Simmons v. Friday
| Decision Date | 14 November 1949 |
| Docket Number | 41257 |
| Citation | 224 S.W.2d 90,359 Mo. 812 |
| Parties | Arthur U. Simmons, Administrator c.t.a. of the Estate of Gustav A. Franz, Deceased, and G. A. Buder, Appellants, v. Jesse T. Friday, Administrator ad Litem of the Estate of Sophie Franz, Deceased, Respondent |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Reported at 359 Mo. 812 at 826.
Original Opinion of September 12, 1949, Reported at 359 Mo. 812.
On Motion for Rehearing or to Transfer.
The main complaint in appellants' motion is that the statement in the opinion, last paragraph, that the relationship of creditor and debtor, if there be liability came into existence on or prior to June 22, 1931, causes the opinion to conflict with Re Franz' Estate, 359 Mo. 362 221 S.W. 2d 739, and to deprive appellants of their property without due process of law, stressing Shelley v Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1, 14, 68 S.Ct. 836, 92 L.Ed. 1161; and Brinkerhoff-Faris Trs. & Svgs. Co. v. Hill, 281 U.S. 673, 679, 50 S.Ct. 451, 74 L.Ed. 1107. We think not.
The statement appears in the discussion involving the statute of limitations in connection with the absence of any relationship owed the Trustees by the beneficiaries staying limitations. Our statutes of limitations apply to suits in equity as well as actions at law. Ludwig v. Scott (Mo.), 65 S.W. 2d 1034, 1035[1]; Rogers v Brown, 61 Mo. 187. Appellants, the Trustees, sought $ 810,001.22 compensation for services as Trustees in a proceeding instituted in the probate court in Re Franz' Estate, supra. In the instant case appellants seek a reasonable compensation, a total of $ 88,309.75 according to the submitted final account. The respondents in Re Franz' Estate, supra, contended, among other things: "Courts of equity have exclusive jurisdiction to allow compensation to trustees of a nontestamentary trust"; and we considered a court of equity and not the probate court was the proper forum to determine the controversy under the record there presented. Re Franz' Estate, supra. Consult 4 (Pt. 2) Bogert, Trusts and Trustees (1948), 206, 207. We find no statement in Re Franz' Estate, supra, whether under the facts and issues of that record the relationship was that of creditor and debtor or not. Under the instant record the Trustees made delivery of the trust res in conformity with the trust instrument and submitted a final account bearing date of June 22, 1931. They filed the instant action for compensation twelve years...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Salem United Methodist Church v. Bottorff
...back to Laura Port was necessary to provide a marketable title. A trustee has legal title to a trust's res. See Simmons v. Friday, 359 Mo. 812, 224 S.W.2d 90 (1949). Failure to satisfy this requirement is fatal to Maple Tree's theory that the deed of trust revoked the Maple Tree, 821 S.W.2d......
-
Maple Tree Investments, Inc. v. Port
...back to Laura Port was necessary to provide a marketable title. A trustee has legal title to a trust's res. See Simmons v. Friday, 359 Mo. 812, 224 S.W.2d 90 (1949). Failure to satisfy this requirement is fatal to Maple Tree's theory that the deed of trust revoked the trust. Hence, we affir......