Parsons v. Robinson
| Decision Date | 23 May 1887 |
| Parties | PARSONS v. ROBINSON |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Richd. C. Dale and Saml. Dickson, for the motion.
D. H. Chamberlain and Francis A. Lewis, in opposition.
This is a motion to dismiss an appeal, because the decree appealed from is not a final decree, and also because the value of the matter in dispute does not exceed $5,000. The suit was originally brought by William M. Robinson, the holder of general mortgage bonds, so called, of the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company, to the amount of $5,000, to foreclose the mortgage given for their security. Afterwards, Edwin Parsons, the present appellant, and the holder of $100,000 of the same issue of bonds, intervened by leave of the court, and became a party complainant in the suit.
On the sixth of October, 1886, a decree was entered, finding that the railroad company had made default in the payment of the interest, and that the complainants were 'entitled to have a sale of the mortgaged premises, in accordance with the provisions in said mortgage contained, upon the failure of the defendant to pay, within a time to be hereafter fixed, the amount of the bonds and coupons now outstanding entitled to the security of the said mortgage,' and for the purpose of finding this amount the cause was referred to masters to ascertain and report 'the amount due upon the bonds, principal and interest, which are entitled to the security of said mortgage; and also to report what liens, if any, are prior to the bonds, or to any and what bonds secured by said mortgage; and also to ascertain and report the extent of the lien of the said mortgage upon the railroad, branches, leasehold interests, franchises, and other property of the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company, including not only the property owned by said company at the time of the execution of said mortgage, but also that which has since been acquired.'
Afterwards the masters filed their report, setting forth (1) the amount due on the bonds entitled to the security of the general mortgage; (2) the liens which were prior to that mortgage; and (3) by general description, the property covered. Exceptions were taken to this report, and, on consideration thereof, the court ordered, March 7, 1887, that the company pay, on and before June 7, 1887, the amount found due by the masters for interest, and also $1,694,250 for 'general mortage scrip,' with interest from July 1, 1886, and, in default thereof, 'that the defendants, the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company, Samuel W. Bell, trustee, the Pennsylvania Company for Insurances on Lives & Granting Annuities, trustees, and all persons claiming under them, be absolutely barred and foreclosed of and from all right and equity of redemption in and to the premises in said mortgage described; and, in default of such payment as aforesaid, the court do further order and decree the defendant the Fidelity Insurance, Trust & Safe Deposit Company, trustee in said mortgage mentioned, to sell the railroads, estates, real and personal, corporate rights, and franchises and premises in said mortgage mentioned, at such time and place and in such manner as the court may hereafter determine; and it is further...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Saco Local Development Corp., In re
...Arnold v. United States ex rel. W.B. Guimarin & Co., 263 U.S. 427, 44 S.Ct. 144, 68 L.Ed. 371 (1923), and Parsons v. Robinson, 122 U.S. 112, 7 S.Ct. 1153, 30 L.Ed. 1122 (1887), with Clark v. Williard, 292 U.S. 112, 54 S.Ct. 615, 78 L.Ed. 1160 (1934), and Gumbel v. Pitkin, 113 U.S. 545, 5 S.......
-
Wells v. Shriver
...the master's report. Burlington, C. R. & N. R. Co. v. Simmons, 123 U.S. 52, 31 L. Ed. 73, 8 S. Ct. 58 (31:73); Parsons v. Robinson, 122 U.S. 112, 30 L. Ed. 1122, 7 S. Ct. 1153 (30:1122). It is equally well settled that a decree in admiralty determining the question of liability for a collis......
-
Bissell Carpet-Sweeper Co. v. Goshen Sweeper Co.
... ... Brinkerhoff, 106 U.S. 3, 1 Sup.Ct. 15; Grant v ... Insurance Co., 106 U.S. 429; 1 Sup.Ct. 414; Parsons ... v. Robinson, 122 U.S. 112, 7 Sup.Ct. 1153; St ... Louis, I.M. & S.R. Co. v. Southern Exp. Co., 108 U.S ... 24, 2 Sup.Ct 6; Iron Co. v ... ...
-
Wells v. Shriver
... ... the coming in of the master's report. Burlington, C. R. & N. R. Co ... v. Simmons, 123 U.S. 52 (31:73); Parsons v ... Robinson, 122 U.S. 112 (30:1122) ... It is equally well settled that a decree in admiralty ... determining the question of liability for ... ...