Legal Opinion

Price v. Horrigan Contracting Co.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided September 18, 1915PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Statement of the Case. The receivers of the Horrigan Contracting Company filed a petition setting forth that at the time of their appointment the Levy Court of New Castle County held $3,710.85 pursuant to five contracts under which the company had built certain County roads, and by which contracts five per cent, of the contract price was withheld to cover any repairs which were required to be made within a year from the completion of the road.

Read the full summary

Statement of the Case. The receivers of the Horrigan Contracting Company filed a petition setting forth that at the time of their appointment the Levy Court of New Castle County held $3,710.85 pursuant to five contracts under which the company had built certain County roads, and by which contracts five per cent, of the contract price was withheld to cover any repairs which were required to be made within a year from the completion of the road. This period of one year had expired as to four of the contracts at the time of the appointment of the receivers, and as to the fifth contract about…

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

In support of the motion to dismiss the petition the solicitor for the bank cited authorities for the motion, urging chiefly that the receivers had been deprived of no tangible property, and that as the payment by the Levy Court was officious, the receivers still had a remedy against that body and so there had been no interference with the possession of the receiver of any asset of the company.

An examination qf the cases does not satisfy me that the contention of the bank is tenable. The case most relied on was that of Receiver of State Bank v. First National Bank of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bien v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  2. Bowker v. Haight & Freese Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1906

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Grobholz v. Merdel Mortgage Investment Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1934
  2. Cusack v. Prudential Ins. Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API