Case ID: nys_18/html/0542-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

People v. Bushwick Chemical Co. et al. In re Brookfield.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.
    
    March 31, 1892.)
    ■Receivers—Discharge.
    A receiver, into whose hands no property has come, and whose appointment has been vacated, is entitled to his discharge.
    Appeal from judgment on report of referee.
    Action by the people of the state of Hew York against the Bushwick ■Chemical Company for the appointment of a receiver of the works. From an order overruling exceptions to report of referee, and discharging the receiver, the Second national Bank of Mauch Chunk, Pa., and the Merchants’ national Bank of Burlington, Vt., claiming to be creditors of the Bushwick Chemical 'Company, appeal.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before Van Brunt, P. J., and O’Brien and Ingraham, JJ.
    
      
      C. Bainbridge Smith, for appellants. Charles F. McLean, for Brookfield, receiver.
   Per Curiam.

It appears among the findings of the referee that no property, assets, effects, or books of said company came into the hands of said William Brookfield, as receiver, under the order of the supreme court of the city, county, and state of New York appointing him receiver upon the application of the people of the state of New York. The evidence not being before the court, it must be assumed that it was sufficient to sustain the finding. As no property of the corporation ever came into the hands of the receiver, and as the order appointing him receiver had been vacated and set aside, he was entitled to his discharge as receiver; and the order which discharged him, and canceled his bond, should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.