Barker v. Utah-Idaho Cent. R.

195 P. 635, 57 Utah 494, 1921 Utah LEXIS 80
CourtUtah Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 4, 1921
DocketNo. 3456
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 195 P. 635 (Barker v. Utah-Idaho Cent. R.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barker v. Utah-Idaho Cent. R., 195 P. 635, 57 Utah 494, 1921 Utah LEXIS 80 (Utah 1921).

Opinion

CORFMAN, C. J.

Plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant in the district court of Weber county to recover the amount alleged to be due and owing on certain interest coupon notes.

It appears that on the 2d day of July, 1918, the defendant, a railroad corporation, was known and designated by name as the Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company, and on said date in its then name made, executed and delivered 10 certain “six per cent, convertible improvement notes,” numbered M. 168 to M. 177, inclusive, for $1,000 each, payable on the 2d day of January, 1921, with interest thereon at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum, payable semiannually on the 2d days of January and July of each year, as evidenced by interest coupons thereto attached, of which were the coupons sued upon by the plaintiff in this action, and in form as illustrative thereof, the following:

“Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company. $30.

“Will pay to the bearer on the 2d day of January, 1918, at the Ogden Savings Bank, at Ogden, Utah, thirty dollars in gold coin of the United States of America, being six months interest due on its six per cent, convertible improvement note.

“No. M. -. (Serial Number.)

“$30. Royal Eccles, Secretary.”

It is alleged by the complaint that the plaintiff is the owner and holder of 30 of said interest coupons for $30 each, 10 of which were payable January 2, 1918, 10 July 2, 1918, and 10 January 2, 1919; that each of the coupons was duly presented, after becoming due, to said Ogden Savings Bank, but that the respective sums due thereon have not been paid, nor any part thereof. Judgment for the several amounts of the interest coupons, together with interest thereon at the legal rate for their respective due dates, was prayed for by plaintiff.

In substance, and in so far as may be pertinent to the questions raised on this appeal, the answer admitted the execution and delivery of the 10 convertible improvement notes, together with the 30 interest coupons attached thereto, but denied, on information and belief, that the plaintiff was the [496]*496owner and holder thereof, or that the coupons were presented for payment, or that they had not been paid. Attached to and made a part of the answer was a copy of one of the convertible improvement $1,000 notes, as illustrative of the 10 notes, and which in part is as follows-.

“Number -. M. -. (Serial.)
“United States of America,
“State of Utah.
“Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company.
“Six Per Cent. Convertible Improvement Note,
“Due January 2, 1921.
“Total Issue, Two Million Dollars.
“The Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company, for value received, hereby promises to pay to the bearer hereof one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in gold coin of the United States of America, or equal to the present standard of weight and fineness, on or before the 2d day of January, 1921, at the Ogden Savings Bank in the city of Ogden, county of Weber, state of Utah, and to pay interest thereon from the 2d day of July, 1916, at the rate of six per cent. (6%) per annum, at said place of payment, in like gold coin semiannually on the 2d day of July and the 2d day of January in each year upon presentation and surrender of the annexed interest coupons as they shall respectively mature. * * *
“This note is one of a series of coupon convertible improvement notes aggregating two million of dollars face value of principal known as the ‘six per cent, convertible improvement notes’ of the Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company, issued and to be issued under a trust agreement dated the 2d day of July, 1918, between the Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company and the Ogden Savings Bank of Ogden, Utah, as trustee.
“For description of the nature and extent of the security, the rights of the holders of said improvement notes and the terms and conditions upon which the same are issued, reference is hereby made to the said trust agreement.
“This note is subject to redemption at par and accrued interest at the option of the Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company, on January 2, 1917, or any subsequent interest day, on thirty (30) days’ notice, as provided in said trust agreement, and may, at the option of the Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company be converted into Ogden, Logan & Idaho Railway Company first mortgage gold bonds, issued or which may be issued under the provisions of section 4 and section 5 of article 1 of the trust indenture securing said gold bonds at the par value of said bonds, which said bonds are pledged under the provisions of said trust [497]*497agreement as collateral to secure tlie payment of the principal sum herein.”

It was further alleged in the answer as an affirmative defense that the plaintiff, in receiving the convertible notes with the interest coupons attached, accepted the provisions of the trust agreement therein mentioned and referred to, and also the provisions of a certain trust deed or indenture, copies of which were attached to and made a part of the answer; that by the acceptance of said notes, likewise, the provisions of the trust agreement and also of said trust indenture were accepted, and that the plaintiff thereby waived his right to and is estopped from any procedure for the collection of the amounts due upon the interest coupons other than that provided for in said trust agreement and in said trust indenture.

Section 12 of article 4 of the said trust indenture with respect to plaintiff’s right of procedure, contains the following provisions, to wit:

“No holder of any bond or coupon secured thereby shall have any right to institute any suit, action or proceeding in equity or at law for the foreclosure of this indenture, or for the execution of any trust hereof, or for the appointment of a receiver, or for any other remedy hereunder, unless such holder shall previously have given to the trustee written notice of such default and of the continuance thereof as hereinbefore provided; nor unless, also, the holders of one-fourth in amount of the bonds hereby secured then outstanding shall have made written request upon the trustee, and shall have offered to it a reasonable opportunity, either to proceed to exercise the powers hereinbefore granted, or to institute such action, suit or proceeding, in its own name (and the trustee shall have, refused or unreasonably delayed to comply with such request); nor unless, also, they or some one or more of the holders of said bonds, shall have offered to the trustee security and indemnity to the satisfaction of the trustee against the costs, expenses and, liabilities to be incurred therein or thereby, and such notification, request and offer of indemnity are hereby declared in every such case, at the option of the trustee, to be conditions precedent to the execution of the powers and trusts of this indenture for the benefit of the bondholders, and to any action or cause of action for foreclosure, or for the appointment of a receiver, or for any other remedy hereunder, it being understood and intended that no one or more holders of bonds and coupons shall have any right in any manner whatever [498]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Scott v. Platt
137 P.2d 975 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1943)
Reader v. District Court of Fourth Judicial District
94 P.2d 858 (Utah Supreme Court, 1939)
Hoyt v. Upper Marion Ditch Co.
76 P.2d 234 (Utah Supreme Court, 1938)
Florida National Bank v. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance
167 So. 378 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1936)
Moody v. Pacific Steamship Co.
24 P.2d 609 (Washington Supreme Court, 1933)
Meissner v. Ogden, L. & I. Ry. Co.
233 P. 569 (Utah Supreme Court, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
195 P. 635, 57 Utah 494, 1921 Utah LEXIS 80, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barker-v-utah-idaho-cent-r-utah-1921.