Whitewright v. Stimpson
New York Supreme Court
In Equity. This was a motion by the plaintiffs, for a receiver, and a cross motion by the defendants to dissolve the injunction. The nature of the bill, and the facts stated in it, and in the answers of the defendants, sufficiently appear from the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHurlbut, J.
The bill in this cause alleged that the defendants, in 1845, formed a limited partnership, and in the course of their business contracted a debt with the plaintiffs, which was due and unpaid at the filing of their bill of complaint; that the defendants are insolvent; that suits at law have been commenced against them by their creditors, and the plaintiffs fear that such prosecuting creditors will obtain a preference over others; that the defendants neglect to place their effects in the hands of a proper and responsible trustee to be distributed ratably among their creditors. The bill prays…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Van Alstyne v. . CookNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Roop v. HerronNebraska Supreme Court · 1883
- Crouch v. First National BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Van Alstyne v. CookNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Batchelder v. AltheimerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.