The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-06-20
TIE PLANTERS ASSOCIATION.
On the Motion to vacate the order Grant,
ing q Recelvership.

The rule taken to vacate the orders appoint
ing receivers for the Consolidated Association
of the Planters OF Louisiana and restore its
assets in the following cases, viz: No. 794O,
Max Grebner VS.. Ben. T. Flanders ct al; No.
8O14, in the matter of the liquidation of the
Consolidated Association of the Planters Of
Louisiana, came up for hearing yesterday.
The following is the statement of the case
as given by the opponents of the rule to
vacate the order to appoint a receiver:
STATEMENT OF THE CASES.
In the year 1876 before the expiration Of the
last extension Of the bonds issued by the
State ia aid Of the association the affairs of
OF directors regularly organized under act of
the Legislature, passed ii 1853, end under
which b. F. Flanders was acting as presi-
dent. About the seventeenth of June,
1 tS,i,o Mr. E;o+,u Chas. Nathan, bond
at the lnstigation of Flanders filed a petition
In the Superior District Court, and hunted up
the record of the suit for forfeiture Of the
charter OF the bank, which had been institu-
ted in 1912, transferred it to the above court
and filed a supplemental petition therein,
alleging that the term of liquidation Of the
bank under the law was about to expire; that
there was no provision Of law for its future
management and liquidation, and asked that
was purely ex parte; nobody was notified
or asked to be notified, and In an
extinct suit, in which final judgment had been
rendered thirtyfour years previously, which
judgment had received full execution, and the
power OF the court over it was exhausted.
Upon this judicial proceeding B. F. Flanders
was appointed by the court receiver, author
izing him to take immediate possession of all
the books, assets and affairs of the corpora
ton. Mr. Flanders, himself director and the
~ hn pH of FOL
order or court and under its pretended author
ity Gbdndon8 his trust, dissOlves the board
and turns over to himself as receiver the af-
fairs of the Consolidation Association, and as
one of the receivers Of this court now charges
upon the stockholders and the State an aban-
dOnment of their possession.
Flanders having thus, under apparent Judi
cial authority, dispossessed the corporation
and the State, proceeded with his admins
tration as receiver under the authority of the
Superior District Court.
In the meantime one Max Grebner, for
eigner, holder of State bonds issued in aid of
the corporation to the amount OF some eight
hundred dollars, conceiving the idea that his
Ousted from his illegal possession, and have
has man appointed receiver by this court
under his bill, No 1910, asked for and OBJ
tanned restraining order: When this order
consultation was had between himself and
the counsel of Grebner, and d partial
release was consented to, after which
the counsel and Flanders, at the expense of
the association, departed for our judiciary in
New Haven, and had before his honor, it is
reported, an understanding that on the return
of the court division Oh the fees would not
be opposed, and that all parties would be sat
isfied. This was, the plaintiffs say, the real
object when the bonds were placed in the
hands Of Grebner, before filing mis- bill in suit
No. 1910 Of this court
At the opening OF the court In the fall OF
1875, Flanders apparently was not acting in