In re Grinnell

11 F. Cas. 51, 7 Ben. 42
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Grinnell. Read the opinion of the Court — 11 F. Cas. 50
District Court, S.D. New York·Decided November 15, 1873·Published

Opinion

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

This is a case of voluntary bankruptcy, the petition in which was filed on the 15th of October, 1873. The formal adjudication was made on the next day. On the 9th of September, 1873, the firm of Blake Brothers & Co. loaned to the firm of George Bird Grinnell & Co., a firm composed of the bankrupts as general partners, and of a special partner, the sum of $100,000, payable on demand, with simple interest, on a pledge and hypothecation of certain collateral securities deposited with the former firm by the latter firm, to secure the loan, the securities consisting of certain bonds and shares of stock. On the 18th of September, 1873, more shares of stock were added. Some- of the' shares of stock have been sold, and their proceeds applied towards the payment of the loan, and there is now due thereon $7(5.393.17, with interest from September 30th, 1873. On the 15th of September, 1873, a further loan was made of $25,000, payable on demand, with simple interest, on the pledge and hypothecation, as collateral security, of certain other shares of stock. No part of that loan has been repaid. On the 17th of September, 1873, a further loan was made of $150,000, payable on demand, with simple interest, on a pledge and hypothecation, as collateral security, of certain other shares of stock and certain other bonds. On the 18th of September, 1S73, more shares of stock were added. Some of the shares of stock have been sold, and the interest on some of the bonds has been collected, and the proceeds applied towards the payment of the last-named loan, and there is now due thereon $108,781.84, with interest from October 4th, 1873. On the 17th of September, 1873, a further loan Was made of $75,000, payable on demand, with .simple interest, on a pledge and hypothecation, as collateral security, of certain other shares of stock. On the 18th of September, 1873, more shares of stock were added. Some of the shares of stock have been sold, and the proceeds applied towards the payment of the last-named loan, and there is now due thereon $49,528, with interest from September 30th, 1873. All the said securities, except the shares of stock so deposited on the 18th of September, 1873, were deposited simultaneously with the making of the loans. To further secure said loans, and to cover any deficiency there might be on either of them, after applying thereto the specific securities on which it was made, and specially relating to it, the borrowers, on or about the ISth of September, 1873, deposited with, and pledged and hypothecated to. the lenders, certain other shares of stock and certain other bonds, and, on the 19th of September, 1873, made a further pledge and hypothecation to, and deposit with, the lenders, of certain other bonds. The securities not so sold are still held by the lenders. Each of the loans was made payable on demand, and under an understanding and agreement between the lenders and the borrowers, that, in case of any default in paying the same on demand, the lenders might immediately reimburse themselves for the amount due to them thereon, by a sale of the collaterals given to secure it. On the 20th of September, 1873, the lenders demanded from the borrowers the payment of the amounts due on all of the loans, but none of them were paid.

A petition is now presented to this court, by Blake Brothers & Co., setting forth the above facts, and further stating that they did not. at the time of the taking place of any of the foregoing transactions, know, or sus[52]*52pect, or believe, and had not been informed, that the borrowing firm, or either of its members, were or was insolvent, or in contemplation of insolvency, or that bankruptcy proceedings were contemplated, or could properly be had by or against them; that they, during all of said times, and especially when the loans were negotiated, were in good standing and credit; that the petitioners supposed, and had good reason to suppose, that they were entirely solvent, and free from embarrassment; that the first meeting of the creditors of the bankrupts will not be held until the 14th of November, 1S73; that the petitioners, pursuant to the provisions of the bankruptcy act, have duly proved the said indebtedness, as a debt with security, as above described, against the estate of the bankrupts; and that they desire to sell the said securities, or so many of them as may be necessary for such purpose, and reimburse themselves therefrom for the amount of said indebtedness, and desire that the value of said securities may be ascertained by a sale to be made in such manner as this court may direct. The petitioners' pray that an order may be made by this court, «authorizing and empowering them to sell the said securities, or so many and such parts of them as may be necessary to be sold, in order to reimburse themselves the amount due to them on account of said loans, and to.make such sale at public auction, in the city of New York, after three days’ notice of the time and place of such sale, by publication thereof in such-newspapers, in said city, as the court may designate for that purpose, and after such other notice thereof, and in such manner, in other respects, as the court may direct. Notice of the presenting of the petition, and of a motion for the order prayed for, was served on the attorneys for the bankrupts. They did not appear on the motion. The first meeting of creditors not having been held, no as-signee in bankruptcy has, as yet, been appointed or elected.

This is an application to the court to direct a sale of the property, so as to ascertain its value, as between the pledgees of it and the estate of the bankrupts, in order to arrive at a basis for determining whether the pledgees will remain creditors of the estate, after deducting such value from their debt, or whether such value will pay the debt and leave a surplus for the estate. The application is supposed by the petitioners to be such an one as is provided for by the 20th section of the act, which contains this language: “When a creditor has a mortgage or pledge of real or personal property of the bankrupt, or a lien thereon, for securing the payment of a debt owing to him from the bankrupt, he shall be admitted as a creditor only for tile balance of the debt, after deducting the value of such property, to be ascertained by agreement between him and the assignee, or by7 a sale thereof, to be made in such manner as the court shall direct; or the creditor may release or convey his claim to the assignee upon such property, and be admitted to prove his whole debt. If the value of the property exceeds the sum for which it is so held as security, the assignee may release to the creditor the bankrupt’s right of redemption therein, on receiving such excess; or he may sell the property, subject to the claim of the creditor thereon; and, in either case, the as-signee and creditor, respectively, shall execute all deeds and writings necessary or proper to consummate the transaction. If the property is not so sold, or released and delivered up, the creditors shall not be allowed to prove any part of his debt.”

It is well settled, that a creditor holding security for a debt does not in any manner prejudice his claim to the security he holds by proving his debt, as a debt with security, and setting out in the proof the particulars of the security, and its estimated value. Such a form for a proof of debt is one of the forms prescribed by the supreme court. He does not, by such a form of proof, release his security, and prove his debt as an unsecured debt. On the contrary, such a form of proof insists on and maintains the security.

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

In re Grinnell, 11 F. Cas. 51, 7 Ben. 42 (S.D.N.Y. 1873).

11 F. Cas. 51 (In re Grinnell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.