State ex rel. Fichtenkamm v. Gambs
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. — Hon. Jas. K. Knight, J udge. The first instance in which the office of receiver is alluded to in the legislation of this State is found in the practice act of 1849, which abolishes the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. — Hon. Jas. K. Knight, J udge. The first instance in which the office of receiver is alluded to in the legislation of this State is found in the practice act of 1849, which abolishes the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity. By article 10 of that act it is provided: “Sec. 1. Until the Legislature shall otherwise provide, the court may appoint receivers and direct the deposit of money or other thing in court, and grant the other provisional remedies now existing according to the present practice, except as otherwise provided in this act.”…
1Opinion of the CourtHough, J.
In a proceeding in' the circuit court of St. Louis by one of the firm of Hoffelman & Eranke, for a dissolution of the co-partnership, Charles A. Snell was appointed receiver of the assets of the firm, and on the 24th day of June, 1868, as such receiver, executed a bond for $20,000 to the State of Missouri, with Charles W. Horn and John Bruch as sureties. On the 2nd day of July, 1870, the relator was appointed receiver to succeed Snell, and under the direction of the court instituted the present action in his own name against the sureties on the bond of his predecessor. The defendants filed a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- King v. CuttsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1869
- Clamorgan & Lisa's Executors v. Guisse, Snider, Morrison & SummersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1821
3Cited by9 opinions
- Stephenson v. GoldenMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
- St. Louis, Kennett & Southern Railroad v. WearSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- State ex rel. Elberta Peach & Land Co. v. Chicago Bonding & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1919
- City of St. Louis v. St. Louis Gas-Light Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1881
- Bishop v. McKillicanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.