Thau v. Bankers & Merchants Telegraph Co.

The Superior Court of New York City

Thau v. Bankers & Merchants Telegraph Co.

24 Jones & S. 588

The Superior Court of New York City·Decided May 7, 1888·Published

Opinion

Held, (O’Gorman, J., writing,)

"that the appointment of the receiver in this action was within the judicial discretion of the court on the facts placed before it on the motion; that there was no reason to doubt that that discretion was not exercised properly and for good cause; and that the order, with modifications of some of its provisions which seemed to be inconsistent with the provision therein contained in relation to the Supreme Court Receiver above adverted to, should be affirmed.”

Sedgwick, Ch. J., concurred.

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

Held, (O’Gorman, J., writing,)

"that the appointment of the receiver in this action was within the judicial discretion of the court on the facts placed before it on the motion; that there was no reason to doubt that that discretion was not exercised properly and for good cause; and that the order, with modifications of some of its provisions which seemed to be inconsistent with the provision therein contained in relation to the Supreme Court Receiver above adverted to, should be affirmed.”

Sedgwick, Ch. J., concurred.

Thau v. Bankers & Merchants Telegraph Co., 24 Jones & S. 588 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1888).

Pincite

24 Jones & S. 588 (Thau v. Bankers & Merchants Telegraph Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.