Receivership Sheets Lumber Company, Limited
| Decision Date | 19 March 1900 |
| Docket Number | 13,384 |
| Citation | 27 So. 809,52 La.Ann. 1337 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | RECEIVERSHIP SHEETS LUMBER COMPANY, LIMITED. FINAL ACCOUNT OF RECEIVERS. OPPOSITION OF I. BAER, OUACHITA NATIONAL BANK, ET ALS |
Rehearing refused.
APPEAL from the Fifth Judicial District, Parish of Ouachita -- Madison, J., ad hoc.
Hudson Potts & Bernstein and Wise & Herndon, for Receivers Appellees.
Stubbs & Russell, for Ouachita National Bank and Mrs. E. Arrant Opponents, Appellants.
Cherubusco Newton, for Trimble & Baulkman, Opponents, Appellees.
Andrew Augustus Gunby, for Jos. C. Branch, A. W. Bird, Joseph Bowling & Co., Limited, and Lumber Trade Journal, Opponents, Appellees.
The Ouachita National Bank and Mrs. Elvira Arrant have prosecuted appeals from the judgment of the District Court upon their oppositions to the final account filed by the receivers in this case, and the receivers have answered, praying an amendment of the judgment.
The grounds of opposition are multifarious, and can be be more intelligently considered after a general statement of the case as presented by the record.
The Sheets Lumber Company, Limited, was incorporated in 1895, and engaged in business at Monroe, in the parish of Ouachita, where it owned a saw and planing mill plant, together with a residence and certain adjacent land. In May, 1897, upon the application of a creditor, and with the concurrence of other creditors and of the company and its stockholders, John P. Parker and C. A. Downey were appointed receivers, and an inventory was taken of the assets, and filed, together with a schedule of the liabilities, from which it appears that the assets were valued at $ 61,688.41, and that the liabilities amounted to $ 48,784.63.
A few days after their appointment, the receivers obtained an order from the court a qua "to operate or lease, as appears most profitable, the saw mill plant and planing mill * * * and also to purchase a stock of saw logs", etc.
They consulted with some of the large creditors, however, and decided not to operate the saw mill, but to confine themselves to operating the planing mill, in so far as to work up, into merchantable condition, a quantity of lumber which formed part of the assets of the company; to disposing of the lumber so prepared, and to putting the plant in order for the purpose of a sale. They proceeded upon the lines thus indicated during the months of June, July, and part of August, employing such labor and making such repairs as they thought advisable, operating the planning mill, and selling, at private sale, the lumber prepared by them, as well as that which they found on hand, or purchased to fill orders. In the month of August, they presented a petition to the judge a quo, representing that they had sold nearly all the lumber, but had been unable to find a purchaser for the plant; that the buildings and machinery were deteriorating, and that it would be advisable to sell the entire property at public sale. And, upon August 23, 1897, the judge made an order in the following terms, to-wit:
"It is further ordered that the real estate be sold in two lots; the residence with the five acres on which it is situated and which is now mortgaged to the Monroe Loan and Building Association to be sold in one lot, separate from the rest of the real estate, and that the saw and planing mill be sold in a separate lot from that of the residence * * * That said sale be advertised in the Manufacturers' Record and Lumbermen's Journal, in addition to the local newspapers in Monroe", etc.
Under this order, the property was advertised to be sold October 2, 1897, and upon that day, the sheriff offered it -- that is to say, he began by offering and selling the residence and the five acres upon which it stands, which were adjudicated to R. B. Blanks for $ 3050.00.
The remaining real estate, considered with reference to the manner in which it appears upon the inventory, consisted of fifty-eight acres
of land appraised at
$ 1,994 00
One-fourth interest in 147 acres
595 00
Saw mill, machinery, ground, etc
19,854 45
Planing mill, machinery, ground, etc
Instead of selling this property as one lot, the sheriff appears to have understood the order under which he was proceeding to be more particularly directed to securing a separate sale of the residence rather than the sale of the rest of the real estate in block; hence, after selling the residence, his idea was to proceed with the sale of the other property in lots as it appeared upon the inventory, and he, accordingly, next offered the fifty-eight acres, which were also adjudicated to R. B. Blanks, for $ 1425. He then sold a lot, of one hundred gallons of oil; and then, as appears from his return, he "continued to cry, for a reasonable length of time, the remainder of said property, and each piece thereof separately, and there appearing no one who would bid the amount of two-thirds of the appraisement for any piece thereof", he declared the sale closed.
The evidence shows that several of the creditors were present at this sale; that one of the counsel, who represents the two opponents now before us, and who, as we understand it, then represented them, was present; and that the judge was within easy access; but that no suggestion was made to the sheriff, or to the judge, that the former was proceeding in a manner not authorized by the order of the latter, or which would prejudice the interests of the creditors. Beyond this, from the testimony given by the judge, himself, it appears that it was his intention, though the language of the order can hardly be said to have expressed it, that the property should be sold as the sheriff sold it, in lots, and not in block.
