Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

71 F.2d 706

Docket No. 7301.

Wake Development Co. v. Auburn-Fuller Co.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided June 12, 1934.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1934-06-12

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1938

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Davis v. Mercantile Trust Co. · Jacobs v. George · Hewitt v. Filbert

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1934-06-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*707Young & Young and Milton K. Young, all of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.

¶2Chandler, Wright & Ward and John F. Gilbert, all of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

¶3Before WILBUR, SAWTELLE, and GARRE CUT, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5Appellee petitioned the court for leave to compromise five claims for damages for breach of five separate leases of premises occupied by the defendant Auburn-Fuller Company before tlie appointment of receiver. In , pursuance of this application and over the objections of four claimants whose claims had been theretofore allowed, the trial court authorized the settlement and immediate payment of said claims, as follows: ’

Van, Ness Realty Co &3 679
William et
Katherine Eddy................... 1,250
Olof Johnson ..................... 1,500
Beverly Wilshire Investment Company .............................1,250

¶6He overruled the objections of E. L. Cord, whose claims were $637,200 and had been disallowed, and the objections of Auburn-California Company whoso claims had been allowed for $3,116.83; Duesenberg, Ine., whose elaims had been allowed for $2,975.72; Don P. Smith whoso claims had been allowed for $1,790.85; and Los Angeles Broadcasting Company whose claims had been allowed ror $19,207.59. The citation on appeal was directed solely to the receiver and his attorneys. The claimants, whose claims were compromised and ordered paid, were necessary parties to the appeal and in default of service of citation upon them this court cannot proceed with the appeal. Seaboard Nat. Bank v. Rogers Milk Products Co. (C. C. A.) 16 F. (2d) 271; Bloomingdale v. Watson (C. C. A.) 128 F. 268; Speers Sand & Clay Works v. American Trust Co. (C. C. A.) 37 F.(2d) 572; Jacobs v. George, 150 U. S. 415, 14 S. Ct. 159, 37 L. Ed. 1127; Davis v. Mercantile Trust Co., 152 U. S. 590, 14 S. Ct. 693, 38 L. Ed. 563; Hewitt v. Filbert, 116 U. S. 142, 6 S. Ct, 319, 29 L. Ed. 581.

¶7The submission of this matter on the mor- ... , A . ,, , , 0 its is vacated with directions to the clerk of ., . ... .... , . this court to issue a citation on appeal to the claimants provided application is made therefor within ten days.

/71/f2d/706 · .json · Public domain