Dilley v. Jasper Lumber Co.
| Decision Date | 17 November 1909 |
| Citation | 122 S.W. 255 |
| Parties | DILLEY v. JASPER LUMBER CO. et al. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Action by C. S. Basham against the Jasper Lumber Company, in which George E. Dilley intervened. Motion by intervener to remove the receiver and set aside a sale was denied, and from affirmance thereof by the Court of Civil Appeals (114 S. W. 878) intervener brings error. Reversed and remanded.
A. D. Lipscomb, for plaintiff in error. McDowell & Duffie, W. D. Wilkerson, E. A. Easterling, Hunt, Meyer & Townes, and A. R. Masterson, for defendants in error.
C. S. Basham brought this suit against the Jasper Lumber Company upon a promissory note, alleging that the sawmill, the running of which was the lumber company's business, was shut down, and that work could not be resumed, for the want of ready money, and prayed that a receiver be appointed to operate the mill and to wind up the business. At the same time the lumber company filed an answer and joined in the prayer for the appointment of a receiver, which was accordingly done, and W. C. McClelland was appointed and gave bond and entered upon the duties of the position. On the ____ day of April, 1906 (five months after the institution of the suit and the appointment of a receiver), George E. Dilley filed a petition of intervention, in which he alleged that the lumber company was indebted to him to the amount of certain notes and attorney's fees and that it had executed to him a mortgage to secure the same. On the 5th day of March, 1906, the court ordered the receiver to sell the property at a sum not less than $35,000, at private sale, and, if not sold in 30 days, then to advertise and sell to the highest bidder for cash. On the 21st day of April, 1906, the order of sale was modified, the upset price being placed at $15,000. Finally all restrictions were removed from the order of sale, and the receiver was authorized to sell at any price he could get at a public sale. The property was sold as follows: 1 engine, heater, and pump for $475.15; the property subject to Dilley's mortgage for $800; 115,000 feet of lumber for $375; and all the residue of the property for the sum of $500 — and A. P. Laughlin became the purchaser of the whole. The sale was confirmed by the court. Thereupon came George E. Dilley, the plaintiff in error in this proceeding, and on July 5, 1906, filed a motion to remove W. C. McClelland as receiver of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Receivership of Great Western Beet Sugar Co.
...... the purchaser, and should be set aside. (Dilley v. Jasper Lumber Co., 103 Tex. 22, 122 S.W. 255.). . . Sullivan. & Sullivan and R. ......
-
Arlington Heights Realty Co. v. Citizens' Ry. & Light Co.
...the sale. The latest expression from the Supreme Court of this state upon the sufficiency of receivership sales is found in Dilley v. Jasper Lumber Co., 122 S. W. 255, in which, Gaines, Justice, says: "If the facts alleged in the motion are true, the sales ought to be set aside. The aggrega......
-
3-C Oil Co. v. Modesta Partnership
...thereof and payment of the purchase price. Dilley v. Jasper Lumber Co., 114 S.W. 878 (Tex.Civ.App.1908, rev'd on other grounds, 103 Tex. 22, 122 S.W. 255, 1909). An attachment lien attaches only to the debtor's interest; if the debtor has no title, none passes on the foreclosure of the lien......
-
United States v. Von Cseh
...ref. n. r. e.). For the sale to be void the complainant must show either a fraud which deceived the complainant, Dilley v. Jasper Lumber Co., 103 Tex. 22, 122 S.W. 255 (1909), or "both irregularity calculated to affect the sale and a gross inadequacy of price." Tex.Jur.2d Judicial Sales § 1......