Fisher v. N. O. Truck & Drayage Co.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Fisher v. N. O. Truck & Drayage Co.

1 La. App. 536, 1925 La. App. LEXIS 67

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedFebruary 2, 1925

DocketNo. 8818

StatusPublished

This text of 1 La. App. 536 (Fisher v. N. O. Truck & Drayage Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fisher v. N. O. Truck & Drayage Co., 1 La. App. 536, 1925 La. App. LEXIS 67 (La. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

WESTERFIELD, J.

This is a controversy over the ownership of an automobile truck and trailer.

Wm. H. Fisher, the receiver of the N. O. Truck & Drayage Co., applied for and obtained an order of Court authorizing the sale of certain assets of the insolvent corporation for the purpose of paying claims. Among the assets which' the receiver proposed to sell was a truck and trailer. Joseph Grefer promptly intervened and obtained an injunction upon the ground that the truck and trailer was his property. From a judgment perpetuating the injunction the receiver has appealed.

We were not favored with oral argument or brief on behalf of appellant, whose counsel did not appear at the hearing of the case in this court. The record- is not mutely eloquent of appellant’s contention and we see no reason to disturb the finding of fact by the trial court. The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

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

WESTERFIELD, J.

This is a controversy over the ownership of an automobile truck and trailer.

Wm. H. Fisher, the receiver of the N. O. Truck & Drayage Co., applied for and obtained an order of Court authorizing the sale of certain assets of the insolvent corporation for the purpose of paying claims. Among the assets which' the receiver proposed to sell was a truck and trailer. Joseph Grefer promptly intervened and obtained an injunction upon the ground that the truck and trailer was his property. From a judgment perpetuating the injunction the receiver has appealed.

We were not favored with oral argument or brief on behalf of appellant, whose counsel did not appear at the hearing of the case in this court. The record- is not mutely eloquent of appellant’s contention and we see no reason to disturb the finding of fact by the trial court. The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 La. App. 536, 1925 La. App. LEXIS 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fisher-v-n-o-truck-drayage-co-lactapp-1925.