Parks v. United States Bankers' Corp.
| Decision Date | 10 July 1905 |
| Citation | 140 F. 160 |
| Parties | PARKS v. UNITED STATES BANKERS' CORPORATION. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
C. Andrade, Jr., for the motion.
Reuben Leslie Maynard, opposed.
This is a controversy between stockholders of a Marine corporation. The owners of 2,982 shares unite in prayer for appointment of receiver, the owners of 3,360 shares oppose the application. No creditor appears. On the contrary, there seem to be no creditors, while the assets are concededly about $20,000. There has been no judgment entered, nor execution returned unsatisfied, no receivers appointed in the home state, nothing to indicate insolvency, or the necessity of protecting the assets for the benefit of creditors. There is no reason why the parties should not take their controversy to the state of Maine, which created the corporation, and which alone has power to dissolve it. When receivers are there appointed, this court will appoint ancillary receivers to conserve any property which may be here; but as the case now stands, there is no reason certainly why this court should appoint a temporary receiver, nor interfere with the management of the internal affairs of this foreign corporation.
Motion denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burnrite Coal Briquette Co v. Riggs
...A.) 229 F. 59. 2 See Leary v. Columbia River Nav. Co. (C. C.) 82 F. 775; Sidway v. Missouri Land Co. (C. C.) 101 F. 481; Parks v. Bankers' Corporation (C. C.) 140 F. 160; Pearce v. Sutherland (C. C. A.) 164 F. 609; Maguire v. Mortgage Co. (C. C. A.) 203 F. 858. 3 Compare Central Trust Co. v......
-
Ward v. Foulkrod
...it is elementary that the state which creates a corporation alone has the power to wind up its affairs and dissolve it. Parks v. U.S. Bankers' Corp. (C.C.) 140 F. 160; Maguire v. Mortgage Co., 203 F. 858, 122 C.C.A. The action in the state court, while it included the relief of conservation......
-
Fehr v. Black Petroleum Corp.
...by numerous cases, among which may be found the following: State ex rel. Minne. Mutual Company v. Denton, 138 Am. St. Rep. 417; Parks v. U.S. Corp., 140 F. 160; Gregory v. N. Y. L. E. & W. R. Co., 40 N.J. Eq. 38; Jackson v. Hooper, 76 N.J. Eq. 592, 27 L.R.A. (N.S.) 658; Richardson v. Clinto......
-
Williamson v. Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co.
...Maguire v. Mortgage Co. of America (C. C. A.) 203 F. 858; Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Newman (C. C. A.) 187 F. 573; Parks v. United States Bankers' Corp. (C. C.) 140 F. 160; Sidway v. Missouri Land & Live Stock Co. (C. C.) 101 F. 481, 485; Leary v. Columbia River & P. S. Nav. Co. (C. C.) 8......