146 A.2d 905 | D.C. | 1958
This appeal is from an order dismissing a complaint brought by the Administrator of
Four defendants were named: Sussman, Baltz, “President Perpetual. Building Association,” and Scrivener and Crowell, who are trustees under the deed of trust.
The second count alleged negligence oh the part of the association in releasing the proceeds of the loan to Sussman and asked judgment for $1,000 against the association. A third count charged Sussman with wrongful conversion of the sum of $1,500 and sought judgment against him.
Two motions to dismiss were filed, one by Sussman and the other by Baltz and the trustees jointly. Both motions were granted and in effect we have two appeals from the granting of the two motions. We shall treat them separately.
The motion of Baltz and the trustees was granted on the ground that the complaint necessarily and directly put in issue title to real estate and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to try such an issue.
It is well established that the trial court has no jurisdiction of cases involving title to real estate, that is, cases where title to real estate is necessarily and directly in issue.
The second count of the complaint charging the association with negligence was also properly dismissed. Although there are allegations that the association knew or was in a position to know of Suss-man’s fra-ud and that it was negligent in releasing the funds to him, these are mere conclusions with no allegations of fact to support them.
With respect to the defendant Suss-man, we think it was error to dismiss the
Affirmed as to Edward C. Baltz, President Perpetual Building Association, Samuel Scrivener, Jr., Trustee, and Junior Crowell, Trustee.
Reversed as to Albert Sussman.
. One ground urged for dismissal was the lack of an indispensable party, namely, the building association, the point being that malting the president of the association a defendant did not have the effect of making the association a defendant. The trial court did not pass on this point and we do not reach it.
. Code 1951, § 11-703. Shapiro v. Christopher, 90 U.S.App.D.C. 114, 195 F.2d 785; Schwartz v. Murphy, 72 App.D.C. 103, 112 F.2d 24; Meredith v. Fitzgerald, D.C.Mun.App., 102 A.2d 306; Nickles v. Sullivan, D.C.Mun.App., 83 A.2d 283.
. W. A. H. Church, Inc., v. Holmes, 60 App.D.C. 27, 46 F.2d 608.
. Kosters v. Hoover, 69 App.D.C. 66, 98 F.2d 595.