Smith v. Urquhart, (1937)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 12
Judges: BUFORD, J.
Attorneys: Horrell Horrell, for Appellant;
Paul W. Harvey, for Appellee.
Filed: Oct. 28, 1937
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: The appeal brings for review decree, as follows: "1. That this Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties to this suit. *Page 743 "2. That the rulings of the Court are noted in the Special Examiner's report in the handwriting of the Court, and the respective parties are allowed an exception to the rulings so made wherein they are adverse to said party. "3. That the charge of the Special Examiner in the sum of $25.00 for his services rendered is approved. "4. That the Merchants
Summary: The appeal brings for review decree, as follows: "1. That this Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties to this suit. *Page 743 "2. That the rulings of the Court are noted in the Special Examiner's report in the handwriting of the Court, and the respective parties are allowed an exception to the rulings so made wherein they are adverse to said party. "3. That the charge of the Special Examiner in the sum of $25.00 for his services rendered is approved. "4. That the Merchants B..
More
Were it not for the prior agreement of the predecessor liquidator, the Chancellor would not have been justified in allowing interest on the preferred
claim, there being no showing that the $15,000.00 was invested in interest bearing property at the time the bank was placed in the hands of the liquidator for winding up. See Everglades Cypress Co. v. Tunnicliffe, 107 Fla. 675, 148 So. 192; Bryan v. Duncan,106 Fla. 357, 143 So. 353. Nor should a preferred claim ordinarily be ordered paid out of the assets of an insolvent bank without consideration being given to the effect of such order on the claims or equities of other claimants of the same class. But this claim was founded upon an express written agreement with the preceding liquidator which agreed to pay interest and which had been approved by the Comptroller and ordered to be carried out by an order of court. And the present order of court allows 75 per cent. of the principal, which was the amount which had been paid to other claimants of the same class, thus showing that their rights had been considered.
Source: CourtListener
