Crawford v. Seattle, R. & S. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 29 August 1916
• Docket Number: 13569,13570.
• Citation: 92 Wash. 670,159 P. 782
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: CRAWFORD v. SEATTLE, R. & S. RY. CO. et al.

159 P. 782

92 Wash. 670

CRAWFORD v. SEATTLE, R. & S. RY. CO. et al.

Nos. 13569, 13570.

Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

August 29, 1916

Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Ralph Kauffman and A. W Frater, Judges.

Action by William R. Crawford against the Seattle, Renton & Southern Railway Company and others for the appointment of a receiver in which the Puget Sound Traction Light & Power Company filed a petition for the payment of a claim against the Railway.From an adjudication of the Railway's insolvency, but denying the plaintiff the relief prayed for, and from an order directing the sale of the property to satisfy claims the plaintiff appeals.Motions to dismiss the appeals granted.

See also, 86 Wash. 628, 150 P. 1155.

Appeal from judgment in receivership proceeding if regarded as final judgment from which an appeal might be taken would be dismissed, where a notice thereof was not given until more than 90 days after the entry of judgment.

In receivership proceeding, the dismissal of an appeal from a judgment, regarded as an interlocutory order in the case reviewable by appeal from a subsequent order of sale, would follow the dismissal of the appeal from such order.

Morris B. Sachs, of Seattle, for appellant.

Higgins & Hughes, of Seattle, for respondents.

MAIN J.

These are two motions for the dismissal of appeals presented in the Seattle, Renton & Southern Railway Company receivership proceedings.

On April 30, 1912, William R. Crawford, principal stockholder of the railway company, brought an action against Peabody, Houghteling & Co. and Augustus S. Peabody, trustee, for the mortgage bondholders of the railway company, alleging an attempt on the part of these defendants to wreck the company, and also alleging imminent danger of insolvency, and praying for the appointment of a receiver.To this action the railway company was a partydefendant.On September 25, 1912, Peabody, Houghteling & Co. and Augustus S. Peabody answered the complaint.To these answers on October 26, 1912, the plaintiff filed replies.

The trial of the issues made by the complaint, the answers, and the replies thereto was begun on January 30, 1913, and concluded on March 15th following.In that action the defendants had been charged with attempting to wreck the road, and damages in a large sum were sought against them.

On May 17, 1913, the court signed and caused to be entered its findings of fact and conclusions of law, in which it was found that the railway company was insolvent, and that the conduct of the defendants had been blameless.On November 12, 1915, the findings and conclusions were again signed by the trial judge and refiled.On this date a judgment was entered adjudging the railway company to be insolvent, and denying to the plaintiff the relief prayed for.

On September 17, 1914, the Puget Sound Traction Light & Power Company filed in the cause a petition for the payment of power, alleging that it was the assignee of a contract which the Seattle, Renton & Southern Railway Company had entered into for the purchase of power, and that this contract did not expire until April 24, 1926.It was stated in the petition that there was due upon the contract at the time the petition was filed a sum in excess of $103,810.57.In this petition it was asked that the contract be decreed a first lien upon the property in the hands of the receiver, and that the property should be sold subject to the contract.

On January 19, 1916, an order was entered allowing claims which had been filed with the receivers and fixing the priorities thereof.On February 9, 1916, an order was entered directing the sale of the property to satisfy claims.This order, among other things, provided that any purchaser at the sale should take the property or properties purchased, subject to the provisions of the contract for power held by the Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Company.

On February 24, 1916, the plaintiff served and filed written notice that he appealed from the judgment entered on November 12, 1915.On the same day he served and filed written notice that he appealed from the order and decree of sale entered on February 9, 1916.The notice of appeal from the judgment entered on November 12, 1915, was served upon Peabody, Houghteling & Co. and Augustus S. Peabody, trustee, and upon the receivers.The notice of appeal from the order of sale on February 9, 1916, was not served on the Puget Sound Traction Light & Power Company, nor upon a number of creditors who had appeared by counsel and presented their claims, and whose claims were classified and allowed in the order entered on January 19, 1916.

As above indicated, the motions are to dismiss both appeals.Considering first the motion directed to the appeal from the order of sale entered on February 9, 1916: It appears that that was an order entered in the receivership proceeding directing the sale of the property for the purpose of satisfying the claims of...