Rowan v. Texas Orchard Development Co.

181 S.W. 871, 1915 Tex. App. LEXIS 1266
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 12, 1915
DocketNo. 6632. [fn*]
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 181 S.W. 871 (Rowan v. Texas Orchard Development Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rowan v. Texas Orchard Development Co., 181 S.W. 871, 1915 Tex. App. LEXIS 1266 (Tex. Ct. App. 1915).

Opinions

* Application for writ of error pending in Supreme Court. *Page 872 It is only necessary, for an understanding of this appeal, to state briefly the origin of this suit and the issues involved as disclosed by the pleadings.

The original petition was filed by plaintiff Lewis E. Gordon on December 14, 1911, against Texas Orchard Development Company, a corporation, D. Noble Rowan, Archibald H. Rowan, Southern Trust Company, and George E. Keeney. The plaintiff alleged that he was the owner of 100 shares of preferred stock in the orchard company of the par value of $100 per share, and that by the terms of an agreement entered into by the defendants he was entitled to have said stock redeemed from the proceeds of the sale of lands of the orchard company, or in lands of said company at a valuation of $27 per acre. It is alleged that, under the construction placed upon said agreement by the trust company, the trustee charged with its execution, it is impossible for the orchard company to continue its business of selling its lands and thereby meet its obligations to its creditors and the holders of its preferred stock. The appointment of a receiver for said company is prayed for, and the court is asked to construe the agreement before mentioned, and that the plaintiff and other holders of preferred stock of the company be adjudged the right to have said stock redeemed in lands of the company at the valuation of $27 per acre. On the day this petition was filed, the defendant orchard company having accepted service and entered an appearance, a receiver was appointed.

The plaintiff, on May 6, 1912, filed a first supplemental petition, amplifying the grounds contained in his original petition, and praying for the redemption of said $10,000 of preferred stock in the Texas Orchard Development Company held by him, and on September 10, 1912, a first amended original petition, with the same parties as defendants, and also against D. Noble Rowan and Archibald Rowan, individually, and against Margaret II. Rowan, Alice Rowan, Jeanne Rowan, Mrs. Lillian Rowan, reiterating and enlarging the grounds for relief set out in preceding pleadings, and praying for redemption in some form of said preferred stock. On May 6, 1912, Raymond G. Keeney filed his original petition in intervention, alleging his ownership of 900 shares of the preferred stock of said Texas Orchard Development Company, of the par value of $90,000, and praying for the redemption of the same upon the same grounds as prayed for by the plaintiff. On June 7, 1912, defendant George E. Keeney filed his first amended original answer and cross-bill, in which he claimed the ownership of certain indebtedness against the defendants and Rowan and the Texas Orchard Development Company, said indebtedness being: (1) Certain notes aggregating about $55,000 principal, alleged to be secured *Page 873 by a first lien under a deed of trust against the lands owned by the Texas Orchard Development Company; (2) indebtedness of $6,136.71, alleged to have been advanced by him to pay interest on the indebtedness of the Texas Orchard Development Company to the Rowans, trustees; (3) an indebtedness of about $4,400, alleged to have been paid by him as taxes upon the lands of said orchard company; (4) an indebtedness of $26,488.31 for money loaned by said defendant to said orchard company. The same causes of action were reiterated, and the grounds of relief amplified, in said defendant George E. Keeney's second amended original answer and cross-bill filed February 3, 1913. At various dates, pending the litigation, Interventions were filed by numerous creditors of the orchard company. On June 9, 1913, the receiver, on behalf of all such unsecured creditors, filed a plea of intervention, setting out the existence of such unsecured debts, the alleged unlawful character of the organization of the Texas Orchard Development Company in the matter of subscription to and payment for stock, and praying for a preference out of the proceeds of the sales of lands of the company in favor of said unsecured creditors as against the other parties to the suit. The defendants D. Noble Rowan and Archibald H. Rowan, as trustees, filed their original answer and cross-bill on June 9, 1913. In this pleading they asserted various defenses to the cause of action asserted by plaintiff, and by their cross-bill sought to recover back the lands involved in this controversy, or, in the alternative, a foreclosure of a vendor's lien on said land to secure the payment of purchase-money notes of the orchard company in the sum of $555,170.79.

From the foregoing pleadings the issues presented were briefly the following: (1) The right of the holders of preferred stock of the Texas Orchard Development Company to have said stock redeemed, that is, to have repaid to such holders of said preferred stock, in land or money, the amount paid by them to said corporation on their subscriptions for said stock, (2) the right of the defendant George E. Keeney and the intervening creditors to judgments for the various indebtedness alleged by them; (3) the right of the defendants Rowan as trustees to judgment for the lands conveyed to the Texas Orchard Development Company, or, in the alternative, judgment with foreclosure upon the vendor's lien notes executed to them for the purchase money of said lands; (4) the adjustment of the priorities between the holders of such of said indebtedness as should be found to be valid.

The trial was had before the district judge, without a jury. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were filed, covering about 100 pages in the transcript. Judgment was entered August 12, 1913. By the judgment the claims of the various parties were established, the lands of the Texas Orchard Development Company were ordered sold, and the proceeds directed to be applied as follows: (1) To the costs and expenses of the receivership, (2) to the defendant George E. Keeney the sum of $71,374.74; (3) to the defendants D. Noble Iowan and Archibald H. Rowan, as trustees, the sum of $647,329.11, principal and interest, and the sum of $67,302.45 attorneys' fees upon their vendor's lien notes. It being provided, however, that $151,000 of said amount should be paid into the registry of the court to be held for the redemption of the preferred stock of the plaintiff Gordon and intervener Raymond G. Keeney, and the defendant A. H. Rowan, unless said land should be sold subject to the right of said preferred stock to be redeemed in land, thereby giving the preferred stock and the accumulated dividends thereon the preference over said vendor's lien notes; (4) it was provided that out of said sum of $151,000 decreed to be paid to the holders of said preferred stock tile unsecured creditors should be paid; (5) the order of sale was stayed by order of the court until the final disposition of this cause upon appeal. From this judgment the defendants D. Noble Rowan and Archibald H. Rowan, as trustees and individually, and the other defendants Rowan, have appealed. The defendants Gordon and George E. Keeney have also appealed from a portion of the judgment.

The material facts disclosed by the record are as follows: The land involved consists of about 25,000 acres of land in Brazoria county, Tex. Prior to August 1, 1907, said lands were the separate property of Mrs. Margaret H. Rowan, wife of appellant D. Noble Rowan. On August 1, 1907, said Margaret H. Rowan, the owner of said lands as her separate property, joined by other members of her family, executed a deed in trust to D. Noble Rowan, her husband, and George W. Rowan and Archibald H. Rowan, her sons, as trustees. After the granting and descriptive clauses, said deed contained the following language:

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

Related

Oklahoma Hotel Building Co. v. Houghton
1949 OK 193 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1949)
Pioneer Building & Loan Ass'n v. Cowan
123 S.W.2d 726 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1938)
West Texas Utilities Co. v. Ellis
102 S.W.2d 234 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1937)
Grace Securities Corp. v. Roberts
164 S.E. 700 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1932)
Keys v. Tarrant County Building & Loan Ass'n
286 S.W. 593 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1926)
Keys v. Tarrant Cty. Bldg. Loan Ass'n
286 S.W. 593 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1926)
Booth v. Union Fibre Co.
171 N.W. 307 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181 S.W. 871, 1915 Tex. App. LEXIS 1266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowan-v-texas-orchard-development-co-texapp-1915.