Pulver v. Commercial Security Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Hennepin county for the appointment of a receiver for defendant corporation. After receivers had been appointed, and upon application of Commercial Security Company, on May 26, 1913, they were ordered to pay to applicant moneys collected and to be collected by them from monthly payments upon piano contracts. The further history of the litigation is stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Hennepin county for the appointment of a receiver for defendant corporation. After receivers had been appointed, and upon application of Commercial Security Company, on May 26, 1913, they were ordered to pay to applicant moneys collected and to be collected by them from monthly payments upon piano contracts. The further history of the litigation is stated in the opinion. On May 10, 1916, John M. Bradford, as receiver, obtained an order to show cause why the court should not vacate its order directing the payment of moneys to Commercial Security Company. The…
1Opinion of the CourtBunn, J.
On the complaint in this action and an answer by defendant admitting its allegations, George D. Norris and John M. Bradford were on May 2, 1913, appointed receivers of Segerstrom Piano Manufacturing Company, the defendant. In the course of the receivership large sums of money came into the hands of the receivers, the proceeds of instalment contracts for the sale of pianos by the company to individual customers. The Commercial Security Company claimed to own all of these contracts under an alleged sale thereof by the Piano Company, and made the claim to the receivers. The receivers believed…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Gallagher v. Irish-American BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Tomlinson v. PhelpsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
- Finch, Van Slyck & McConville v. Le Sueur County Co-operative Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana · 1887
3Cited by6 opinions
- Barrett v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- In Re Estate of SimonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Greenfield v. Hill City Land, Loan & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- Windom National Bank v. RenoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- Cox-Rushing Greer Co. v. RichardsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.