addition, SBS’s business records containing computerized notations of its collection efforts indicated that nearly every SBS communication to collect the debt was with Cody who responded, requested information on the debt, and supplied excuses to SBS regarding why the debt remained unpaid. In one telephone call, Cody indicated he was seeking SBS’s payment from his franchisor and final payment to SBS was dependent on the completion of a settlement between Direct and its franchisor. Cody did not personally appear at trial and his attorney presented no evidence to the contrary. Based on the evidence, we conclude that Cody was a trustee of construction trust funds under the Act. See Nuclear Corp. of America v. Hale, 355 F.Supp. 193, 197 (N.J.D.Tex.1973), aff'd, 479 F.2d 1045 (5th Cir.1973) (<HOLDING>). Direct contends that, in order to establish
holding that an order to disgorge funds was final even though the order did not distribute the funds holding that a trustee properly withheld trust payments owed to a prior trustee who had misappropriated trust funds holding that a third party who receives trust property on inquiry notice that a trustee has misappropriated trust funds is also liable for breach of trust holding that defendant violated section 4b when she misappropriated pool participant funds by soliciting funds for trading and then trading only a small percentage of those funds while disbursing the rest of the funds to investors herself and her family holding that companys president was trustee of trust funds because he had control and direction over the funds