Potter

Potter v. McFarland

Good Law
44 F.2d 375·1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 3376
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 27, 1930No. 6233California605 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rudkin, J.

This was an action by one Smallin, as plaintiff, against the receiver of the Stewart Fruit Company, as defendant, to recover the value of a quantity of grapes alleged to have been sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant as such receiver. There was a second cause of action, based upon a claim of a similar nature assigned to the plaintiff by one Beall, but the facts and rules of law applicable to both causes of action are the same. Smallin died during the pendency of the action, and the administrator of his estate was substituted in his place and stead. From a judgment on a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, the defendant has appealed.

Briefly stated, the facts are as follows: March 2, 1926, in a certain suit wherein the First National Bank of Medford, Or., was plaintiff, and the Stewart Fruit Company, a corporation, was defendant, an order was made appointing one Patterson as receiver of the fruit company, and by such order the receiver was authorized and directed to operate, manage, and control the business and assets of the fruit company in such manner as in his judgment would produce the best results, so that the same might be continued in operation as a business…

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.