Bock v. Columbia Brewing Co.

133 A. 516, 99 N.J. Eq. 617, 14 Stock. 617, 1926 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 140
New Jersey Court of Chancery·Decided May 21, 1926·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

This is an application for allowances to counsel and receivers in the matter of the dissolution of the Columbia Brewing Company.

This was a subsidiary of the New Jersey Refrigerating Company, and its stock was owned by the refrigerating company. In the winding up of the affairs of that company it became necessary to appoint receivers for the subsidiary company in order that its assets might be sold and turned over to the parent corporation.

I appointed the same receivers whom I had appointed in the matter of the refrigerating company. They sold the property for $56,000, taking a small payment in cash and a purchase-money mortgage of $42,000.

The receivers ask for $2,500 each and counsel for $5,000, and they have submitted statements which, in their opinion, justify these allowances. It should be noted that the amount asked for, $10,000, is nearly eighteen per cent. of the corpus of the estate.

While I have no doubt that the receivers and their counsel did excellent work and sold the property to the best advantage, I believe such a percentage of the estate for allowances is excessive. Consideration must be given, not only to the work done, but to the quantum of the estate. Unger v. NewlinHaines Co., 95 N.J. Eq. 16.

I will allow the receivers $1,000 each and counsel $2,500. *Page 619

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

Bock v. Columbia Brewing Co., 133 A. 516, 99 N.J. Eq. 617, 14 Stock. 617, 1926 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 140 (N.J. Ct. App. 1926).

133 A. 516 (Bock v. Columbia Brewing Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re New Jersey Refrigerating Co.
142 A. 176 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1928)
Landsman v. Globe Art Mfg. Co.
141 A. 313 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1928)