Monsarrat v. Mercantile Trust Co.

• Decision Date: 07 May 1901
• Docket Number: 872.,853
• Citation: 109 F. 230
• Parties: MONSARRAT v. MERCANTILE TRUST CO. et al. SAME v. ROBINSON.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

109 F. 230

MONSARRAT v. MERCANTILE TRUST CO. et al.

SAME v. ROBINSON.

Nos. 853, 872.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 7, 1901

James H. Hoyt, for Monsarrat.

Lawrence Maxwell, Jr., for Robinson.

Morrison R. Waite, for Mercantile Trust Co. and Metropolitan Trust Co.

Before LURTON, DAY, and SEVERENS, Circuit Judges.

LURTON Circuit Judge.

These two cases have been heard together, and involve the same question. The appeal of Monsarrat, as receiver of the Columbus, Hocking Valley & Toledo Railroad Company, in cause No. 853, is from a decree dismissing an intervening petition filed by him against Joseph Robinson successor to S. M. Felton, as receiver of the Columbus Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Company, praying a decree against Robinson, as receiver, upon an account for $7,522.64. Monsarrat was appointed receiver of the Hocking Valley Company by the court below, February 24, 1897. Under an arrangement entered into between him, as receiver, and the defendant the railroad company, mileage tickets were issued by Monsarrat, as receiver, good over the railroad of the railroad company, and by the latter company good over the line operated by Monsarrat, as receiver. June 2, 1897, Felton was appointed receiver of the railroad company. At that time many mileage books were outstanding, which had been sold by the railroad company, good over the Hocking Valley Line. Monsarrat, as receiver, continued, after the appointment of a receiver for the railroad company, to accept these outstanding mileage books when presented upon his railroad. He now claims that, after crediting all mileage coupons sold by him and honored by the railroad company, or its receiver a balance is due him, as receiver, of $7,522.64. Much the larger part of this accrued during March, April, and May 1897, being for mileage coupons taken up by Monsarrat before a receiver was appointed for the defendant railroad company. Appellant insists that the whole claim is a liability of the receivership, and the object of his intervention was to have it so declared and paid. The decree from which appellant has appealed was one holding that the receiver was not liable on account of mileage books issued by the railroad company prior to his appointment as receiver. In this conclusion we concur. The contention that the balance due on this mileage account when a receiver was appointed for the defendant railroad company became a liability of the receiver by virtue of the order made when the receiver was appointed is unsound. That order was the usual order made in such cases directing the receiver to pay labor, supply, and material claims, and 'traffic or mileage balances,' which had accrued within six months. Conceding that the order included the balance due on this mileage account, still it does not follow that the claim became thereby a receiver's debt. In the case of Gregg v. Trust Co. (a case against the same receiver, and decided at this term) 109 F. 220, we had occasion to pass upon the legal effect of that order, it being there contended that every claim within the terms of...