Case ID: f_297/html/1008-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

EQUITABLE TRUST CO. OF NEW YORK v. GREEN STAR S. S. CORPORATION et al. In re AMERICAN MARINE INS. CO.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    February 21, 1924.)
    No. 240.
    Corporations <®=^486 — Holders of obligations to which sinking fund applicable held entitled to interest after obligations became due.
    "Where, under corporate mortgage, payments to sinking fund were for payment of bonds and interest coupons due on nest interest payment date, holders of such obligations held entitled to interest on the fund after tbeir obligations became due.
    ¿35F01' other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
    Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
    Suit in equity by the Equitable Trust Company of New York, trustee under the first mortgage of the Green Star Steamship Corporation, dated October 15, 1919, against the Green Star Steamship Corporation and another, in which the American Marine Insurance Company filed a petition to intervene pro interessé suo. From a decree (291 Fed. 650) allowing intervention, complainant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Murray, Prentice & Aldrich, of New York City (Winthrop W. Aid-rich and William M. Evarts, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
    Chadbourne, Hunt & Jaeckel, of New York City (William M. Chadbourne, of New York City, and Carroll R. Ward, of counsel), for receiver.
    Kirlin, Woolsey, Campbell, Hickox & Keating, of New York City (Charles T. Cowenhoven, Jr., William H. Arnold, and H. Maurice Eridlund, all of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.
    ' Before ROGERS, MANTON, and MAYER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

As this appeal brings up for consideration the construction of a particular mortgage, wherein is not involved any question of general interest, we think it is sufficient to state that we agree with the conclusion of the court below as to the priority of the holders of bonds of series C.

In respect of the question of interest, the only debatable matter-might have been whether the date should be April 13, 1921, or April 15, 1921; but we understand that no point is made in this respect, because of the very small amount involved, and therefore we shall leave the date of April 15, 1921, undisturbed in the decree below,,

We agree with the conclusion of the court below that the intervener was entitled to be paid by the trustee interest at the rate of 6 per centum per annum from April 15, 1921. We also think that it was well that the decree contained the reservation in paragraph 7.

The decree is affirmed, with costs to the intervener appellee.