Osterberg v. Union Trust Company
| Decision Date | 01 October 1876 |
| Citation | 93 U.S. 424,23 L.Ed. 964 |
| Parties | OSTERBERG v. UNION TRUST COMPANY |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois.
The Rockford, Rock Island, and St. Louis Railroad Company issued certain bonds secured by its mortgages to the Union Trust Company, the trustee of the bondholders. The trustee filed its bill to foreclose the mortgages, June 11, 1874, in the court below; and on the 29th of the following October a receiver was appointed to take charge of the money, real and personal assets of the company, and all its rights and property, with power to exercise its franchises, and, if need be, to sell, transfer, and convey, under the direction of the court, the whole or any part of the property; and it was further ordered, that the company and Lynde and Cable, or whoever may have possession thereof, do assign and deliver to the receiver the property, and all equitable interests, things in action, and other effects belonging to or held in trust for the company, or in which it had any beneficial interest, right, or title, at the time of filing the bill. The deed executed by the company pursuant to that order transfers to the receiver 'all and every the estate, real and personal, chattels real, moneys, outstanding debts, things in action, equitable interests, property, and effects whatsoever and wheresoever, of or belonging or due to, or held in trust for, the said railroad company, or in which it had any interest, right, or title, at the time of filing the bill of complaint.'
The receiver took possession of the property, and operated the road. On July 11, 1875, a decree was rendered finding the amount due the bondholders, and directing the sale of the road and of certain real estate, specifically described, and of 'all rights, claims, and benefits in and to all leases, contracts, and agreements made with any parties owning any coal lands, or mineral lands, or railroad or railroads, or with any other parties for any other property, together with all and singular the tenements and appurtenances thereto belonging, and the reversions remainders, tolls, incomes, rents, issues, and profits thereof; and also all the estates, rights, titles, and interests whatsoever, as well at law as in equity, of the said Rockford, Rock Island, and St. Louis Railroad Company, of, in, and to the same; . . . and all other property, real and personal, belonging to said Rockford, Rock Island, and St. Louis Railroad Company, and which is now in possession of said receiver, and hereinafter described or referred to; and all other property, rights, franchises, and things which shall have been acquired by purchase or otherwise, by the said receiver, during the pendency of this suit for use in connection with said railroads, and shall be at the time of the sale hereby decreed in his possession, or to which he may then be entitled.'
The master appointed by the court sold the said road, franchises, &c., Aug. 16, 1875; and, when offering it, publicly declared, 'I am ordered by the court to say, that from the proceeds of the sale will be retained a sum sufficient to provide for the taxes of 1873 and 1874.'
The appellant became the purchaser of the property for the sum of $1,320,000, and paid in cash, conformably to the order directing the sale, $200,000. On the 3d of November, 1875, the court, upon the report of the master, made a further order, directing that the appellant be let into possession on the payment of an additional sum of $350,000, and the delivery of coupons and bonds of a specified amount, he to have the earnings of the road and to pay its expenses after Nov. 1 of that year; but the court decreed, that, on the payment by the appellant of the residue of the purchase-money on or before Dec. 5, 1875, the sale should be confirmed, and that the appellant might apply to the master under the direction of the court for a deed conveying to him the property purchased at the sale. He took possession accordingly on the 9th of that month. On the twenty-eighth day of January, 1876, an order was made extending the time for the payment of the residue of the purchase-money until the 1st of April; and on May 27 of that year an order was made confirming the sale and directing a conveyance, which was carried into effect.
The receiver...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scottish American Mortg. Co., Ltd. v. Minidoka County
... 272 P. 498 47 Idaho 33 THE SCOTTISH AMERICAN MORTGAGE COMPANY, LIMITED, a Corporation, Appellant, v. MINIDOKA COUNTY, a Legal ... 884, 59 N.W. 290, 29 L. R. A. 278; Central Trust Co. v. Third Avenue R. R. Co., 186 F. 291, 110 C. C. A. 1;. Miller v. ... Trust Co. v. Weis, 118 Cal. 489, 50 P. 697; Union. Central Life Ins. Co. v. Black, 67 Utah 268, 47 A. L. R. 572, 247 P. ... . . In. Osterberg v. Union Trust Co., 93 U.S. 424, 23 L.Ed. 964, it is said that a lien ......
-
State ex rel. Malott v. Bd. of Com'Rs of Cascade Cnty.
...this inference but a plain expression of a different purpose found in the statute itself.” See, also, Osterberg v. Union Trust Co., 93 U. S. 424, 23 L. Ed. 964;Morey Engineering & Construction Co. v. St. Louis Artificial Ice Rink Co., 242 Mo. 241, 146 S. W. 1142, 40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 119, An......
-
State v. Board of Com'rs of Cascade County
...... It is aptly said in the case of Minnesota v. Central. Trust Co. (C. C. A.) 94 F. 244, 250, that: "It. cannot be inferred that the ... itself." See, also, Osterberg v. Union Trust. Co., 93 U.S. 424, 23 L.Ed. 964; Morey Engineering & ......
-
Granite Bituminous Paving Co. v. Parkview Realty & Improvement Co.
...and nature, is superior to all pre-existing contract or judgment liens unless especially provided otherwise by statute. Osterberg v. Union Trust Co., 93 U.S. 428; Stafford v. Fizer, 82 Mo. 393; Jack Weiennett, 115 Ill. 105, 110; Gitchell v. Kreidler, 84 Mo. 472; Allen v. McCabe, 93 Mo. 138;......