Tomlinson & Webster Manuf'g Co. v. Shatto
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota
In Equity. Motion for the appointment of a receiver. The Austin, Tomlinson & Webster Manufacturing Company, plaintiff and judgment creditor, apply by motion for the appointment of a receiver after disclosures upon examination of Charles W. Shatto, defendant and judgment debtor, in proceedings supplementary to execution.
1Opinion of the CourtNelson, J.
A motion is made for a receiver, after disclosure, upon an examination in proceedings supplementary to execution, in accordance with the state law and practice.
The appointment of a receiver is opposed for the reason that after the proceedings had been instituted, and an order served upon the judgment debtor forbidding any disposal of his property or interference therewith, he made a voluntary assignment to an assignee of his own selection under the insolvent law of the state of Minnesota, enacted in 1881. I have duly considered the case presented by the arguments of counsel and find:
1. That…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Edmeston v. LydeNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- M'Dermutt v. StrongNew York Court of Chancery · 1820
- Porter v. . Williams and ClarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- Lynch v. . JohnsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Towne v. CampbellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Watson v. PryorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Berger v. LoomisOregon Supreme Court · 1942
- Bates v. International Co. of MexicoU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1898
- United States v. RossDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1961
- Curtis v. MortonSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1916