From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Margulies v. Manufacturers Trust Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Jul 19, 1933
148 Misc. 564 (N.Y. App. Term 1933)

Opinion

July 19, 1933.

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York, County of New York.

White Case [ J. Adam Murphy, Carl E. Newton and C.W. Dibbell of counsel], for the appellant.

Joseph R. Margulies, for the respondent.


We find that the complaint herein states a cause of action at law. The general rule is that as to an existing trust the cestui que trust must sue in equity when he complains against the trustee with relation to matters concerning the performance of the trust. There are, however, instances when a personal action may be maintained at law for damages under such circumstances. One such instance is where the breach of a specific covenant of the trust agreement resulting in damages is claimed. The gravamen of the present complaint is that the trustee failed to sell certain collateral under circumstances which the plaintiff contends required such sale. However, the trust indenture provided that it rested in the discretion of the trustee whether or not such sale should be made. For this reason a suit for breach of a specific agreement by the trustee would not be maintainable and the complaint appears insufficient in this regard. The complaint, however, alleges facts and circumstances sufficient to show that the failure to sell was the result of defendant's negligence and that it acted in bad faith in the matter. The right of a cestui que trust to sue the trustee personally in an action at law for damages for negligent conduct in the performance of trust duties seems to have been upheld in instances where the trust was still open. ( See Hunsberger v. Guaranty Trust Co., 164 A.D. 740; affd., 218 N.Y. 742; Doyle v. Chatham Phenix Bank, 253 id. 369.) A similar ruling has been made in other States. ( Bennett v. Preston, 17 Ind. 291; Holderman v. Hood, 70 Kan. 267; Sherwood v. Sexton, 63 Mo. 78; and see Pom. Eq. Juris. [3d ed.] 895.) The case of Meisel v. Central Trust Co. ( 179 A.D. 795), relied on by appellant, was an action in equity and the complaint was dismissed because of the failure of the pleading to state facts sufficient to show negligence.

In sustaining this complaint we do not indicate that the measure of damages pleaded is the proper one.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

All concur; present, LYDON, CALLAHAN and FRANKENTHALER, JJ.


Summaries of

Margulies v. Manufacturers Trust Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Jul 19, 1933
148 Misc. 564 (N.Y. App. Term 1933)
Case details for

Margulies v. Manufacturers Trust Co.

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM MARGULIES, Respondent, v. MANUFACTURERS TRUST COMPANY, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Jul 19, 1933

Citations

148 Misc. 564 (N.Y. App. Term 1933)
266 N.Y.S. 157

Citing Cases

Harper v. Interstate Brewery Co.

Upon that question the authorities are in conflict. 1 C.J.P. 1031; 1 C.J.S.P. 1128; Sharts v. Douglas, 94…

Bank of New York v. N.J. Title Guar. Trust Co.

No reason exists why the present legal owner of the assets of the trust should not sue at law for the damages…