Safford v. People

Citations

• 85 Ill. 558

Syllabus

<p>1. Injunction by State court—receiver appointed by Federal court. Where an injunction is granted by a State court, and served on a railway company, restraining it and its servants from obstructing a public avenue in a city with its trains, etc., the same will be binding upon a receiver of the company subsequently appointed by the United States court, and such receiver, the same as a subsequent purchaser, will be punishable for contempt for disobeying the mandate of the writ.</p> <p>2. Same—punishment after removal from office. If the receivers of a corporation disobey an injunctionagainst the corporation, made before their appointment, the fact that they have been removed at the time they are tried for a contempt, affords no defense whatever.</p> <p>3. Same—as to receiver not actively participating. Where a railway company passes into the hands of receivers after it and its servants and agents are enjoined from obstructing a certain avenue, etc., with its cars, and in managing its business the injunction is disobeyed, one of the receivers can not be exonerated because he took no active part in the matters complained of. It is his duty to see that the injunction is obeyed.</p> <p>4. Receiver—of railroad, company as its agent. A receiver of a railway company appointed by the court to manage its business, is legally the agent of the company, although under the direction of the court appointing him.</p> <p>5. Same—powers. The court, in appointing a receiver for a corporation, has no power to enlarge or restrict the corporate powers and duties conferred on the corporation by its charter. The receiver is bound by the charter to the same extent as the directory. If the company is under a legal duty to perform or not to do a certain act, the same will devolve upon its receiver.</p>