Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas, during the latter part of the Austin term, 1884, and the Tyler term, 1884. Volume 62. Page: 42
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
42 RYAN v. HAYS. [Austin Term,
The special charge asked by the appellant was correctly refused;
for it assumed a state of facts not made by the evidence and pleading,
and in many respects, already considered, was erroneous.
The case of Ohio & Mississippi R'y Co. v. Nickeless, 73 Ind., 383,
relied on by appellant, has been carefully considered, but we do not
see that it has application to this case. It appears in that case that
a cause of action existed against the railway company, and that it
pleaded in abatement of the action the fact that the road, together
with the other property, at the time the suit was brought, was in the
hands of a receiver, and that by the orders of the court appointing
the receiver, it was forbidden to pay any debt or to adjust any
claim. To this plea a demurrer was sustained, and properly sustained;
and the defendant seems to have considered the ruling so
manifestly right, that the ruling was not brought in question on
appeal by a considered assignment of error.
In the ruling of the court below, in that case, we have simply the
ruling that a railway company may be sued for a debt due by it,
notwithstanding its property may be in the hands of a receiver at
the time the suit is brought. We see no error in the judgment and
it is affirmed.
[Opinion delivered June 17, 1884.]
JOHN RYAN V. R. S. HAYS, RECEIVER.
(Case No. 5061.)
I. & G. N. R'Y Co. v. JOHN RYAN.
(Case No. 5249.)
1. RAILWAY COMPANY - LIABILITY OF RECEIVER - DAMAGES.--A receiver was
appointed in April, 1878, by a court of competent jurisdiction, on the application
of bond-holding creditors of a railway company, and was invested
with exclusive authority to manage and carry on the business of the road,
as a common carrier, subject to the supervision of the court, and for that
purpose he was invested by its order with all the rights and franchises of
the corporation. The property was afterwards sold, October 13, 1879, and
purchased by the bondholders, for whose benefit the receiver had been appointed,
and the sale had been ordered. The sale being approved by the
court, a deed was executed to the purchasers. The purchasers thereupon
conveyed the property to the original railway company for a less sum than
the amount bid by them, taking a mortgage to secure payment. After the
reconveyance to the original company, its board of directors passed a resolution
accepting from the receiver the property and all money in his hands,
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas, during the latter part of the Austin term, 1884, and the Tyler term, 1884. Volume 62., book, 1885; Austin, Texas. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28512/m1/64/: accessed March 23, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .