In re Dennett

Good Law
136 C.C.A. 422·221 F. 350·1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 1336
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 15, 1915No. 2417California1,561 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Wolverton, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [ 1 ] That the term of court had expired at which the first decree was made and entered no one questions, and that a court is without power or authority to modify, set aside, or open tip a decree, rendered properly within the scope of the pleadings, after the expiration of the term at which it was given and entered, is likewise conceded. But it is insisted by respondent and counsel that the court exceeded its jurisdiction in entering the decree, for that the relief granted was such as the court could not properly administer.

The manifest theory and purpose of the original bill is and was, first, to redress a wrong done by the Loan Association, its stockholders participating therein, and its directors and officers, in fraudulently, and without legal or rightful authority, transferring its property and assets to the Trust Company; and, secondly, to wind out the affairs of the Loan Association, it being alleged that it was insolvent and disabled from continuing further with the business for which it was organized and incorporated. Very naturally, the first relief was to recover back the properties that had gone into the hands of the Trust Company…

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.