Prudence Co. v. Central Hanover Bank

237 A.D. 595, 262 N.Y.S. 311, 1933 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10673
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 15, 1933
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 237 A.D. 595 (Prudence Co. v. Central Hanover Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Prudence Co. v. Central Hanover Bank, 237 A.D. 595, 262 N.Y.S. 311, 1933 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10673 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Opinion

Martin, J.

We are called upon to determine whether, upon the statement of facts submitted herein, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment requiring the defendant Central Hanover Bank and Trust Company of New York, as trustee, to pay the sum of $889,551.96 in cash, out of certain pledged property, or whether the defendants, the trustee and a representative of the bondholders, are entitled to a judgment in their favor.

The trust indenture provides for the issuing by plaintiff, The Prudence Company, Inc., of guaranteed collateral trust five and one-half per cent gold bonds in denominations of $500, $1,000 or any multiple of $1,000 in an aggregate principal amount of not exceeding $15,000,000, due and payable on May 1, 1961. The bonds are guaranteed as to principal, sinking fund and interest by Realty Associates. They are also collaterally secured by bonds, mortgages, cash and securities assigned or delivered from time to time by The Prudence Company, Inc., to the trustee, the collateral being designated the pledged property. Bonds amounting to $13,800,000 are still outstanding.

There has been no default by plaintiff, it having paid or caused to be paid the interest on bonds and complied with the sinking fund requirements.

The trust indenture contemplates that plaintiff may substitute security or withdraw collateral in excess of the amount required to be kept with the trustee. Plaintiff is a company which loans [597]*597money secured by mortgages. As it reinvests funds, its business requires it to secure other capital for further issues of bonds, and it asserts it must carry on its business if its obligations under the trust indenture are to be fulfilled. With this in view, the trust indenture was undoubtedly drawn, one of the purposes being to allow plaintiff to make withdrawals of cash from the pledged property,” provided the amount of security required be kept with the trustee.

Under the indenture, no real estate mortgage is acceptable by the trustee if the amount of principal thereof is more than seventy-five per cent of the appraised value of the realty mortgaged, appraisals to be as of the time of the deposit with the trustee. It is also provided that no mortgage of real estate is to be accepted as collateral for more than eighty-three and one-third per cent of its principal sum. On these terms, real estate mortgages and interests in such mortgages were accepted by the trustee at a total value fixed as of the time of deposit of some $8,000,000 to $10,000,000.

The pertinent sections of the trust agreement are as follows:

Article 3, section 2, which deals with the valuation of collateral, provides in part as follows: “ All of the Pledged Property herein-above described shall, for the purpose of determining the amount of bonds to be delivered from time to time by the Trustee as hereinafter provided, and for the purpose of determining the right of the Company to withdrawals and substitutions as hereinafter provided, be valued at the market value thereof as of the time when such determination is, or is required to be made, except that the securities mentioned in subdivisions A, D, E and F above set forth shall, for such purpose, be valued at eighty-three and one-third percentum (83 1 /3%) of the face amount of the principal thereof due and unpaid, and the face value or amount of all building loan bonds and mortgages shall be deemed to be increased over the amount previously advanced thereon by the face amount of all advances as and when thereafter made thereon. If any part of the principal of any such bond and mortgage is paid, the face value of such bond and mortgage shall be deemed to be reduced by the amount of such payment so made on account of the principal thereof.”

Article 3, section 3, which relates to pledged property to be deposited with the trustee, provides as follows: “ The value (determined as hereinabove provided in Article Three hereof) of the Pledged Property shall at all times be equal to the face amount of the principal of all Bonds then issued and outstanding hereunder, and the Company shall from time to time make such additions to the Pledged Property so that the value (determined as_herein[598]*598above provided in Article Three hereof) of the Pledged Property shall not at any time be less than the face amount of the Bonds issued and outstanding hereunder.”

Article 9, subdivision (g), which relates to the maintenance of collateral, provides in part as follows: The Company will at all times keep and maintain the Pledged Property under the terms of this Trust Indenture in accordance with the requirements herein-before specified which shall have a total aggregate value (determined as in Article Three hereof) which shall not at any time be less than the face amount of the principal of all bonds then issued and outstanding hereunder. * * * If at any time the value of such Pledged Property (determined as in Article Three hereof) shall be less than the face amount of the principal of all bonds then issued and outstanding hereunder, the Company will forthwith deposit additional Pledged Property to the extent required by the terms of this Trust Indenture.”

Article 9, subdivision (j), provides: The Company will also do, execute, acknowledge and deliver, or cause to be done, executed, acknowledged and delivered, all and every such further acts, deeds, transfers and assurances for the better assuring, conveying and confirming unto the Trustee all and singular the Pledged Property as the Trustee shall reasonably require for better accomplishing the provisions and purposes of this Trust Indenture and for better securing the payment of the principal and interest of the Bonds.”

The classifications of collateral are: (a) Real estate mortgages; (b) cash; (c) securities issued by the United States, the State or city of New York, bank certificates of deposit and acceptances of a stated kind, and secured notes approved by the trustee; (d) issues of State and municipalities, outside of New York State, and of Federal land banks approved by the trustee; (e) bonds of Prudence Bonds Corporation, guaranteed by plaintiff, and (f) legal investments for New York trustees, other than those included in classification (c).

It is stipulated that the market value of the mortgaged real estate has declined since the time the mortgages were deposited to such a point that the unpaid principal sum of each mortgage is more than seventy-five per cent of the present market value of the mortgaged real estate. Impairment is admitted, but to what extent has not been determined for the reason that the plaintiff contends that in figuring the amount of collateral on hand, value is to be determined as of the time of deposit, and claims the right to make withdrawals of cash from the pledged property no matter how much depreciation has occurred in the value of the real estate securing mortgages.

[599]*599According to the trustee, plaintiff’s position requires a determination that, with respect to groups A, D, E and F, collateral be valued at eighty-three and one-third per cent of its face value, even though it may have become valueless subsequent to deposit. We should hesitate to arrive at such determination inasmuch as United States bonds and bank acceptances must be taken at the market value whenever requests are made for substitution or withdrawals of collateral.

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

Related

Rievman v. Burlington Northern Railroad
618 F. Supp. 592 (S.D. New York, 1985)
In Re Realty Associates Securities Corporation
66 F. Supp. 416 (E.D. New York, 1946)
President and Directors of Manhattan Co. v. Kelby
147 F.2d 465 (Second Circuit, 1945)
Empire Properties Corp. v. Manufacturers Trust Co.
262 A.D. 166 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1941)
In re Baltimore & O. R.
34 F. Supp. 154 (D. Maryland, 1940)
Marine Midland Trust Co. v. Alleghany Corporation
28 F. Supp. 680 (S.D. New York, 1939)
Prudence Co. v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.
238 A.D. 821 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
237 A.D. 595, 262 N.Y.S. 311, 1933 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10673, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prudence-co-v-central-hanover-bank-nyappdiv-1933.