Legal Opinion

In re Florcken

District Court, S.D. California

Decided February 18, 1901No. 1,507PublishedCited by 2 opinions

On Motion to Vacate Order Appointing Receiver.

1Opinion of the Court

WELLBORbf, District Judge.

From the evidence submitted on this motion, I am satisfied that the appointment of the receiver was made after the order of reference, but that only a few minutes elapsed between the two, and that the only knowledge or information which the referee had of the latter order was through a message by telephone (not to him directly, but to one of the attorneys of the petitioning creditor) that the order had been made; that the charges against said attorneys that they represented only an inconsiderable claim of 95 cents, and that their application for a receiver was a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re Fixen & Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1899

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. McAfee v. Arnold & MathisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1908
  2. Kilgore v. BarrSupreme Court of Virginia · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API