Roberts v. Washington Nat. Bank

• Decision Date: 24 May 1894
• Citation: 9 Wash. 12,37 P. 26
• Parties: ROBERTS v. WASHINGTON NAT. BANK.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

37 P. 26

9 Wash. 12

ROBERTS v. WASHINGTON NAT. BANK.

Supreme Court of Washington

May 24, 1894

Appeal from superior court, Spokane county; Jesse Arthur, Judge.

Bill by William B. Roberts, as receiver of the Washington Savings Bank, against the Washington National Bank.From an order granting an injunction, and appointing a receiver of certain notes in controversy, the defendant appeals.The paragraph in the complaint relating to the subject of the receiver and the injunction is as follows: "That the plaintiff has reason to believe, and does believe, and on information and belief alleges, that the defendant corporation, if it make restitution to the Washington Savings Bank of the moneys and properties of the latter fraudulently obtained and now held by it, will be insolvent, and unable to pay its indebtedness in full."

Dunbar C.J., and Scott, J., dissenting.

R. B Blake and Frank T. Post, for appellant.

Turner Graves & McKinstry, for respondent.

HOYT J.

This is an appeal from an order appointing a receiver to take possession of certain notes alleged to be in the possession of the defendant.The first question to be determined is as to the scope of the inquiry in this court upon appeals from orders of this kind.It is contended on the part of the respondent that such inquiry must be confined within narrow limits, and authorities have been cited to sustain his contention in that behalf.The convenience of this court would surely-and public policy, probably-be subserved by the sustaining of the contention of the respondent in this regard.We are, however, unable to so hold.As we interpret the statute, it requires that we should entertain such appeals, and give the appellant the benefit of our determination as to whether or not the order appealed from was authorized by the law and facts.It does not follow from this construction of the statute that no weight should be given to the decision of the question in the court below.The making of such orders is committed, under our system, to the sound discretion of the judge before whom the proceeding is pending; and his decision of the question must stand, unless the appellate court, upon an examination of the law and facts of the case, shall affirmatively determine that his action was not warranted, and in determining this question the decision of questions of fact will not be reversed, if there is a substantial conflict in the proofs in regard thereto.But the appellate court must examine such proofs for the purpose of determining whether or not there is such a clear preponderance against the determination of the lower court.In other words, we will treat its determination of the facts somewhat as we would the verdict of a jury or the findings of a court in a law case.

Examining the proofs offered in this case with these limitations in view, and applying thereto the law of the case as we understand it, there is practically but a single question of fact as to which there could be any doubt whatever, and that is as to whether or not the notes in question came into possession of the defendant fraudulently.The proof offered tending to show that the defendant was insolvent was of such an unsatisfactory character, and was so fully explained and overthrown by testimony on the part of the defendant, that it could furnish no reason for the appointment of a receiver.In determining the question as to whether or not the notes were fraudulently obtained by the defendant, we feel compelled to...