Dale v. Duffy
North Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from Ward County, Leighton, J. Defendants appeal from an order appointing a receiver. “The appointment of a receiver pendente lite is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the judge before whom the proceeding is pending.” Cameron v. Groveland Improv. Co. 20 Wash. 169, 72 Am. St. Rep. 26. “The power to appoint a receiver in the settlement of the partnership affairs is inherent in the court, and not dependent upon any statute.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ward County, Leighton, J. Defendants appeal from an order appointing a receiver. “The appointment of a receiver pendente lite is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the judge before whom the proceeding is pending.” Cameron v. Groveland Improv. Co. 20 Wash. 169, 72 Am. St. Rep. 26. “The power to appoint a receiver in the settlement of the partnership affairs is inherent in the court, and not dependent upon any statute.” Cox v. Voekert, 86 Mo. 511; McIntosh v. Perkins, 13 Mont. 143; 23 R. O. L. 4; Baughman v. Reed (Cal.) 7 Am. St. Rep. 170.
1Opinion of the Court
Christianson, Ch. J.
This is an appeal from an order appointing a receiver. It appears that on or about January, 1918, the plaintiff and the defendant Duffy entered into a contract whereby the defendant agreed to farm during the seasons of 1918 and 1919 certain lands which the plaintiff held under a lease. In connection with such farming operations a large tractor was obtained. This controversy involves the ownership of such tractor.
On this appeal, appellants have argued two questions: (1) That the evidence fails to show that the plaintiff has any interest in the tractor; and (2) that if he…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Kinsella v. KinsellaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1970
- Guldeman v. HellerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1967
- Gunsch v. GunschNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1954
- Craft v. HertzNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1970
- Olson v. BrodellNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1964
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.