TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Winona, Warsaw, Elkhart & South Bend Traction Co. v. Collins

Winona, Warsaw, Elkhart & South Bend Traction Company v. Collins

Winona, Warsaw v. Collins, 69 N.E. 998 (Ind. 1904)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Indiana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 2, 1904
Docket
No. 20,169
Judges
Hadley
Citations
69 N.E. 998162 Ind. 6931904 Ind. LEXIS 102
Disposition
Beversed.
Summary
From Elkhart Circuit Court; J. 11 Ferrad, Judge. Petition of Samuel A. Collins against the Winona, Warsaw, Elkhart & South Bend Traction Compauy for a receiver. From an order appointing a receiver the defendant appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Hadley

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Hadley, J.

Appeal from an interlocutory order appointing a receiver. It appears from the record that on July 13, 1903, appellee, without filing any complaint in the Elkhart Circuit Court, or causing or requesting any summons or other process to be issued out of said court, presented to the judge of said court at his chambers in the city of Lagrange, Lagrange county, Indiana, his verified petition for the appointment of a receiver to take charge of all the assets, books, papers, maps, franchises, surveys, documents, and all other property of the appellant. It is averred in the petition that appellant is an Indiana corporation and has its principal office in Elkhart, Indiana. The petition demands no money judgment, and no other legal or equitable remedy beyond the appointment of a receiver. It sets forth causes for the appointment of a receiver without notice. In the absence of the defendant the judge ap *694 pointed, a receiver upon the verified petition in accordance with the prayer thereof, approved the receiver’s bond, and administered the oath of office, and so far as anything appears by this record that was a final disposition of the cause.

There was no action commenced and pending in the circuit court to which the application for a receiver was ancillary, hence the judge had no jurisdiction to appoint a receiver. The ease is fully ruled by Alexandria Gas Co. et al. v. Irish, 152 Ind. 535 , and oases there cited.

The order appointing a receiver is therefore reversed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1924: 11925: 11953: 119242026peak 1924 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. District No. 21 United Mine Workers of America v. Bourland277 S.W. 546 (Ark. 1925)
  2. Tucker v. Tucker142 N.E. 11 (Ind. 1924)
  3. Johann, Sr. v. Johann, Jr.111 N.E.2d 473 (Ind. 1953)

Most recent

  1. Johann, Sr. v. Johann, Jr.111 N.E.2d 473 (Ind. 1953)
  2. District No. 21 United Mine Workers of America v. Bourland277 S.W. 546 (Ark. 1925)
  3. Tucker v. Tucker142 N.E. 11 (Ind. 1924)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Alexandria Gas Co. v. Irish, 53 N.E. 762 (Ind. 1899) 13

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list