Pratt v. Anderson

Citations

• 126 Wash. 30
• 216 P. 885
• 1923 Wash. LEXIS 1073

Syllabus

<p>Receivers (29) — Appointment—Collateral Attack. In an action by a receiver, his appointment cannot be collaterally attacked on the ground of want of prior notice, and that he was disqualified as having been attorney for the judgment creditors, since those questions could be raised only on appeal.</p> <p>Receivers (14)- — Appointment—Qualifications—Attorneys. An attorney for judgment creditors is not disqualified to act as receiver where he was not an attorney for the creditor in the case in which the appointment was made.</p>