Dias v. Merle
New York Court of Chancery
This was an application, for an injunction and for areceiver, founded upon the supplemental bill in this cause and upon a petition of the complainant The original bill was for the settlement of a partnership account between the complainant J. L. Dias, and G. Merle and L. Asbury, the defendants in the original suit.
Read the full summary
This was an application, for an injunction and for areceiver, founded upon the supplemental bill in this cause and upon a petition of the complainant The original bill was for the settlement of a partnership account between the complainant J. L. Dias, and G. Merle and L. Asbury, the defendants in the original suit. The complainant in that bill also claimed the .benefit of a lease which the defendant Merle had obtained, of the store and lot No. 138, Pearl street, in the city of New-York, in his own name; on the ground that it was a part of the partnership property. Dias also alleged in his…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The only possible foundation for the appointment of a receiver, or for an injunction to restrain the defendant from collecting the rents and profits of the lot and premises in Pearl street, is the allegation in the supplemental bill that he is insolvent. As the affidavits in opposition to the application show this allegation to be altogether false *262find groundless, this part of the order to show cause must of course be discharged, without reference to any other matters alleged in the bill. Although the complainant has sworn positively that every matter, statement, allegation and…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Matter of NoonanUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1982
- Winslow v. . ClarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Hill v. PhelpsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
- City of Omaha v. RedickCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1894
- In Re Rooster, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1989
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.