Devlin v. Hope
New York Supreme Court
Motion for an injunction and the appointment of a receiver. This action was brought by Charles Devlin against Thomas and Anthony S. Hope, Donaldson, and others. One HacMey had entered into a contract with the city of New York to clean the streets for a term of years for a specified compensation.
Read the full summary
Motion for an injunction and the appointment of a receiver. This action was brought by Charles Devlin against Thomas and Anthony S. Hope, Donaldson, and others. One HacMey had entered into a contract with the city of New York to clean the streets for a term of years for a specified compensation. Subsequently, HacMey, to obtain funds sufficient to enable him to perform his contract, had assigned various interests in the profits of the contract,—among others, the present plaintiff was entitled to one-eighth of such profits. HacMey had given security to the city for the due performance of the…
1Opinion of the CourtLeonared, J.
If a receiver of the contract between Hackley and the Corporation of Hew York were to be appointed, its farther performance must be carried on under the direction of the court, or else its performance must be abandoned.
The inquiry arises, where are the funds to be obtained to meet the outlay necessarily required for the payment of workmen, &e., should a receiver, under the direction of the court, attempt such an enterprise ?
It is manifest, from the statement of the proposition, that such a scheme cannot be attempted without the concurrence of the majority of the parties in interest. *
The…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Northland Pine Co. v. Melin Bros.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Poerschke v. KedenburgNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1869
- Gallagher v. KarnsNew York Supreme Court · 1882