Credit Alliance Corp. v. Dellenoci

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Credit Alliance Corp. v. Dellenoci

1 D.C. 99

District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided July 1, 1933·No. Equity No. 55471·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PROCTOR, J.

On Motion for Receiver:

Although there is no appearance or opposition by or on the behalf of the sole defendant, the bill shows that others [100] holding prior liens have an interest in the property, which of course makes the appointment of a receiver and sale of the property a matter of concern to them. They should be made parties. The bill fails to show any value to the property above such prior liens. For these reasons the motion for a receiver is denied, but without prejudice to renew the same if the bill is reformed to overcome the foregoing deficiencies.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PROCTOR, J.

On Motion for Receiver:

Although there is no appearance or opposition by or on the behalf of the sole defendant, the bill shows that others [100] holding prior liens have an interest in the property, which of course makes the appointment of a receiver and sale of the property a matter of concern to them. They should be made parties. The bill fails to show any value to the property above such prior liens. For these reasons the motion for a receiver is denied, but without prejudice to renew the same if the bill is reformed to overcome the foregoing deficiencies.

Credit Alliance Corp. v. Dellenoci, 1 D.C. 99 (D.C. 1933).

Pincite

1 D.C. 99 (Credit Alliance Corp. v. Dellenoci) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.