Ogden City v. Bear Lake & River Waterworks & Irrigation Co.
| Court | Supreme Court of Utah |
| Writing for the Court | ZANE, C. J. |
| Citation | 18 Utah 279,55 P. 385 |
| Parties | OGDEN CITY, RESPONDENT v. BEAR LAKE & RIVER WATER WORKS & IRRIGATION CO., BEAR RIVER IRRIGATION & OGDEN WATER WORKS COMPANY, SAMUEL M. JARVIS AND ROLAND R. CONKLIN |
| Decision Date | 05 December 1898 |
55 P. 385
18 Utah 279
OGDEN CITY, RESPONDENT
v.
BEAR LAKE & RIVER WATER WORKS & IRRIGATION CO., BEAR RIVER IRRIGATION & OGDEN WATER WORKS COMPANY, SAMUEL M. JARVIS AND ROLAND R. CONKLIN
Supreme Court of Utah
December 5, 1898
Appeal from the District Court of Weber County, Hon. Ogden Hiles, Judge.
Appeal by the Bear River Irrigation and Ogden Water Works Co. from the order of the court below, approving the report of the receiver and allowing various items thereof, and ordering them paid out of the funds in the receiver's hands.
Cause remanded.
Messrs. Rogers & Johnson, and Messrs. Bennett, Harkness, Howat, Bradley & Richards, for appellant.
The rule appellant contends for is that when a receiver has been appointed upon application of plaintiff, and the application is resisted by the defendant, and upon appeal his appointment is set aside and the property ordered returned to the defendant, then the compensation of the receiver and all expenses incurred incident to his appointment, additional to the ordinary and usual expenses should not be paid out of the fund but should be paid by the plaintiff who procured the appointment. Weston v. Watts, 45 Hun. 219; Pittsfield Nat. Bank v. Bayne et al., 140 N.Y. 321; Cooper v. Shirley, 75 F. 168; Highley v. Deane, 64 Ill.App. 389; French v. Gifford, 31 Iowa 428; Willis v. Sharp, 12 N.Y.S. 120; St. Louis v. Gas Light Co., 11 Mo.App. 237; Howe v. Jones, 60 Iowa 70; St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v. Wear, 36 S.W. 658; Brundage v. Savings & Loan Assn., (Wash.) 39 P. 669; Moyers v. Corner, 22 Fla. 422.
C. C. Richards, Esq., J. H. Macmillan, Esq., and E. M. Allison, Esq., for respondent.
We believe the better rule to be that inasmuch as the receiver is appointed to manage and preserve the property pending the litigation, for the benefit of those ultimately adjudged to be entitled to it, the cost of doing this, including his commissions, should be made a charge upon the property itself and paid out of its proceeds, regardless of who finally succeeds. Espuella, etc. Co. v. Bindle, 32 S. W., 582. Hembree v. Dawson, 18 Ore., 474. S. C., 23 P. 264. Hopfensack v. Hopfensack, 61 How. Pr., 498. New Birmingham, etc., v. Blevins, 34 S. W., 834.
ZANE, C. J. BARTCH, J. and MINER, J., concur.
OPINION
[18 Utah 281] ZANE, C. J.
This is an appeal by the Bear River Irrigation & Ogden Water Works Company, a defendant, from the order of the court below approving the report of Thomas D. Dee, Receiver, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. Byrd, 12701
...79 Mont. 499, 257 P. 267; Hickey v. Parrot, etc., Co., 32 Mont. 143, 79 P. 698, 108 Am.St.Rep. 510; Ogden City v. Bear Lake, etc., Co., 18 Utah 279, 55 P. 385; Rex Refining Co. v. Morris, Tex.Civ.App., 75 S.W.2d 156; Brundage v. Home Savings & Loan Ass'n, 11 Wash. 288, 39 P. 669. Where the ......
-
Weltner v. Thurmond
...or other officer, and ordering payment of money. (Grant v. Los Angeles, 116 Cal. 71; Grant v. Court, 106 Cal. 324; Ogden v. Bear Lake, 18 Utah 279; Bank v. Bank, 103 Wis. 39; Bank v. Bank, 127 N.C. 432; In re. R. R. Co., 124 F. 727; Stillman v. Hart, 126 F. 359; In re. Currier Est. (Colo.) ......
-
John v. Farwell Co. v. Craney
...other expenses out of funds in the receiver's hands is a final order, from which an appeal lies." (Ogden City v. Bear Lake etc. Irr. Co., 18 Utah 279, 55 P. 385; Grant v. Los Angeles & P. Ry. Co., 116 Cal. 71, 47 P. 872; Union Nat. Bank of Chicago v. Mills, 103 Wis. 39, 79 N.W. 20; Guarante......
-
John V. Farwell Co. v. Craney
...other expenses out of funds in the receiver's hands is a final order, from which an appeal lies." (Ogden City v. Bear Lake etc. Irr. Co., 18 Utah 279, 55 P. 385; Grant v. Los Angeles & P. Ry. Co., 116 Cal. 71, 47 P. 872; Union Nat. Bank of Chicago v. Mills, 103 Wis. 39, 79 N.W. 20; Guarante......
-
Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. Byrd, 12701
...79 Mont. 499, 257 P. 267; Hickey v. Parrot, etc., Co., 32 Mont. 143, 79 P. 698, 108 Am.St.Rep. 510; Ogden City v. Bear Lake, etc., Co., 18 Utah 279, 55 P. 385; Rex Refining Co. v. Morris, Tex.Civ.App., 75 S.W.2d 156; Brundage v. Home Savings & Loan Ass'n, 11 Wash. 288, 39 P. 669. Where the ......
-
Weltner v. Thurmond
...or other officer, and ordering payment of money. (Grant v. Los Angeles, 116 Cal. 71; Grant v. Court, 106 Cal. 324; Ogden v. Bear Lake, 18 Utah 279; Bank v. Bank, 103 Wis. 39; Bank v. Bank, 127 N.C. 432; In re. R. R. Co., 124 F. 727; Stillman v. Hart, 126 F. 359; In re. Currier Est. (Colo.) ......
-
John v. Farwell Co. v. Craney
...other expenses out of funds in the receiver's hands is a final order, from which an appeal lies." (Ogden City v. Bear Lake etc. Irr. Co., 18 Utah 279, 55 P. 385; Grant v. Los Angeles & P. Ry. Co., 116 Cal. 71, 47 P. 872; Union Nat. Bank of Chicago v. Mills, 103 Wis. 39, 79 N.W. 20; Guarante......
-
John V. Farwell Co. v. Craney
...other expenses out of funds in the receiver's hands is a final order, from which an appeal lies." (Ogden City v. Bear Lake etc. Irr. Co., 18 Utah 279, 55 P. 385; Grant v. Los Angeles & P. Ry. Co., 116 Cal. 71, 47 P. 872; Union Nat. Bank of Chicago v. Mills, 103 Wis. 39, 79 N.W. 20; Guarante......