Papazian v. Kulhanjian

78 So. 2d 85
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedFebruary 16, 1955
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 78 So. 2d 85 (Papazian v. Kulhanjian) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Papazian v. Kulhanjian, 78 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 1955).

Opinion

MATHEWS, Chief Justice.

The facts necessary for the appointment of a receiver pendente lite do not appear in this case. The power of . appointment of a receiver for a corporation should be exercised only where the exigencies demand it and no other protection - to the applicants appears. There is no ^sufficient allegation of fraud, insolvency, mismanagement, or other meritorious considerations.

The petition for writ of certiorari should be and is hereby granted, and the order complained of should be and is hereby quashed under the authority of McAllister Hotel, Inc., v. Schatzberg, Fla., 40 So.2d 201.

It is so ordered.

TERRELL, SEBRING and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Recarey v. Rader
320 So. 2d 28 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1975)
Conlee Construction Co. v. Krause
192 So. 2d 330 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 So. 2d 85, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/papazian-v-kulhanjian-fla-1955.