SYDNOR J. TUCKER, AS TRUSTEE OF THE ESTATE OF BULA E. CROKER, BANKRUPT, AND JOHN MAGEE, PETITIONERS,
v.
CROWN CORPORATION, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1941-02-28
Brown, C. J., Chapman, Thomas and Adams, J. J., concur.
146 Fla. 329 Florida Supreme Court (1941) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 200 So. 844
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy trustee and judgment creditor may assert the defense of usury against a mortgage creditor's claim to a surplus foreclosure fund, and that the trial court erred in appointing a receiver over property already in the trustee's control.


Holding

The trustee in bankruptcy and judgment creditor may assert the defense of usury under the National Bankruptcy Act, and the trial court erred in appointing a receiver when the property was already in the trustee's hands with no showing of necessity or danger to the property.


Key Quotes

“The National Bankruptcy Act provides that a trustee in bankruptcy may plead, usury.”

Establishes the statutory authority for the trustee's right to assert the usury defense

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Bula E. Croker owned land subject to a mortgage held by Crown Corporation from a transaction on October 5, 1931. Foreclosure proceedings were institut…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
Terrell, J.

Terrell, J.

For full statement of the facts in this cause see Crown Corporation v. Robinson, 128 Fla. 249, 174 So. 737, and Tucker v. Crown Corporation, 136 Fla. 517, 183 So. 740. It appears that suit was instituted to foreclose a mortgage on certain lands owned by Bula E. Croker who was adjudged a bankrupt after the foreclosure was instituted-and Sydnor J. Tucker was appointed trustee in bankruptcy.

After the latter decision cited above, Tucker as trustee in bankruptcy and John Magee moved the court for permission to file an amended answer to the petition of Crown Corporation for- the purpose of raising the defense of usury in that certain transaction of October 5, 1931, between Crown Corporation and Bula E. Croker, they alleging that the availability of such a defense had only recently been discovered. The court denied Tucker’s and Magee’s motion and entered an order appointing E. G. Newell as receivei of the property in bankruptcy. Crown Corporation amended its petition to which Tucker and Magee filed answers setting up the usurious nature of the said contract. The court struck all reference to the defense of usury. All four orders are brought here for review on certiorari.

In this state of the record, the main question presented is whether or not a trustee in bankruptcy and judgment creditor may interpose the defense of usury to the claim of Crown Corporation to the surplus fund arising by reason of the mortgage foreclosure..

The National Bankruptcy Act provides that a trustee in bankruptcy may plead, usury. 11 U. S. C. A., .Sec. 1, et seq. We have examined many decisions that so hold and *331the principle that the statute of limitations does not operate against a defense of usury was approved by this Court in Beekner v. Kaufman, decided November 22, 1940, which was not available to the trial court at the time of his decision. It follows that on this point, the cause is reversed on authority of the last cited case.

The only other question was that of whether or not the trial court erred in the appointment of a receiver.

On this point the record has been examined and we find that the property was in the hands of the trustees in bankruptcy, it was not shown that a receiver was necessary, and there was no showing of danger to the property.

Writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment below quashed.

Brown, C. J., Chapman, Thomas and Adams, J. J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Magee v. Crown Corp., 151 Fla. 422 (Fla. 1942)
    …think the plea of usury as incorporated in the answer of the appellants in this case was, inferentially at least, held to be suffiicent by this Court in the case of Tucker as Trustee of Bula E. Croker, Bankrupt, [*428] et al., v. Crown Corporation, 146 Fla. 329, 200 So. 844. The evidence on this question is familiar to counsel for the parties and’ to the members to this Court, and no good purpose could be subserved by reviewing this evidence. Suffice it to say that in my opinion the plea of usury was suffi…
    1 / 2

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw