Legal Opinion

Franklin National Bank v. Kennerly Coal & Coke Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 25, 1930No. Appeal, 27PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

We are asked to vacate the appointment of a receiver which was made on the ground of corporate mismanagement. The appointment of a receiver is a discretionary matter with the court below, and its action will not be disturbed unless there is a clear abuse of sound judicial discretion: McDougall v. Hunt. & Br. T. R. & C. Co., 294 Pa. 108. We suggested in that case a receiver should not be appointed unless there is good reason therefor, but when such reason exists, there should be no hesitancy in making the appointment. After a careful review of the evidence, we are…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McDougall v. Huntingdon & Broad Top R. & C. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  2. Bailey v. Pittsb. Coal R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Bowman v. Gum, IncorporatedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  2. Sale v. Ambler (Emmett)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  3. Collins v. CollinssCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1945
  4. Levin v. Pittsburgh United Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  5. Commonwealth ex rel. Chidsey v. Keystone Mutual Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950

10 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