Saunders v. Kempner
| Citation | 32 S.W. 585 |
| Parties | SAUNDERS v. KEMPNER et al.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
| Decision Date | 16 October 1895 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas |
Appeal from district court, Guadalupe county; T. H. Spooner, Judge.
Petition by H. Kempner against R. E. Saunders and others for the appointment of a receiver. A receiver was appointed. Defendant Saunders filed a cross bill for damages caused by the appointment of the receiver, claiming that there was no ground for his appointment. From a judgment striking out his cross bill on exceptions, and a distribution of the property in the hands of the receiver, defendant Saunders appeals. Affirmed.
W. E. Goodrich, for appellant.
The petition in the case was filed by H. Kempner, asking for the appointment of a receiver to take charge of a stock of goods and store accounts that had been the property of the firm of Whittaker & Co., and, by certain proceedings, were at the time of the suit in the hands of R. E. Saunders. It is not necessary to state the grounds upon which the application was based. J. B. Whittaker & Co., Adam Seidemann, R. E. Saunders, John Ireland, and E. Nolte & Sons were the defendants. The prayer was, in substance, that defendants be cited and required to assert any equities they had in and to the property; that the claim of John Ireland be decreed to be a first lien, that plaintiffs' claim be declared a second lien, and that of E. Nolte & Sons a third lien; and that so much of defendant Saunders' claim as is legal and just be declared a lien subsequent to the above; and that the property be sold, and the proceeds applied as the facts upon a trial should require. The motion for receiver was opposed by Saunders at a hearing when it was considered, and the court, having heard the pleadings and testimony, granted the motion, and appointed a receiver on September 14, 1893. Saunders did not except to this action of the court, and did not appeal from the interlocutory judgment, as was allowed by the act of April 13, 1892. The cause was finally disposed of on May 21, 1895. On May 20, 1895, defendant Saunders filed a general denial, also set up in detail his claim to the property, and also in the form of a cross bill, pleading that he had been damaged by reason of the appointment of the receiver at the instance of Kempner, Ireland, and Nolte & Sons, and in the taking of the property from his possession, resulting in its total loss to him, and asked for exemplary damages, in that the petition showed no grounds for a receivership, and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Riffle v. Sioux City and Rock Springs Coal Mining Co.
......Fish Co., 42. Wash. 332; Pagett v. Brooks, (Ala.) 37 So. 263;. Greeley v. Bank, (Mo.) 15 S.W. 429; Post v. Dorr, 4 Edw. (N. Y.) 412; Saunders v. Kemper,. (Tex.) 32 S.W. 585; Neeves v. Boos, 86 Wis. 313; 32 Cyc., 162 and cases cited in notes; High on. Receivers, (4th Ed.) sec. 37; State ......
-
Archer v. Ross
...Tex.Civ.App., 244 S.W.2d 844; Leach v. Leach, Tex.Civ.App., 223 S.W. 287; Huth v. Huth, Tex.Civ.App., 110 S.W.2d 1011; Saunders v. Kempner, Tex.Civ.App., 32 S.W. 585. Appellants did not file a motion to re-tax or readjudicate costs of receivership but in their amended motion for new trial l......
-
Copeland v. Cooper Grocery Co.
...it from the Rotan Grocery Company, thereby depriving it of its value, alleged to be $350. Upon the authority of Saunders v. Kempner (Tex. Civ. App.) 32 S. W. 585, decided by the court of civil appeals at San Antonio, the trial court held that the Cooper Grocery Company could not be held lia......