Legal Opinion

Sweeny v. Mayhew

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided January 30, 1899PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Origina] proceeding by certiorari. The jurisdiction exercised by courts of equity in administering relief by the extraordinary remedy of a receiver pendente lite is a branch of the general preventive jurisdiction, being intended to prevent injury to the thing in controversy and to preserve it for the security of all parties in interest, to be dis-. posed of as the court may finally direct.

Read the full summary

Origina] proceeding by certiorari. The jurisdiction exercised by courts of equity in administering relief by the extraordinary remedy of a receiver pendente lite is a branch of the general preventive jurisdiction, being intended to prevent injury to the thing in controversy and to preserve it for the security of all parties in interest, to be dis-. posed of as the court may finally direct. Its effect, temporarily at least, is to deprive the party of his property before a final judgment or deoree is reached by the court determining the rights of the parties. It is-not to be exercised…

1Opinion of the CourtQuarles, J.

— October 17, 1898, Kennedy J. Hanly, as plaintiff, filed bis complaint in the district court oí Shoshone county against Charles Sweeny, F. Lewis Clark, and the Empire State-Idaho Mining and Developing Company, a corporation, defendants, for the purpose of setting aside and having declared null and void a deed made by the said plaintiff conveying to the said defendants Sweeny and Clark an undivided one-eighth interest in and to the Skookum lode mining claim, situated in Shoshone county, Idaho, to have an accounting for the proceeds of ores extracted from said mining claim hy defendants, and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Whitney v. Board of Delegates of San Francisco Fire DepartmentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. People Ex Rel. Citizens' Gas-Light Co. v. Board of AssessorsNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
  3. State ex rel. Chemung Mining Co. v. CunninghamIdaho Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Buchanan v. ComstockNew York Supreme Court · 1865
  5. Crombie v. Order of SolonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Hay v. HayIdaho Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Lansdon v. State Board of CanvassersIdaho Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Gilbert v. ElderIdaho Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Gibbs v. MorganIdaho Supreme Court · 1903
  5. McConnell v. State Board of EqualizationIdaho Supreme Court · 1905

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API