Kolb Coal Co. v. Sauter

Seventh Circuit

Kolb Coal Co. v. Sauter

295 F. 690, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 3235

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedJanuary 11, 1924

DocketNo. 3349

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 295 F. 690 (Kolb Coal Co. v. Sauter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kolb Coal Co. v. Sauter, 295 F. 690, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 3235 (7th Cir. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The' appeal is from an order of the District Court, entered without notice, appointing a receiver for the property of appellant, upon appellee’s verified bill of complaint. Whatever may be appellee’s remedy for the wrongs enumerated in his bill, we find nothing therein alleged which would justify the appointment of a receiver for the corporate property, and particularly no ’ such contingency or emergency as would warrant appointing a receiver without notice.

Receivership in advance of the hearing of the cause should be constituted only where this extraordinary remedy is shown to be indispensable to the relief sought, and never without notice, unless it is made clearly to appear that substantial and irreparable injury will probably accrue to the moving party, unless the order for receivership be made without such notice.

Finding none of these conditions here present, the order appointing the receiver is reversed, with costs, and the cause is remanded to the District Court.

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

PER CURIAM.

The' appeal is from an order of the District Court, entered without notice, appointing a receiver for the property of appellant, upon appellee’s verified bill of complaint. Whatever may be appellee’s remedy for the wrongs enumerated in his bill, we find nothing therein alleged which would justify the appointment of a receiver for the corporate property, and particularly no ’ such contingency or emergency as would warrant appointing a receiver without notice.

Receivership in advance of the hearing of the cause should be constituted only where this extraordinary remedy is shown to be indispensable to the relief sought, and never without notice, unless it is made clearly to appear that substantial and irreparable injury will probably accrue to the moving party, unless the order for receivership be made without such notice.

Finding none of these conditions here present, the order appointing the receiver is reversed, with costs, and the cause is remanded to the District Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 F. 690, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 3235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kolb-coal-co-v-sauter-ca7-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack