Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. v. Williams
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
Section 1547 of the Civil Practice Act does not entitle a receiver Of rents to five per cent of stuns received and disbursed by him as a matter of right, blit only to such Commissions “ not exceeding five per centum ” as the court in the exercise of its judgment may allow. Taking into consideration the magnitude of the operation involved here, the fact that the receiver delegated so many of his duties in accordance with the authority contained in the order of appointment and also the disastrous situation of the bondholders, we are of the opinion that a Commission of two and one-half per cent…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. v. HerbstCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
- New York State Mortgage Loan Enforcement & Administration Corp v. Milbank Site One Houses, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- City of New York v. Big Six Towers, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1969
- Cornell Associates, Inc. v. Euston Properties Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1966
- Dubiner v. GoldmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.