STATE OF OKLAHOMA
v.
STATE OF TEXAS, UNITED STATES, INTERVENER
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Oklahoma and Texas disputed a boundary matter in which the Supreme Court appointed a receiver to manage property and funds pending resolution; the Court approved the receiver's final accounting and terminated the receivership after finding all assets had been properly disposed of and all obligations fulfilled.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
On’consideration of the final report of the receiver, presented a week ago, it is ordered that the accounts, disbursements and transactions of the receiver shown in the report be approved.
And it appearing that all of the property and moneys which came into the possession of the receiver have been disposed of, disbursed and paid out in compliance with the instructions and orders of the Court; that all of the expenses of the receivership have been paid; that the receiver has stored the books of account, records and files of the receivership with the Security Storage Company of Washington, D. C., and has delivered the same as stored to the clerk of the Court, as directed in the order of May 11, last'; and that the receivership ha$ served its purpose and is, now ready to be. closed:
It is considered, ordered and decreed that the receivership in this cause be, and it, now is, déclared at an end;, and that the receiver be, and he now is, relieved-and discharged from further duty, obligation and responsibility in .the premises.
In terminating the receivership the Court expresses its high appreciation of the admirable service of the receiver in satisfactorily managing a large estate in novel and difficult circumstances.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cal. State Bd. of Equalization v. Goggin, 191 F.2d 726 (9th Cir. 1951)…International Shoe Co. v. Pinkus, 278 U.S. 261, 49 S.Ct. 108, 73 L.Ed. 318. The Court had a right to protect its own officers in the discharge of their duties laid down- by Congress. Oklahoma v. Texas, 266 U.S. 298, 45 S.Ct. 101, 69 L.Ed. 296; Id., 268 U.S. 472, 45 S.Ct. 609, 69 L.Ed. 1057.…