Legal Opinion
Ex Rel. Nenzel v. District Court
Nevada Supreme Court
Decided December 4, 1925No. 2720PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Receiver cannot be appointed or take over all assets except in dissolution action brought according to law. Havemeyer v. Court, 24 P. 121; French Bank Case, 53 Cal. 495; Rev. Laws, 1195; Stats. 1923, 20.
Prohibition is proper remedy to prevent punishment as for contempt for alleged violation of void order. Main v. Luce,215 P. 399. Also to prevent court from taking possession by receiver when order of appointment is void. Murray v. Court, 62 P. 191.
Supreme court is not precluded from determining jurisdiction where its want is apparent from pleadings, because no plea to jurisdiction was entered…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Wiswall v. SampsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1853
- Havemeyer v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- La Société Française D'Epargnes et de Prévoyance Mutuelle v. Dist. Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Dist.California Supreme Court · 1879
- Walling v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Walcott v. WellsNevada Supreme Court · 1890
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- In Re Wal-Mart Wage & Hour Employment Practices LitigationDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2007
- Bowler v. LeonardNevada Supreme Court · 1954
- Maitia v. Allied L. & L. S. Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1926
- Mieyr v. Federal Surety Co. of DavenportMontana Supreme Court · 1933
- Bowler v. First Judicial District Court of the State of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1951
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.