Simmons v. Freer

2 D.C. 62
CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals
DecidedJuly 1, 1935
DocketEquity No. 57839
StatusPublished

This text of 2 D.C. 62 (Simmons v. Freer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Simmons v. Freer, 2 D.C. 62 (D.C. 1935).

Opinion

[63]*63FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS

LUHRING, J.

The Court finds that on the 7th day of November, 1930, the plaintiff, Laura A. Simmons, was the owner of the following described real estate in the District of Columbia, to wit:

Part of Lot 28 in Patterson Bayne, Jr. and others’ subdivision of part of square 920, as per plat recorded in Liber 24 folio 48 of the records of the office of the Surveyor of the District of Columbia, described as follows: Beginning for the same at a point distant 45.05 feet South on the East line of Eighth Street from its intersection with the South line of East Capitol Street, which point is the center of the division wall between houses Nos. 4 and 6, Eighth Street South East, and running thence South on said Eighth Street 24.64 feet; thence East at right angles to Eighth Street, 24 feet; thence North parallel to Eighth Street 24.64 feet; and thence west 24 feet to the beginning.

That on said 7th day of November, 1930, the said plaintiff, Laura A. Simmons, by her promissory note, and for value received, promised to pay to the defendant, James F. Freer, three years after date, the sum of Five Thousand Dollars, together with interest thereon at the rate of six per centum per annum until paid, payable semi-annually, and each installment of interest to bear interest after maturity, if not then paid, at the rate aforesaid.

That to secure the prompt payment of said note and interest when and as the same should become due and payable, and all costs and expenses incurred in respect thereto, including reasonable counsel fees, the said plaintiff, Laura A. Simmons, on said 7th day of November, 1930, executed and delivered to the defendants, E. Stuart Poston and Leroy Gaddis, as trustees, a deed of trust to the real estate herein-above described, in and upon the trusts in said deed declared, among others, that “upon any default or failure being made in the payment of the note or of any installment of principal [64]*64or interest thereon, when and as the same shall become due and payable . . . then and at any time thereafter the said parties of the second part (trustees Poston and Gaddis) . . . shall have the power and it shall be their duty thereafter to sell . . . the said described land and premises at public auction, upon such terms and conditions, in such parcels, at such time and places, and after such previous public advertisement as the parties of the second part (trustees Poston and Gaddis) . . . shall deem advantageous and proper; and to convey the same in fee simple, upon compliance with the terms of sale, to, and at the cost of, the purchaser or purchasers thereof, who shall not be required to see to the application of the purchase money and of the proceeds of said sale: Firstly, to pay all proper costs, charges, and expenses, including all fees and costs herein provided for, and all moneys advanced for taxes, insurance, and assessments . . .; Secondly, to pay whatever may then remain unpaid of said promissory note; . . . and Lastly, to pay the remainder of said proceeds, if any there be, to said party of the first part (Laura A. Simmons), her heirs or assigns, upon the delivery and surrender to the purchaser . . . of possession of the premises ...”

That by the terms of said deed of trust, the plaintiff, Laura A. Simmons, agreed, among other things, to pay all taxes and assessments, both general and special, that may be assessed against or become due on said land and premises during the continuance of said trust.

That because of the default of the plaintiff in the payment of the interest due on said note on the 7th day of November, 1932, and on the 7th day of May, 1933, and her default in the payment of taxes due on said property for the second half of 1931 and for the first and second halves of 1932 and 1933, the defendant trustees, by virtue of said deed of trust, on the 18th day of May, 1933, caused to be inserted in the Washington Herald, a newspaper of general [65]*65circulation in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, an advertisement for the sale of the real estate hereinabove described, at public auction, on the 29th day of May, 1933.

That on the 27th day of May, 1933, the plaintiff filed her bill in equity in this court wherein she sought to enjoin such sale and to declare the trust usurious and to remove the trustees. Said cause is Equity Number 55,740 on the Equity Docket of this court, and is entitled Laura A. Simmons v. James F. Freer, E. Stuart Poston, Trustee, and Leroy Gaddis, Trustee. The bill in said cause, in paragraph three thereof, alleged:

“That defendant Gaddis is agent for defendant Freer and has collected the interest for defendant Freer during the entire time and defendant Poston is agent for defendant Freer collecting rents from and handling all his properties and neither trustee is such disinterested party as fits him to be a trustee where defendant Freer is secured.”

That in answering said bill, the defendant trustees, Poston and Gaddis, among other things, stated under oath as follows:

“Further answering said bill of complaint, these defendants say that they have no personal interest in the property proposed to be foreclosed upon, or the proceeds therefrom; that their only interests are those of trustees as contemplated by the terms of the deed of trust; that, should either the Court or the holder of the note secured by said deed of trust desire, they are willing to resign as trustees; and that they attach hereto, as a part hereof, their tendered resignations, subject to acceptance by the Court and/or James F. Freer, holder of the note secured by the deed of trust aforesaid.”

The resignation tendered by said trustees, subject to acceptance by the Court or James F. Freer, reads as follows:

“We, E. Stuart Poston and Leroy Gaddis, trustees under and by virtue of a certain deed of trust duly recorded in Liber 6503, Folio 475, etc., of the Land Records of the District of Columbia, do hereby tender our resignation as trustees under said deed of trust.”

[66]*66That while said cause was pending, and on the 30th day of June, 1933, the defendant trustees sold said property under said deed of trust. The defendant Freer became the purchaser thereof, and a deed thereto was duly executed and delivered to him by the trustees, July 5th, 1933. Shortly thereafter, the defendant Freer instituted a landlord and tenant proceeding in the Municipal Court of the District of Columbia for possession of the property.

That on the 25th day of September, 1933, the plaintiff, Laura A. Simmons, filed in said Equity Cause No. 55,740, a pleading designated as an “Ancillary petition to Recover and Restore property and for contempt,” wherein she prayed that the sale on June 30, 1933 be declared null and void and vacated, and that the trustees, Poston and Gaddis, be adjudged in contempt of court.

That said cause (Equity No. 55,740) came on for final hearing before Mr. Justice Bailey, and on the 13th day of December, 1933, he rendered an opinion in writing, as follows:

“I do not think that the plaintiff has shown that she is entitled to the relief which she seeks. Even if the loan was usurious, she has made no tender of the amount due with legal interest, and she has failed to pay the taxes due upon the property.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 D.C. 62, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simmons-v-freer-dc-1935.