Yaryan Naval Stores Co. v. B. Borchardt Co.

217 F. 758, 133 C.C.A. 488, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 1478
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedOctober 28, 1914
DocketNo. 2669
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 217 F. 758 (Yaryan Naval Stores Co. v. B. Borchardt 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
Yaryan Naval Stores Co. v. B. Borchardt Co., 217 F. 758, 133 C.C.A. 488, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 1478 (5th Cir. 1914).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

[1] Where months after a creditors’bill has been-filed, and the defendant has appeared and filed an answer admitting the - indebtedness to the complainant and all the equities set up in the bill, and consented to the appointment of receivers, and where under orders of court receivers have entered upon the administration of the property of the defendant, incurring obligations and large expenditures, it is too late to urge that, inasmuch as the complainant’s claim has not been reduced to judgment, the suit should be dismissed because the-complainant had an adequate remedy at law. See Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & Iron Co., 150 U. S. 371, 380, 381, 14 Sup. Ct. 127, 37 L. Ed. 1113; Brown v. Lake Superior Iron Co., 134 U. S. 530, 10 Sup. Ct. 604, 33 L. Ed. 1021; Reynes v. Dumont, 130 U. S. 354, 9 Sup. Ct. 486, 32 L. Ed. 934. And see Fed. Rep. Dig. vol. 7, Eq. § 53.

[2] Inasmuch as the equity proceedings looking to the liquidation, of the affairs of the Yaryan Naval Stores Company were instituted more than six months prior to the alleged voluntary bankruptcy proceedings, wherein it is claimed the Yaryan Naval Stores Company was-adjudicated a bankrupt, the proceedings in the District Court in this-[759]*759case were not necessarily affected. See Pickens v. Roy, 187 U. S. 177, 23 Sup. Ct. 78, 47 L. Ed. 128; Metcalfe v. Barker, 187 U. S. 165, 23 Sup. Ct. 67, 47 L. Ed. 122; Eyster v. Gaff, 91 U. S. 521, 23 L. Ed. 403; In re Heckman, 140 Fed. 859, 72 C. C. A. 8 (C. C. A. 9); Sample v. Beasley, 158 Fed. 607, 85 C. C. A. 429 (C. C. A. 5).

On the record we find no reversible error in the proceedings of the lower court. The decree appealed from appears to have been regularly rendered in due course of proceedings, and the same is affirmed.

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

Related

Stevens v. Carolina Scenic Stages
208 F.2d 332 (Fourth Circuit, 1954)
First Nat. Bank of Medford, Or. v. Stewart Fruit Co.
17 F.2d 621 (N.D. California, 1927)
In re Richardson's Estate
294 F. 349 (N.D. Texas, 1923)
Blair v. Brailey
221 F. 1 (Fifth Circuit, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
217 F. 758, 133 C.C.A. 488, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 1478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yaryan-naval-stores-co-v-b-borchardt-co-ca5-1914.