Ewald v. Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co.
| Decision Date | 13 February 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 12870.,12870. |
| Citation | 242 F.2d 319 |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
| Parties | Gerald R. EWALD and Florence R. Ewald, Appellants, v. CITIZENS FIDELITY BANK AND TRUST CO., Inter Vivos Trustee for Sterling D. Ewald, Deceased, Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co., Statutory Committee for Sterling D. Ewald, Deceased, Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co., Executor of the Estate of Sterling D. Ewald, Deceased, and Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co., as a Corporate Individual, Appellees. |
Edward A. Dodd, Louisville, Ky. (Raymond C. Stephenson, Louisville, Ky., on the brief), for appellants.
Nelson Helm, Louisville, Ky. (Thomas W. Bullitt, Louisville, Ky., on the brief), for appellees.
Before SIMONS, Chief Judge, and STEPHENS and McALLISTER, Circuit Judges.
Gerald R. Ewald and Florence R. Ewald filed suit in the district court setting forth that appellee, Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co., in its various capacities as a fiduciary, had violated the trusts imposed upon it, and, accordingly, asked the court to investigate such breach of trust and order an accounting. On motion of the appellee, the district court dismissed the complaint.
The background of the case is as follows: On October 29, 1935, Sterling D. Ewald executed an inter vivos trust agreement conveying most of his personal estate to appellee Company, as trustee. The agreement, insofar as relevant to this case, provided for payments from the trust fund to appellants, Florence R. Ewald and Gerald R. Ewald, the wife and son respectively of Sterling D. Ewald, the trustor. Shortly after executing the trust, Mr. Ewald became mentally incompetent. He died on July 31, 1955; and the property of the trust was then transferred by the Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co. as inter vivos trustee to itself in the capacity of executor of the estate of Sterling D. Ewald, Deceased. Appellants are the beneficiaries of that estate and it is agreed that they have the right to prosecute claims for mismanagement of the trust, here in question.
Prior to the death of Mr. Ewald, the Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co. had filed periodical settlements with the Jefferson County Circuit Court of Kentucky, covering its administration of the inter vivos trust for the years 1935 to 1950 inclusive. On November 27, 1953, and on March 24, 1955 appellee trust company filed its sixth and seventh settlements in the Jefferson County circuit court as trustee of the inter vivos trust.
On August 1, 1955, the day after the death of Mr. Ewald, appellants filed objections and exceptions in the Jefferson County circuit court, in the form of an answer to the last two settlements of the trust company of the inter vivos trust, in which they sought to hold the company liable, and to surcharge its accounts for certain taxes and interest on taxes paid out of the trust, and for certain other alleged wrongful acts. They also prayed that the court would require a general accounting of the trustee's affairs.
After appellants had filed their answer on August 1, 1955 in the Jefferson County circuit court, which, as heretofore mentioned, comprised their objections and exceptions to the last two settlements of the trust company of the inter vivos trust, they filed, on January 17, 1956, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, a complaint against the trust company in which they presented every claim which they were already asserting in the state court in the proceedings which were then pending. While the Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co. is here sued in various capacities, it is a party, in all those capacities, in the prior litigation in the state court. The acts of which complaint is made, appear in the trust company's settlements as inter...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dailey v. National Hockey League, 92-5156
...489, 492 (4th Cir.1971) (stating that Princess Lida-type abstention is "compulsory," not discretionary); Ewald v. Citizens Fidelity Bank & Trust Co., 242 F.2d 319, 322 (6th Cir.1957) (stating that where Princess Lida applies the court where the action is first filed has "exclusive jurisdict......
-
Bedo v. McGuire
...246 U.S. 199, 38 S.Ct. 254, 62 L.Ed. 664 (1918); Rice v. Rice Foundation, 610 F.2d 471 (7th Cir.1979); Ewald v. Citizens Fidelity Bank & Trust Co., 242 F.2d 319 (6th Cir.1957); Spears v. Spears, 162 F.2d 345 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 332 U.S. 768, 68 S.Ct. 78, 92 L.Ed. 353 (1947). Some auth......
-
Firestone v. Cleveland Trust Co.
...state courts. Tonti v. Petropoulous, 655 F.2d 212 (6th Cir. 1981); Starr v. Rupp, 421 F.2d 999 (6th Cir. 1970); Ewald v. Citizens Fidelity Bank, 242 F.2d 319 (6th Cir. 1957); Magaziner v. Montemuro, supra; Reichman v. Pittsburgh National Bank, 465 F.2d 16, 18 (3rd Cir. 1972). The policies u......
-
Cartwright v. Garner
...305 U.S. at 466, 59 S.Ct. 275;Bank of New York & Trust Co., 296 U.S. at 477–78, 56 S.Ct. 343);see also Ewald v. Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Co., 242 F.2d 319, 321–22 (6th Cir.1957). This rule applies where the court first asserting jurisdiction needs some control over the property to r......