Ohio Court of Appeals, 1926

Euclid Roxford Co. v. Bolgar

Euclid Roxford Co. v. Bolgar
Ohio Court of Appeals · Decided March 1, 1926 · Levine
4 Ohio Law. Abs. 733; 1926 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 968

Euclid Roxford Co. v. Bolgar

Opinion of the Court

LEVINE, P. J.

Cuyahoga Common Pleas having appointed a receiver on application of Aranka Bolgar, error was prosecuted to the Court of Appeals on the sole ground that no notice had been given to the Euclid Roxford Co. The Court of Appeals held:

1. The general rule is that notice must be given on application for appointment of a receiver.
2. When an emergency exists, requiring immediate action a receiver may be appointed without notice.
3. Every presumption is in favor of the regularity of the order appointing a receiver.
4. In absence of evidence to the contrary, facts necessary to sustain the order will be presumed.

Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.