Gilbert v. Murphey
| Decision Date | 24 August 1900 |
| Parties | GILBERT v. MURPHEY. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Wisconsin |
Henry Schofield, for complainant.
Fish Cary, Upham & Black, for defendant.
The complainant sues as receiver of the estate of one Fredericksen, under appointment by the superior court of Cook county, Ill., as successor to one Filkins, who was the previously appointed receiver in the same matter. The bill charges, in substance, that the defendant, an attorney at law, and citizen of Wisconsin, acted as attorney for the said predecessor in the receivership, in conjunction with Cook & Upton, who were attorneys for the receiver at Chicago, and with one Hewetson, who was the agent and representative of the receiver in the various matters; that, so acting, certain suits were conducted by said defendant in Wisconsin to recover large claims asserted on behalf of the receivership against one Nunnemacher, which resulted in a decision by the supreme court adverse to the right of the receiver to maintain an action thereupon in the courts of Wisconsin, and such suits in the name of the receiver were eventually discontinued by the advice of the defendant; that pending the appeal to the supreme court in such proceedings, and for the ostensible purpose of providing against an adverse decision therein, such attorneys purchased for a small consideration a large claim against the trust estate held by one Rice, on which another suit was instituted by the defendant in the name of Upton, the nominal purchaser, with a garnishee and attachment proceeding against Nunnemacher, the same person who was defendant in the last-mentioned suits; that thereupon a settlement was made with Nunnemacher, whereby he paid over to the defendant, as such attorney, $36,000, as a compromise of all such claims against him, of which $1,000 only was paid over to the receiver, and the defendant failed and refused to account to the trust estate for the remaining $35,000, but the same was in some manner divided up between the attorneys and the agent, Hewetson, without accounting therefor to or with the trust estate; that Nunnemacher demanded and obtained upon such settlement releases of the trust estate, and discontinuance of all the suits, including the action in the name of the receiver, which was then dismissed by the defendant, together with the withdrawal of a petition for rehearing of the appeal to the supreme court then pending. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial