty-nine printed pages of record. Among its terms are provisions for the compensation and expenses of the trustee, including the following:
These provisions were supplemented by a letter dated March 26, 1952, from the Republic Bank to the debtor setting up a formula for computing the trustee's compensation. The body of this letter read:
On the basis of the foregoing letter agreement the debtor paid the Republic Bank to the end of March, 1953, the last full month before the inception of proceedings in the bankruptcy court.
The Texas Bank & Trust Company, which will be referred to as the Texas Bank, made loans to the debtor evidenced by promissory notes and secured by the pledge of intangible collateral. The notes provided for the payment of principal, interest and attorneys' fees.
The debtor filed a petition on April 29, 1953, under Chapter XI of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. §§ 701-799, for an arrangement with its unsecured creditors. A receiver was appointed by the court on the following day. The plan provided for two other finance companies to advance funds and to collect customer paper, and to receive five per cent. interest on the advances and ten per cent. of collections. The finance companies were given a first priority of payment and the bank creditors were next in line. This arrangement was approved on June 15, 1953. On August 24, 1953, the court removed the receiver and restored the estate to the debtor for management by a creditors' committee.
On March 31, 1954, creditors filed a petition for reorganization of the debtor under Chapter X of the Bankruptcy Act. This plan provided that:
"The balance due on the principal and regular rate of interest to the secured creditors in Class 1 shall be paid in cash at the time of consummation of the plan, but said secured creditors shall receive nothing for costs, attorneys\' fees, penalty interest, nor any other amount."
This plan was not accepted by either of the appellant banks. The appellee, Elijah Crippen, who had been appointed by the court as Trustee of the debtor in the reorganization proceedings submitted an amended plan containing, in lieu of the proviso quoted, the following:
This plan was accepted by all of the secured creditors and by substantially all of the unsecured creditors.
The Texas Bank filed a claim for attorneys' fees which were originally computed at the contract rate of ten per cent. but subsequently reduced to $7,500.00. The court refused to hear testimony on these claims and disallowed them. On appeal ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
SECURITIES & EXCH. COM'N v. WL MOODY & CO., BANK.(UNINC.)
...S.W.2d 830 (Tex.Civ. App.—Texarkana 1940, no writ), 2 Clark, Law of Receivers § 642(a) (3rd ed. 1959). 26 E. g., Texas Bank & Trust Co. v. Crippen, 235 F.2d 472 (5th Cir. 1956); Braswell v. Braswell, 476 S.W.2d 444 (Tex.Civ.App. —Waco 1972, no writ); In re Westec Corp., 313 F.Supp. 1296 (S.......
-
TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc., Matter of
...as possible demands recognition. See In re Bemporad Carpet Mills, Inc., 5 Cir., 434 F.2d 988, at 990; Texas Bank & Trust Co. v. Crippen, 235 F.2d 472, 476 (5th Cir. 1956). Indeed it has been suggested that "(e)conomy is the most important principle" to be considered in awarding fees to the ......
-
First Colonial Corp. of America, Matter of
...as efficiently as possible demands recognition. See In re Bemporad Carpet Mills, Inc., 434 F.2d at 990; Texas Bank & Trust Co. v. Crippen, 235 F.2d 472, 476 (5th Cir. 1956). Indeed it has been suggested that "(e)conomy is the most important principle" to be considered in awarding fees to th......
-
In re Continental Vending Machine Corp.
...administered by courts of bankruptcy must expect to be moderately compensated rather than richly rewarded." Texas Bank and Trust Co. v. Crippen, 235 F.2d 472, 476 (5th Cir. 1956) Any allowance higher than the 50% heretofore mentioned would raise the danger that the trust fund beneficiaries ......