McCandless v. Furlaud,
293 U.S. 67 (1934)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

McCandless v. Furlaud, 293 U.S. 67 (1934)

McCandless v. Furlaud

No. 11

Argued October 11, 1934

Decided November 5, 1934

293 U.S. 67


1. An objection to the capacity of the receiver of a corporation, appointed by a federal court, to sue in a federal court in another State under an ancillary appointment made on his direct ex parte application and not as an incident to an independent bill, is an objection that might have been remedied if timely made in the court of first instance, and is waived if made for the first time on appeal. P. 293 U. S. 73.

2. The court in which the receiver sued having jurisdiction of both the subject matter and the parties, the objection to the manner of his appointment goes not to the court's jurisdiction, but to his legal capacity as plaintiff. P. 293 U. S. 74.

3. Booth v. Clark, 17 How. 322, distinguished. P. 293 U. S. 75.

68 F.2d 925 reversed.

Certiorari, 292 U.S. 617, to review the reversal of a decree in a suit brought by McCandless as ancillary receiver. The review here was to be limited to the questions pertaining to the validity of the appointment of the petitioner as ancillary receiver, and his right as such to maintain this suit.

Page 293 U. S. 68

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.