Cross v. Hecker

Fowler, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The motion to dismiss this appeal must be overruled. It is based upon Article 47, section 31, of the Code, which requires records in insplvent proceedings to be transmitted to this Court within sixty dajrs from the date of the decision appealed- from. But this is an appeal from a Court of equity and is governed by Art. 5, sec. 31, which allows three months from the time of the appeal prayed for the transmission of the record.

This latter section has been complied with. The important and only question presented by the record which need now be disposed of is one of jurisdiction. On the 13th August, 1890, William L. Cross filed a petition in insolvency in the Court of Common Fleas against Lyman Fearguson — and on the loth of the same month Fearguson himself applied to the same Court for the benefit of the insolvent laws, and Joseph C. Boyd was appointed preliminary trustee. These two proceedings were consolidated, and Messrs.

Boyd and Cross were appointed permanent trustees on the 7th November, 1890. It appears that the Baltimore Fire Insurance Company was indebted to Fearguson on a policy of fire insurance in the sum of $L447.83 which was payable on the 3rd September, 1890. During the month of July, 1890; several of Fearguson's creditors had attachments issued and laid in the hands of the Insurance Company, and during the same month Fearguson gave to several other creditors, among whom were Messrs. Ward and Hecker, the appellees, orders on said insurance money which were addressed to and left with the company, but not paid.

Thereupon on the 10th September, 1890, the Insurance Company ⁵⁷⁶ filed a bill of interpleader, with the leave of the insolvent Court, to have the Circuit Court of Baltimore City determine who was entitled to the fund in its hands. This .bill was answered by the several creditors, who were made parties thereto, each claiming a portion of the fund, and the permanent trustees of the insolvent Fearguson were subsequently made parties defendant. In their answer the trustees deny that any of the claims made against said fund are valid, alleging that they can all be properly adjusted in the insolvent Court, and claiming the fund as part of their insolvent’s estate. Testimony was taken and on the 30th of September, 1891, an order was passed directing the claims of the