The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-11-01
THESE INVOLVE BANKS.
Pair of Decisions That Affect Bank
rupt Repositories.


Two of the decisions filed in the supreme
court yesterday involve insolvent b@nEs.
They are:
Minneapolis Base Ball Co., of Minneapolis,
Mimi plaintiff; Charles P. Wbitall ct al,
respondent, VS.. The City Bank ct al, de-
PENDANTS; Isaac c. Seelsy, intervenor, ap-
pellant.
Syllabus. Where an insolvent bank
ing corporation is proceeded against under
the provisions of c. S. 1894, oh. rs, sec, 1900,
and the obligations of its executory contract
Of leasing for term of years Is repudiated
by its receiver and TIE leased premises are
abandoned there is a final breach Of su b
contract The lessor should Immediately d.
clare the breach to be total ard in the in
solvency proceedings must be allowed to es-
tablish his claim for damages against the
estate.
2. The measure of damages in such a
case Is the difference he wen the ret stpu-
lat d in the lease and the actual rental value
for the balance Of the term.
5. There was no finding Of fact in this
case for an application Of this rule. Order
affirmed. Collins, j.
George B. Clark, substituted for George
Schwartz, assignee of Oscar Cassidy,
nsolvent respondent, National Citi-
zens Bank Of Mankato. appellant
Syllabus-In an acton by assignee in
insolvency to set aside bill of sale of per-
sonal property and to recover back payments
OF money owed by the insolvent to the de-
PENDANT, on the ground that they constitute
insolvent act OF 1851
Held that the evidence justified finding
thai the bill of sale constituted an unlawful
preference, as also the payments in so far
as they were not made out of the proceeds
of some prior valid security for the debt
If a mortgage CT chattel property files his
mortgage or takes actual and continued pos
session of the property, or its proceeds, un-
der his mortgage before any other right or
lien attaches it, 1t is coed against everybody,
If it was previously valid between the par
ties although the mortgage was not filed or
possession of the property taken at the time
of its execution, assuming that the only OBJ
lection to it is that the mortgage was not
filed or the possession of the property de-
livered TO the mortgage at the time Of the
execution of the mortgage.
According to the findings Of the court prior
Ito the execution of the bill of sale, the in
solvent had executed, as security for his
Indebtedness to the defendant warehouse re-
ceipts for chattel property. some of which
sale referred to. The defendant permitted
the insolvent to retain possession of all the
property covered by either the receipts or
the bill of sale to sell and dispose of it and
pay part of the proceeds to apply on the In.
debtedness for which he property was Sc
curity and to use part in his own business.
The payments sought to be recovered back
in this action were made out of the pro-
ceeds of property covered by either or both
the warehouse receipts and the bill. of sale,
but the court did not find, except as to $780,
what amount of such payments were made out
OF the proceeds. of property covered by the
warehouse receipts. He'd, shat under the
circumstances, the burden was on the defend
ant to show what part of the payments was
made out of the proceeds of property COW
cred by the warehouse receints, and hence
that the findings as made justified an or
der for judgment against the defendant for
the full amount of the payments except the
500. Order for judgment modified.
Mitchell, ].