Moe v. Royal Life Insurance, 199 Ill. App. 305 (1916)

April 28, 1916 · Illinois Appellate Court · Gen. No. 22,471

199 Ill. App. 305

Chester C. Moe et al., Appellees, v. Royal Life Insurance Company, Appellant.

Gen. No. 22,471.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Interlocutory appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Chables M. Foell, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court.

Reversed.

Opinion filed April 28, 1916.

Rehearing denied May 11, 1916.

Statement of the Case.

Bill by Chester C. Moe, Catharine Davis Moe, Harold Rossiter, Mabel Oehlsen, C. S. Krysinski, Julius Shieffert, Adolph Pearson and Wildon Ohlson, complainants, as stockholders, on behalf of themselves and all other stockholders in said corporation similarly situated, against- the Royal Life Insurance Company, a corporation, and others, defendants, for the appointment of a receiver. From an interlocutory order appointing a receiver without notice, defendant appeals.

Henry J. Toner, for appellant.

William McKinley, Homer Ekern, Homer Sullivan, C. W. Armstrong and L. F. Binkley, for appellees.

* See Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. XI to XV, and Cnmnlative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Appeal and error, § 350 ^* —when corporation may appeal from order appointing receiver. Where, on a hill by stockholders of a corporation on behalf of themselves and other stockholders against the corporation and its directors and officers, an order is entered appointing a receiver of the corporation pendente lite, the corporation may appeal therefrom.

2. Corporations, § 561*—when interlocutory order appointing receiver pendente lite not reversed for lack of notice. The fact that on a bill by stockholders of a corporation on behalf of themselves and other stockholders against the corporation, its directors and officers an interlocutory order is entered, without notice to the corporation, appointing a receiver for it pendente lite is not ground for reversing the order where it appears that after the appointment of the receiver the defendant company entered its appearance, filed a demurrer to the bill and made a motion to vacate the order, which was denied.

3. Corporations, § 563*—when allegations of stockholders’ hill insufficient to warrant appointment of receiver pendente lite. Allegations of a bill by minority stockholders against the corporation, its officers and agents, examined and held insufficient to warrant the entry of an interlocutory order appointing a receiver for the corporation pendente lite.