John G. Bookout, as Receiver for Modern Home Life Insurance Co. v. First National Mortgage and Discount Company, Inc., and Atlas Financial Corporation

514 F.2d 757, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14861
CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit
DecidedMay 1, 1975
Docket74-3769
StatusPublished
Cited by39 cases

This text of 514 F.2d 757 (John G. Bookout, as Receiver for Modern Home Life Insurance Co. v. First National Mortgage and Discount Company, Inc., and Atlas Financial Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
John G. Bookout, as Receiver for Modern Home Life Insurance Co. v. First National Mortgage and Discount Company, Inc., and Atlas Financial Corporation, 514 F.2d 757, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14861 (1st Cir. 1975).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Following discovery and a conference with the parties, the district court found ' substantial reason to suspect that the Atlas defendants had caused certain collateral to be fraudulently conveyed by, through, and to affiliated corporate defendants, to the probable detriment of a secured party which is the plaintiff in Modern Home Life Ins. Co. v. Atlas Financial Corp., et al., Civ. No. C74 — 302A, now pending before the district court. The court thereupon appointed a receiver pendente lite for the purposes of managing the defendants and marshaling the collateral together with its proceeds.

We have carefully examined the defendants’-appellants’ objections to the receivership and find them to be without merit. The appointment of a receiver, otherwise proper, is not to be defeated for lack of sworn pleading or the absence of a full evidentiary hearing. See Haase v. Chapman, W.D.Mo.1969, 308 F.Supp. 399. Considering the probability of success on the merits, the appearance of fraudulent conduct, the imminent danger of further injury to the collateral, and the balance of the equities, 1 we are of the opinion that no abuse of discretion has been demonstrated.

Finding no error, the order appointing the receiver pendente lite is affirmed on the basis of District Judge Freeman’s well-reasoned opinion, 395 F.Supp. 1338 (1974).

1

. See 12 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2983, at 22-24.

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

Related

Peyton v. Grant
S.D. Florida, 2024
Netsphere, Inc. v. Baron
703 F.3d 296 (Fifth Circuit, 2012)
Sterling Savings Bank v. Citadel Development Co.
656 F. Supp. 2d 1248 (D. Oregon, 2009)
Canada Life Assurance Co. v. LaPeter
563 F.3d 837 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)
SSMC Inc v. Singer Furn Acquis
102 F.3d 704 (Fourth Circuit, 1996)
Citronelle-Mobile Gathering, Inc. v. James D. Watkins
934 F.2d 1180 (Eleventh Circuit, 1991)
Citronelle-Mobile Gathering, Inc. v. Watkins
934 F.2d 1180 (Eleventh Circuit, 1991)
United States v. Vertac Chemical Corp.
671 F. Supp. 595 (E.D. Arkansas, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
514 F.2d 757, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14861, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-g-bookout-as-receiver-for-modern-home-life-insurance-co-v-first-ca1-1975.