Williams v. Callan Court Co.
Williams v. Callan Court Co.
Opinion of the Court
A lot, with an unfinished dwelling-house • thereon, was levied upon under an execution in favor of the Colonial Trust Company against Brackett, and the sheriff was advertising it for sale under this levy. Marbut-Williams Lumber Company filed its petition for injunction and receiver against the trust company and Brackett, in which this company alleged, that it furnished to Brackett materials to the amount of $2,800, which were used by
TTpon the hearing of the application for receiver and injunction, it was agreed that all parties having claims for labor and material should be made parties defendant; and that, if no good cause to the contrary be shown, a receiver would be appointed to take charge of the property and complete the house. A later hearing of the matter was set for June 28, 1924. At this hearing no parties
The receiver was an officer of Marbut-Williams Company. He took charge of the property, and expended $3600.82 toward completing the dwelling. At the time of and before his appointment as receiver, Williams submitted to the court an estimate of the cost of labor and material necessary to complete the house, amounting to $3245. This estimate included the cost of the installation of electric fixtures. This property was sold by the sheriff under the execution of the trust company, and was bought in by Callan Court Company for $7000. By order of the court $3088 was paid to the trust company in payment of its conceded first lien upon this property.
The receiver brought a rule to distribute the balance of the proceeds of the sale, which amounted to $3912. In his rule he claimed that he completed the house at an expenditure of $3600.82, and that this amount should be awarded him out of the above balance; and that he should be allowed out of this fund ten per cent, of the amount expended by him in completing the house, as compensation for his services as receiver in supervising its completion. The Callan Court Company resisted these claims of the receiver, on the ground that he had entered a contract with the parties, .by which he was to complete this house; that he was to have a lien second to that of the trust company, and superior to other liens, for $3245 of the cost of completing it, and a lien for any excess over $3245 which it might take to finish the building, which was to be a third lien and inferior to its lien; and that the receiver had
The Callan Court Company, after buying this property, expended $670.93 in completing the house, and insisted that this sum should be deducted from the amount to be awarded the receiver. This sum included $70 for interior finish, $153.82 for electric fixtures, and $53 for screening. In his judgment distributing this fund the trial judge deducted these amounts from the $3245 for which the receiver was to have a lien superior to the claim of this company; directed the balance to be paid to the receiver, less a court expense of $6; and refused to provide any compensation'to the receiver. To this judgment the receiver excepted, on the grounds that it was contrary to law, contrary to equity, and without evidence to support it. The specific assignment of error is that the court had no authority to deduct from the amount expended by the receiver in completing this house, as the receiver was acting for the court, and was not under any contract to complete the house according to any certain specifications, but what was -to be done toward completing it was a matter resting in his judgment and discretion. He insists that he should have been allowed the full amount expended by him in completing the building, and that he should have been allowed compensation for his services as receiver in supervising the work on the building.
Williams was more than the receiver of the court. Under the facts he occupied the dual role of receiver and contractor. The Marbut-Williams Company, of which he was an officer, applied for the receivership. His company thought it would be benefited by the appointment of a receiver. To secure the consent of the parties to his appointment as receiver, he submitted an estimate of the cost of labor and material necessary to complete the dwelling. This estimate amounted to $3245. With this estimate before him, the court appointed Williams receiver, and authorized him to complete the house. For the cost of labor and material, to the extent of said amount, he was to have a lien on the property second only
The trial judge did right also in not awarding to the receiver the full amount expended by him in his effort to finish this structure, to the-exclusion of the claim of Callan Court Company. For the excess of this expenditure over the $3245 the receiver would only have been entitled to a lien subject to the lien of this company. As there was no fund on which this lien could operate, no award from the funds subject to distribution could be made in favor of the receiver.
By the express terms of the order appointing the receiver, no expenses incurred in this receivership should come ahead of the claim of the Callan Court Company, except the $3245 for labor and material furnished by the receiver in finishing the dwelling. As any compensation to the receiver would have come ahead of this claim, the judge, under the letter of the order appointing the receiver, could not allow the same. It was a case of getting blood out of a turnip, which is an impossible feat, even in a receivership proceeding. Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- WILLIAMS, receiver v. CALLAN COURT CO.
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published