From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farmers' Loan and Tr. Co. v. Hotel Brunswick Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1896
12 App. Div. 628 (N.Y. App. Div. 1896)

Opinion

December Term, 1896.

Present — Van Brunt, P.J., Barrett, Rumsey, O'Brien and Ingraham, JJ.


Order affirmed, without costs. —


The question which arose between Mr. Baker and Mr. Sturgis, with regard to the property to be sold under the order appealed from, is no longer of any importance. This court takes judicial notice of the fact that it has modified the order appointing Mr. Sturgis receiver by substituting Mr. Baker in his place. The effect of this is that all the money received upon the sale will pass into Mr. Baker's possession under the previous order. The question, therefore, whether property not covered by the mortgage was sold, is unimportant. As Mr. Baker is the receiver of the company, generally, and as such receiver is entitled to the proceeds both of the sale of the mortgaged property (which he will hold for the plaintiff), and also of what may not have been covered by the mortgage, the disputed question which arose at the time of the sale is, at the present time, of no moment. The order should be affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Farmers' Loan and Tr. Co. v. Hotel Brunswick Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1896
12 App. Div. 628 (N.Y. App. Div. 1896)
Case details for

Farmers' Loan and Tr. Co. v. Hotel Brunswick Co.

Case Details

Full title:The Farmers' Loan and Trust Company, as Trustee, Respondent, v. The Hotel…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 1, 1896

Citations

12 App. Div. 628 (N.Y. App. Div. 1896)