RECEIVERS - INDIVIDUAL INCORPORATING HIS ASSETS TO SECURE CONSENT RECEIVERSHIP

Authors

Abstract

One Robinson, a lumber dealer in Philadelphia, was unable to pay his debts as they matured, but believed that he could satisfy his creditors and leave a surplus if he was not pressed. Neither in federal nor in Pennsylvania practice will a receiver be appointed for an individual. Robinson transferred his property to a Delaware corporation organized by him, receiving in return substantially all of the company's stock. The corporation agreed to assume his debts. A few days later Robinson and a simple contract creditor petitioned a federal district court for Pennsylvania for the appointment of receivers for the corporation, making the allegations usual in conservation receivership bills. The corporation filed an answer admitting the allegations of the bill and joined in the prayer, and receivers were appointed. Plaintiff later filed suit against Robinson in the state courts, prosecuted it to judgment, and petitioned the federal court for leave to levy execution on the property in the receivers' hands. Held, that the transfer to the corporation was a fraud on creditors, and that the receivership, as part of a single scheme, fell with the rest of the transaction. The trial court was ordered to allow issuance of execution or to direct payment out of the assets in the receivers' hands. Shapiro v. Wilgus and Bachman, Receivers, (United States Sup. Ct., Dec. 5, 1932) U.S. Daily Supp. Dec. 6, 1932.

Recommended Citation

RECEIVERS - INDIVIDUAL INCORPORATING HIS ASSETS TO SECURE CONSENT RECEIVERSHIP, 31 Mich. L. Rev. 437 (1933).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol31/iss3/22