Texas Ry Co v. Marlor
Decision Date | 19 December 1887 |
Citation | 31 L.Ed. 303,123 U.S. 687,8 S.Ct. 311 |
Parties | TEXAS & P. RY. CO. v. MARLOR. 1 |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
John F. Dillon and W. S. Pierce, Jr., for plaintiff in error.
J. R. Dos Passos, for defendant in error.
This is a writ of error to the circuit court of the United States for the Southern district of New York, brought by the Texas & Pacific Railway Company, a corporation organized and existing under acts of the congress of the United States, to review a judgment entered against it by that cou t on the seventeenth of September, 1884, in favor of Henry S. Marlor, for the sum of $23,204.99. The suit was commenced in a court of the state of New York, in November, 1883, and was removed into the circuit court by the defendant. It was tried by that court, on filing a written waiver of a jury on an agreed statement of facts, and on the depositions of witnesses. The material facts of the case, as found by the circuit court, are as follows: Prior to the first of July, 1883, the plaintiff became the owner of 150 bonds issued by the defendant, and entitled to the interest due thereon on the first days of July in the years 1882 and 1883, according to the terms and conditions of the bonds. Each bond was in the following form:
'
'The Texas & Pacific Railway Company.
'Chartered by act of Congress.
'Seven Per Cent. Income and Land-Grant Bond on the Eastern Division.
'The Texas & Pacific Railway Company hereby acknowledges itself to be indebted to _____, of _____, or assigns, in the sum of one thousand dollars, lawful money of the United States of America; which sum the said company promises to pay the said _____, or assigns, at the office of the company in the city of New York, on the first day of January, A. D. (1915,) one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, with interest thereon at the rate of seven per cent. per annum, payable annually on the first day of July in each year, as provided in the mortgage hereinafter mentioned.
'In witness whereof, the said the Texas & Pacific Railway Company has caused these presents to be duly executed, sealed with its corporate seal, and attested by the proper signatures of its president or vice-president and secretary, this fifteenth day of May, A. D. 1875.
'FRANK BOND, Vice-President.
'Attest: C. E. SATTERLEE, Secretary.'
Upon each bond was a certificate signed by the trustees in the mortgage mentioned in the bond, in the following form:
'CERTIFICATE OF TRUSTEES.
The complaint alleged that the defendant did not exercise the option given to it by the bonds to pay the plaintiff the interest in scrip upon the 150 bonds, which became due and payable on July 1, 1882, or that which became due and payable on July 1, 1883, and demanded judgment for the interest in money, with accrued interest from those days respectively. There was no formal presentment by the plaintiff of the bonds in suit for the payment of interest on July 1, 1882, or on July 1, 1883, or at any other time. Shortly after each of those days the treasurer of the defendant, at the defendant's office, notified the holders of the bonds that it was not prepared to pay interest, as the earnings of the railway were not sufficient; and no action was taken by it in reference to the issue of scrip. Before the commencement of this suit, and induced by the suggestion that suits were about to be brought to recover the interest on the bonds, and on or about October 12, 1883, the executive committee of the defendant's board of directors adopted a resolution providing for the payment of the interest in question in scrip. Notice of this action on the part of the defendant was given to the plaintiff and to the bondholders generally, by publication, before this suit was brought, and the defendant notified the plaintiff of its willingness to deliver to him his scrip for the interest in suit, and tendered it to him at the trial, but he refused to receive it.
On the twenty-ninth of March, 1875, the defendant had outstanding 9.252 land-grant bonds, secured by a first mortgage upon all the lands in the state of Texas which it had acquired, or might thereafter acquire, by virtue of its consolidation with the Southern Pacific Railroad Company and the Southern Transcontinental Railway Company, or by virtue of its consolidation with, or purchase of, any other railroad company in the state of Texas, under the authority of the acts of congress of March 3, 1871, and May 2, 1872; also certain construction bonds, secured by a first mortgage upon its lines of railway and their appurtenances east of Fort Worth in the state of Texas. Those land-grant bonds and construction bonds were fixed obligations, with coupons for semi-annual interest, and the mortgages which secured them contained provisions for fore- closure, in case of default in the payment of such interest. On the twenty-ninth of March, 1875, the road of the defendant was only partially completed to Fort Worth, about 325 miles of it being then built and in operation. The defendant had made default in paying the interest on the bonds above mentioned. On tht day, the stockholders met and passed the following resolution: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Haskins v. Dern
...he is absolutely bound to pay the stipulated amount. Pearson v. Williams, 24 Wend., 244; Stevens v. Herzler, 19 So. 838; Texas, etc., Co. v. Marlor, 123 U.S. 687; v. Smith, 22 Vt. 302; Cleveland, etc., Co. v. Kelly, 5 Ohio St., 180; Nobles v. Bates, 7 Cow, 307; Taylor v. Smith, 49 N.Y.S. 41......
-
Quadrant Structured Prods. Co. v. Vertin
...through a foreclosure of the mortgage is a different inquiry, and not relevant now [to the suit on the bond]”), aff'd, 123 U.S. 687, 8 S.Ct. 311, 31 L.Ed. 303 (1887).Other jurisdictions reached the same result. See, e.g., Kimber v. Gunnell Gold Mining & Milling Co., 126 F. 137, 138 (8th Cir......
-
W. Bateson & Co. v. Baldwin Forging & Tool Co.
... ... entitled to damages until it had so performed the contract ... Citing 15 Cyc. 1086, Texas, etc., R. Co. v. Marlor, ... 123 U.S. 687, 8 S.Ct. 311, 31 L.Ed. 303, and 1 Beach on ... Contracts, section 772 ... The ... ...
-
New York Trust Co. v. Michigan Traction Co.
... ... to perform its agreements with reference to maintaining and ... operating its property so as to protect and continue its ... franchises. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Marlor, ... 123 U.S. 687, 8 Sup.Ct. 311, 31 L.Ed. 303; Dow v. Memphis ... R.R. Co. (C.C.) 20 F. 260; Guardian Trust Co. v ... ...
-
Holdout Panic.
...it enables issuers to access the market more quickly, even if the debt is registered later. (44) See Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Marlor, 123 U.S. 687, 701, 8 S. Ct. 311, 319, 31 L. Ed. 303 (1887) ("We are also of opinion that no demand by the plaintiff was necessary to entitle him to the paym......