Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Kist v. Ball

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided September 25, 1945No. 28,108PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtYoung, J.

The purpose of the action which will be affected if a writ of mandate or prohibition is issued herein was to settle a partnership between relator herein and Morton S. Hawkins. The appointment of a receiver pendente lite in that case for partnership property was affirmed in Kist v. Coughlin, Trustee (1936), 2Í0 Ind. 622, 1 N. E. (2d) 602. Thereafter the case was tried and final judgment and decree was entered. ' The part nership was established and the rights of the partners were determined, the appointment of the receiver was made permanent, an accounting was had and the receiver was directed…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Perkins v. HaywardIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Kist v. CoughlinIndiana Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Mayer v. HaggertyIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
  4. State, Ex Rel. v. Superior Court of Marion CountyIndiana Supreme Court · 1931
  5. State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Cody, JudgeIndiana Supreme Court · 1937

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Young v. NiblackIndiana Supreme Court · 1951
  2. State Ex Rel. Glamack v. HornIndiana Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Reedy v. ReedyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1951
  4. State Ex Rel. Martin v. Hancock Circuit CourtIndiana Supreme Court · 1953
  5. State Ex Rel. Young v. NiblackIndiana Supreme Court · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API