Copeland v. Cooper Grocery Co.

• Decision Date: 26 June 1901
• Citation: 63 S.W. 886
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals
• Parties: COPELAND et al. v. COOPER GROCERY CO.

63 S.W. 886

COPELAND et al. v. COOPER GROCERY CO.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

June 26, 1901.

Error from McLennan county court; J. N. Gallagher, Judge.

Action by the Cooper Grocery Company against M. C. Copeland and another. From

a judgment against defendants, they bring error. Affirmed.

A. C. Prendergast, for plaintiffs in error. John W. Davis, for defendant in error.

KEY, J.

This appeal involves a contest between two creditors of M. C. Copeland, formerly a retail merchant. Copeland himself is a party to the suit, but the only complaint made in this court in his behalf is against the action of the trial court in adjudging certain costs against him. We do not think the court abused its discretion in the matter referred to. The subject-matter of the contest between the creditors is Copeland's title to a storehouse in the city of Waco, which consisted of a leasehold for 10 months. The Cooper Grocery Company sued out an attachment against Copeland, and caused it to be levied upon the property referred to. Thereafter said company, asserting a lien upon the property, procured the appointment of a receiver, who, by order of the court, took possession of the storehouse, and held it until the lease expired. The Cooper Grocery Company's attachment was sued out and levied on November 4, 1897. On November 5, 1897, Copeland assigned his leasehold and conveyed his interest in the storehouse to the Rotan Grocery Company. November 3, 1897, Copeland conveyed his stock of merchandise, then situated in the storehouse referred to, to a trustee for the benefit of certain creditors, and the trustee conveyed the stock to the Rotan Grocery Company. The latter company intervened in the suit brought by the Cooper Grocery Company against Copeland, and, after the expiration of the leasehold estate, sought to recover the value thereof against the Cooper Grocery Company, alleging that the latter had no lien upon the property, and had unlawfully procured the appointment of a receiver, who, by order of the court, had withheld it from the Rotan Grocery Company, thereby depriving it of its value, alleged to be $350. Upon the authority of Saunders v. Kempner (Tex. Civ. App.) 32 S. W. 585, decided by the court of civil appeals at San Antonio, the trial court held that the Cooper Grocery Company could not be held liable in the matter referred to, although it may have wrongfully procured the appointment of the receiver, and the court may have committed an error in making that...