Legal Opinion

Hopfensack v. Hopfensack

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided March 15, 1880PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoesen, J.

This is a motion to confirm the report of a referee appointed to inquire, among other things, as to whether the compensation of a receiver should be paid by the defendant who, it has been decided upon a trial of the issues in the action, are the sole and exclusive owners of property which was placed in the hands of the receiver under the supposition that the plaintiff was entitled to some interest in it.

I regret that the last order of reference was ever made, for it has entailed unnecessary expense upon the parties.

Pauline Hopfensack alleged that she was a partner of the defendant William…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Noe v. GibsonNew York Court of Chancery · 1839
  2. Parker v. BrowningNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
  3. Vincent v. ParkerNew York Court of Chancery · 1838

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. U. S. Investment Corp. v. Portland HospitalOregon Supreme Court · 1901

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API