Ridgely

Ridgely v. Abbott Quicksilver Mining Co.

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 773·1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 235·117 P. 1036
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 1911Civ. No. 701.California696 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

J.—The appeal is from an order of the superior court of Lake county removing one Matthew T. Wilson from the office of receiver in the above-entitled cause and appointing in his place one Euvelle Howard.

Respondent has presented no argument, either orally or by brief. This may be for the reason that appellants’ con tention was deemed unanswerable, or probably respondent did not feel inclined to incur any additional expense, since, according to the evidence, the property is merely of nominal value. This court should have been apprised, however, by respondent of his attitude or been afforded the advantage of his views upon the questions herein involved. On account of his remissness he would have no cause for complaint if the order were reversed without any examination of the record. We have, however, considered with some care the points made by appellants.

It seems that, on March 27, 1903, the plaintiff brought suit to foreclose upon certain bonds, secured by a mortgage upon the real property involved herein. On the same day one Riley A. Boggess, was, ex parte, appointed a receiver of the property. On October 2, 1903, a final decree of foreclosure was entered, at which time Boggess…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.