Lombard v. Wade
Oregon Supreme Court
From Umatilla: Stephen A. Lowell, Judge. This is a dispute between Letitia Lombard and C. B. Wade, who was receiver in the case of Conklin v. La Dow, reported in 33 Or. 354 (54 Pac. 218). The facts are fully stated in the opinion in that case.
Read the full summary
From Umatilla: Stephen A. Lowell, Judge. This is a dispute between Letitia Lombard and C. B. Wade, who was receiver in the case of Conklin v. La Dow, reported in 33 Or. 354 (54 Pac. 218). The facts are fully stated in the opinion in that case. For a proper understanding of the questions now before the court, it is only necessary to add that, after the termination of the proceedings in the probate court and the execution of the mortgage to the plaintiff’s assignor, the defendant Mrs. Lombard purchased a portion of the mortgaged premises, known as “No. 301 Court Street, Pendleton, Oregon,” from…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Bean
1. The motion of Mrs. Lombard, made in February, 1900, for an order of redistribution of the funds collected by the receiver, and for the delivery to her of the undivided half of 301 Court Street, was properly denied on account of her laches, if for no other reason. The original order of distribution and for the discharge of the receiver was made in September, 1898, at which time the receiver’s accounts were examined, settled and approved. At that time no request was made of the court, so far as the record discloses, for an order directing the receiver to turn over the property to any one. No…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Courtney v. BarnettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- Silliman v. SillimanOregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Bogh v. BoghOregon Supreme Court · 1949
- Wood's Pharmacy, Inc. v. KentonArizona Supreme Court · 1937
- Southern Pacific Co. v. PenderArizona Supreme Court · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.