Legal Opinion

Adams v. Haskell & Woods

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1856PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District. This was a proceeding upon the petition of intervention of Richard Roman, Edward Jones and A. A. Cohen, in this cause, setting forth that the petitioners had been duly appointed the assignees in insolvency of the defendant Woods, and had received from him a surrender of a large amount of property belonging to the firm of Adams & Co., whereof the plaintiff Adams, and the defendants Haskell & Woods were members,…

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District. This was a proceeding upon the petition of intervention of Richard Roman, Edward Jones and A. A. Cohen, in this cause, setting forth that the petitioners had been duly appointed the assignees in insolvency of the defendant Woods, and had received from him a surrender of a large amount of property belonging to the firm of Adams & Co., whereof the plaintiff Adams, and the defendants Haskell & Woods were members, and had retained the custody and charge of said property, until by an order of the Court below, of January 30th, 1856,…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Heydenfeldt.

Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.

*477When this case was here, upon appeal by the intervenors from an order directing them to pay over to the receiver the funds, which they had received as assignees in bankruptcy, we decided, that in consequence of the proceedings in bankruptcy being coram non judice, they held the fund which they had obtained by the order of the Court, as the custodians of the Court. There was nothing indeed, except the name, in which they differed in character from regularly appointed receivers. Had we not taken…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Olson v. State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API