Chicago-Texas Land & Lumber Co. v. Robertson

Fifth Circuit

Chicago-Texas Land & Lumber Co. v. Robertson

169 F. 287, 94 C.C.A. 577, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4579

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 23, 1909

DocketNo. 1,840

StatusPublished

This text of 169 F. 287 (Chicago-Texas Land & Lumber Co. v. Robertson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chicago-Texas Land & Lumber Co. v. Robertson, 169 F. 287, 94 C.C.A. 577, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4579 (5th Cir. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The bill in this case is one to cancel deeds of real estate sold to pay debts of complainant which were an admitted charge upon the lands conveyed, and it is without equity, in that complainant does not even offer to restore the large sums of money paid out for its benefit in satisfaction of such admitted legal charges. Under the evidence, Matthews is an innocent purchaser, and is entitled to protection in a court of equity. Greeson, although fully acquainted with the trust relations of Robertson, was a creditor of the complainant, and in all his dealings with the complainant and Trustee Robertson appears to have acted at arm’s length.

The charges in the bill against Robertson for violation of trust, conspiracy for the purpose of making money, and bad faith are wholly unsustained by the evidence, which, on the contrary, shows that Robertson, as trustee, dealt with his trust fairly and honestly.

The decree of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The bill in this case is one to cancel deeds of real estate sold to pay debts of complainant which were an admitted charge upon the lands conveyed, and it is without equity, in that complainant does not even offer to restore the large sums of money paid out for its benefit in satisfaction of such admitted legal charges. Under the evidence, Matthews is an innocent purchaser, and is entitled to protection in a court of equity. Greeson, although fully acquainted with the trust relations of Robertson, was a creditor of the complainant, and in all his dealings with the complainant and Trustee Robertson appears to have acted at arm’s length.

The charges in the bill against Robertson for violation of trust, conspiracy for the purpose of making money, and bad faith are wholly unsustained by the evidence, which, on the contrary, shows that Robertson, as trustee, dealt with his trust fairly and honestly.

The decree of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 F. 287, 94 C.C.A. 577, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4579, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-texas-land-lumber-co-v-robertson-ca5-1909.