Hurley v. Atchison, Topeka Santa Fe Railway Company

Decision Date05 April 1909
Docket NumberNo. 95,95
Citation53 L.Ed. 729,29 S.Ct. 466,213 U.S. 126
PartiesJ. E. HURLEY, Cyrus Leland, Jr., and Walter Reeves, Trustees in Bankruptcy of the Estate of Mount Carmel Coal Company, Bankrupt, Appts., v. ATCHISON, TOPEKA, & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, Osage Carbon Company, and Cherokee & Pittsburg Coal & Mining Company
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

There is practically no controversy in respect to the facts in this case. We take the following statement from the opinion of the circuit court of appeals: In 1896 the Osage Carbon Company and the Cherokee & Pittsburg Coal & Mining Company, as parties of the first part, and Charles J. Devlin, as party of the second part, and the railway company as party of the third part, entered into an agreement whereby the parties of the first part leased to Devlin, for a term of three years, certain coal lands located in the state of Kansas, with the right to mine coal therefrom, and Devlin, the party of the second part, agreed to sell and deliver to the railway company, and the latter to buy from him daily, all the coal required by it in the operation of certain of its lines of railroad in the state of Kansas at prices stated in the lease, payment to be made by the railway company on the 15th day of each month for all coal delivered to it during the preceding calendar month. Power was conferred upon the railway company to terminate the lease for failure by Devlin to perform any of his undertakings, and the right to assign the lease was made subject to the consent of the railway company. Subsequently, Devlin duly assigned to the Mount Carmel Coal Company all his right under the lease. By two successive agreements this contract was extended until June, 1906. All the parties continued in the performance of their respective obligations until July, 1905, when the Mount Carmel Company was adjudicated a bankrupt. Receivers were appointed and authorized to conduct the business of the bankrupt in the usual course until trustees should be chosen. The receivers and the subsequently-appointed trustees successively continued to operate the mines under the orders of the court, and to deliver the coal as required by the contract. While the receivers were in charge, the railway company and the two coal companies, the original lessors, filed their joint intervening petition, setting forth their relations to the bankrupt under the contract, their rights thereunder, as already stated, and, in substance, that, by an agreement between them and the bankrupt, the contract had been modified to the extent that the railway company had agreed that, without waiting until the 15th day of the month to make its payment for coal theretofore purchased, it would, in order to accommodate the Mount Carmel Coal Company, and enable it to pay off laborers and keep the mines going, make advance payments from time to time when necessary for those purposes. In pursuance of that agreement, and for the purposes stated, it had advanced $57,304.16, with the understanding that it should be repaid by the subsequent delivery of coal; that the intervening bankruptcy proceedings of July 7 and the appointment of receivers by the court alone prevented the bankrupt from carrying out its agreement and delivering the coal as required by the contract. The petitioners prayed that the lease be declared forfeited and void and the mines delivered back to them, or that the receivers be directed to deliver to the railway company the amount of coal so paid for in advance.

A referee, to whom the intervening petition was referred, reported unfavorably to the granting of any relief. His report was afterwards confirmed by the district court and the petition dismissed. The referee found and reported that the amount claimed by the railway company was as stated in the intervening petition, and was advanced to enable the bankrupt to meet its pay rolls, but found that there was no testimony indicating an intention to modify the written lease. The district court, in reviewing the action of the referee, said: 'True, at the time the sums of money were advanced it was no doubt contemplated and agreed by the parties that the bankrupt would repay the money by furnishing the coal at the price of the coal, measured in money by the terms of the contract, and would furnish such coal in July and August, as claimed; but, at the time of the failure of the bankrupt, the coal remained in the ground, unmined.' Both the referee and the district court found that the agreement for the advance of the money was a separate, independent, parol contract, and had nothing to do with the original written contract, as shown by the lease, and that, being such an independent parol contract, there was no lien upon any of the property for its payment.

The circuit court of appeals (82 C. C. A. 453, 153 Fed. 503) reversed the judgment of the district court, and held that that court should have directed a surrender of the leased premises, or required the trustees, upon assumption of the lease, to mine and deliver to the railway company sufficient coal to cover its advances; and it further held that, the lease having expired, the assets of the estate, consisting in part of the money received for coal delivered to the railway company, should be subject to the payment of such debt as a preferential claim.

Messrs. Frank Hagerman and John S. Dean for appellants.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 129-130 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Robert Dunlap, William R. Smith, and Gardiner Lathrop for appellees.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 130-131 intentionally omitted] Statement by Mr. Justice Brewer:

Mr. Justice Brewer delivered the opinion of ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
135 cases
  • Fourth St. Nat. Bank v. Millbourne Mills Co.'s Trustee
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • August 10, 1909
    ... ... on store at the mills of the bankrupt company. The ... company issued certificates, after the ... is nothing to the contrary of this in Hurley v ... Railroad, 213 U.S. 126, 29 Sup.Ct. 466, ... ...
  • Union Trust Co. of Maryland v. Townshend
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • February 23, 1939
    ...of local or general law that takes from the transaction the effect it was intended to produce. Hurley v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 213 U.S. 126, 134, 29 S.Ct. 466, 53 L.Ed. 729, 734. When the English firm took the securities it only exercised a right that had been created long be......
  • Bayer v. Neiman Marcus Grp., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • June 26, 2017
    ...damages serve with those served by the classic form of legal relief, compensatory damages. See Hurley v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co. , 213 U.S. 126, 134, 29 S.Ct. 466, 53 L.Ed. 729 (1909) ( "Equity looks at the substance, and not at the form."); see also Mertens , 508 U.S. at 255, 113 S.Ct.......
  • Cumberland Portland C. Co. v. Reconstruction F. Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee
    • November 17, 1953
    ...160, 36 S.Ct. 520, 60 L.Ed. 934; Sexton v. Kessler & Co., 225 U.S. 90, 32 S.Ct. 657, 56 L.Ed. 995; Hurley v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., 213 U.S. 126, 134, 29 S.Ct. 466, 53 L.Ed. 729; Hunt v. Curry, 153 Tenn. 11, 282 S.W. 201; Milam v. Milam, 138 Tenn. 686, 200 S.W. 826; State ex rel. McCo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • § 28.03 Leases and Contracts: The Effect of Bankruptcy
    • United States
    • Full Court Press Negotiating and Drafting Commercial Leases CHAPTER 28 Bankruptcy
    • Invalid date
    ...ed. 2016)). [52] In re CB Holding Corp., 448 B.R. 684, 688 (Bankr. D. Del. 2011).[53] Hurley v. Atchinson, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., 213 U.S. 126, 29 S.Ct. 466, 53 L.Ed. 729 (1909).[54] Id., 213 U.S. at 133.[55] Id., 213 U.S. at 134-135.[56] In re Gardinier, Inc., 831 F.2d 974 (11th Ci......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT