Legal Opinion
In re Gold Run Mining & Tunnel Co.
District Court, D. Colorado
Decided September 14, 1912No. 2,356PublishedCited by 14 opinions
In the matter of the Gold Run Mining & Tunnel Company, alleged bankrupt. On involuntary petition.
1Opinion of the Court
POPE, District Judge.
The holding of the court upon the several matters argued is as follows:
[1] 1. The receiver appointed by the state court is competent to resist the petition for adjudication. Matter of Hudson River Co. (D. C.) 173 Fed. 934.
[2] 2. The receiver’s answer, on page 5, contains the following:
“your intervener would further state that he was on or about the 17th day of May, A. D. 1912, appointed receiver of said company, but that he was not appointed receiver on the ground that said company was insolvent, but on other grounds, and that at that time the said E. A. Austin, who filed…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Simonson v. SinsheimerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899
- In re Hudson River Electric Power Co.District Court, N.D. New York · 1909
- Woolford v. Diamond State Steel Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1905
- Lowenstein v. Henry McShane Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1904
3Cited by14 opinions
- In re San Antonio Land & Irrigation Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1916
- Hanna v. Brictson Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932
- Arkansas Oil & Mining Co. v. Murray Tool & Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1942
- Ohio Motor Car Co. v. Eiseman Magneto Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
- In re Bankshares Corp. of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.