Ex parte Haley
Supreme Court of Missouri
Habeas Oorpios. (1) A receiver can only be called to account by the court appointing him; and is not subject to the orders of any other jurisdiction. Henry v. Kaufman, 24 Md. 1; Oonkling v. Butler, 4 Bissell, 22; Walker v. Morris, 14 Georgia, 323. (2) And only the court which appointed him can divest him of the trust which it imposed upon him.
Read the full summary
Habeas Oorpios. (1) A receiver can only be called to account by the court appointing him; and is not subject to the orders of any other jurisdiction. Henry v. Kaufman, 24 Md. 1; Oonkling v. Butler, 4 Bissell, 22; Walker v. Morris, 14 Georgia, 323. (2) And only the court which appointed him can divest him of the trust which it imposed upon him. Galster v. Syracuse Savings Bank, 29 Hun. 594. (3) If it were so that the Ralls circuit court acquired jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the Haley receivership by the change of venue of the Estes-Fry attachment suit to that court, it did not thereby…
1Opinion of the CourtSiierwood, J.
Estes brought suit by attachment in the Louisiana court-of common pleas in Pike county, against Jacob Fry. The petitioner was appointed receiver by that court, and in that capacity, from the sale of growing crops attached as the property of Fry, collected, exclusive of commissions, $400.91. After the appointment of the receiver the cause was removed to St. Charles county, and finally to Ralls county, where the attachment suit was abated, and the receiver, upon the order of the circuit court for the last-named county, filed his report, showing the balance in his hands to be the sum aforesaid.
Th…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Prather v. PratherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1953
- Bizzell v. Kodner Development Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1985
- Giett v. McGannon Mercantile Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1898
- Oyster v. BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- Krepp v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.