Harrison v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.

94 F. 728, 36 C.C.A. 443, 1899 U.S. App. LEXIS 2392
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMay 31, 1899
DocketNo. 816
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 94 F. 728 (Harrison v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Harrison v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 94 F. 728, 36 C.C.A. 443, 1899 U.S. App. LEXIS 2392 (5th Cir. 1899).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellants were simple-contract creditors of the Greenville Water & Electric Light Company. Their claim had not been reduced to judgment, and they had no express lien, by mortgage, trust deed, or otherwise. It is well settled by the supreme court that such creditors cannot come into a court of equity to obtain a seizure of the property of a debtor, and its application to the satisfaction of their claims; and this, notwithstanding [729]*729a statute of the state may authorize such a proceeding in the courts of the state. Hollins v. Iron Co., 150 U. S. 371, 378, 34 Sup. Ct. 127; Scott v. Neely, 140 U. S. 106, 11 Sup. Ct. 712; Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 351, 13 Sup. Ct. 883, 977. It follows that the demurrer wras properly sustained in the circuit court.

The decree; dismissing the bill was absolute, and, although the appellants have not objected on that account, it should be modified. Lacassagne v. Chapuis, 144 U. S. 119, 126, 12 Sup. Ct. 659. The decree of the court below dismissing the bill is so modified a.s to declare that it is without prejudice to an action at la,w, or to the assertion by the appellants in the suit by the Farmers’ Loan & Trust Company v. The Greenville Water & Electric Light Company of any equity they may have under the statutes of the state oí Texas providing for the appointment of receivers against corporations; and as so modified the decree is affirmed.

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

Related

Degraff v. Smith
157 P.2d 342 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1945)
Brill v. W. B. Foshay Co.
65 F.2d 420 (Eighth Circuit, 1933)
Pusey & Jones Co. v. Hanssen
261 U.S. 491 (Supreme Court, 1923)
Mathews Slate Co. v. Mathews
148 F. 490 (D. Massachusetts, 1906)
Jacobs v. Mexican Sugar Co.
130 F. 589 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
94 F. 728, 36 C.C.A. 443, 1899 U.S. App. LEXIS 2392, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrison-v-farmers-loan-trust-co-ca5-1899.