The attempt to sell upon October 2nd, having resulted as has been stated, the sheriff re-advertised the property, to be sold October 23rd, on a twelve month bond. Upon October 23rd, however, a number of creditors, including the present opponents, presented a petition, setting forth "that the condition of the country, growing out of the excitement of the prevailing epidemic, and the strict quarantine" would be likely to interfere with the attendance of purchasers, and praying that the sale be postponed for thirty days, or until the removal of the quarantine; and the sale was postponed until December 4th, when the rest of the property was sold to R. B. Blanks, with the exception of the one-fourth interest in the 147 acres, which was sold to R. B. Blanks and John P. Parker, in indivision; and the purchasers, preferring to do so, were permitted to pay the amounts of their bids in cash.
The receivers had thus sold all the property which had been entrusted to them, and had received the price, and there was nothing left for them to do, but file their account.
Why this was not done at once, does not appear. As a matter of fact, the account was not filed until May 28, 1898, nearly six months after the last sale. The account as filed is open to criticism in several particulars, and among others, in that it requires a series of calculations in order to ascertain the amount of money which is admitted to have been received, and which, those calculations having been made, we find to be as follows:
Proceeds of residence
$ 3,050 00
Proceeds of fifty-eight acres
1,425 00
One-fourth of 147 acres
175 00
100 gallons of oil
Other property
5,525 00
Logs, lumber, furniture, etc., sold by receivers at private
sale
150 00
Oxen
195 00
Wagon
100 00
Lumber
5,675 45
Collections from accounts
Collections from accounts, Exhibit B, made part of account
287 02
Total
As against this sum, there are disbursements charged (exclusive of the amount of the mortgage claim of the Building and Loan Association), aggregating $ 9749.45, and other claims recognized as privileged, aggregating $ 4212.11, and still other claims, tentatively placed on the account as entitled to privilege or mortgage, which more than absorb the small balance.
The oppositions which we are to consider attack this account in general, and in particular. It is objected that the public sale, save as to the residence, was not made in conformity with the order of the court, and it is claimed, in argument, that the receivers should be held liable for the appraised value of the property so sold; that the receivers have failed, in some instances, to account for money or property received; that they have credited themselves with the same amounts twice; that they have made disbursements without authority, and to no purpose, and should not be allowed credit therefor; that the fees with which they credit themselves and their attorneys, are excessive, etc., etc., which objections and claims, we will now consider in detail.
The objection that the property which was sold by the sheriff was not sold in conformity to the order of the court would, we think, have been entitled to serious consideration if it had been presented at the proper time and in connection with some prayer for relief which it would be possible to grant. But there are several reasons why the receivers ought not to be held liable for any loss which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dalliba v. Winschell
... ... business and transactions of the receivership estate, and has ... failed to take vouchers for numerous ... found due the receiver. The American Hydraulic Company and ... other defendant appealed. Decree ordered modified ... 216, 18 A. 1052; Smith on Receivers, 587; In re Sheets ... Lumber Co., 52 La. Ann. 1337, 27 So. 809; Beach on ... ...
-
In re Receivership of Great Western Beet Sugar Co.
... ... 328 In the Matter of the Receivership of GREAT WESTERN BEET SUGAR COMPANY. O. E. CANNON, Receiver, Respondent, v. HENRY HEWITT, Jr., a Lienholder, ... the purchaser, and should be set aside. (Dilley v ... Jasper Lumber Co., 103 Tex. 22, 122 S.W. 255.) ... Sullivan ... & Sullivan ... 775; 24 Cyc. 38; Maquoketa v. Willey, 35 Iowa ... 323; In re Sheets Lbr. Co., 52 La. Ann. 1337, 27 So ... 809; Hartshorne v. Reader, 3 Ohio ... ...
-
State Central Saving Bank of Keokuk v. Fanning Ball-Bearing Chain Co.
... ... FANNING BALLBEARING CHAIN COMPANY, Defendant; WILLIAM ANDRUS, C. F. MCFARLAND, JOHN C ... and every person undertaking the duties of a receivership ... must be assumed to appreciate the main and controlling ... But his authority ... to hire was both limited in the amount to be expended and the ... work to be done ... Eells (Kan.) 30 ... Kan. 680, 2 P. 116; In re Sheets Lumber Co. La. (52 ... La. Ann. 1337, 27 So. 809); ... ...
-
Nowell v. International Trust Co.
... ... 1, 1896, the Berners Bay Mining & Milling Company executed ... its mortgage to the International Trust ... and, in case the receivership could not be set aside, that F ... D. Nowell be appointed ... & M. Co., ... 30 Mont. 181, 76 P. 2; Receivership Sheets Lumber Co., 52 ... La.Ann. 1337, 27 So. 809; McAnrow v ... ...