Crayton v. Spullock
Supreme Court of Georgia
Attorney and client. Receiver’s sale. Before Judge Maddox. Floyd superior court. September adjourned term, 1890. Reported in the decision.
1Opinion of the Court
Lumpkin, Justice.
Messrs. Wright & Harris, as attorneys for one Lattner, for the use of Kohn et al., filed an equitable petition against the Rome Nail Manufacturing Co., praying for a judgment against the corporation, and also for the appointment of a receiver to take charge of and sell its assets. No resistance was made to the appointment of a receiver, and afterwards a consent decree was rendered in the case, directing the sale of the property of the corporation by the receiver, and also providing that the firm of Wright & Harris be paid out of the proceeds of the sale $150.00 for their…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Hardin v. BaynesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
- Holmes v. HolmesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- Oviatt v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
- Allen v. Southern Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
- Hardin v. BaynesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944