Article Text
MAKES DEMAND FOR RECEIVER Urgency Pleaded by Lawyer Wise in Coast Pacific Case Savings Society CLIENTS ARE UNSECURED Motion to Make Injunction Permanent Continued for Argument Until Tuesday The argument on a motion for a permanent injunction to restrain and enjoin the Pacific Coast Savings Society from transacting further business on the ground that it is insolvent was to have been heard before Judge Lawlor yesterday afternoon at 2 o'clock. Attorneys representing various interests were present. When the case was called the Judge suggested that another date for hearing be agreed upon, as he could not take up the case. Attorney O. I. Wise, representing stockholders who had paid in more than $100,000. said that the only question up was the appointment of receivers, as all were agreed that the society was insolvent. That should not take much time and he pleaded urgency. Attorney Van Ness, representing the Canadian and American Mortgage and Trust Company, holders of the society's debenture bonds, who had filed a complaint in Intervention, said that the society's debts amounted to about $72,500. He thought there was nothing to justify the appointment of receivers and asked whether the parties interested could not agree upon the best method of liquidating the estate. He suggested that a continuance of four or five days be granted to see if it were not possible to make some satisfactory arrangements in that direction. The temporary restraining order was sufficient to prohibit the society from doing any further business. Attorney Wise said that Van Ness' clients were nominally secured and so was Daniel Meyer's bank, but his clients were unsecured. There was nothing to prevent Meyer from foreclosing, thereby depriving others of the benefit of any surplusage. He repeated that the only question was the naming of receivers. The rights of Van Ness' clients could not be impaired. The arguments went over till Tuesday morning, and the attorneys were asked to come prepared with authorities as to whether the allegations in the complaint were sufficient to authcrize the court to appoint receivers. Attorney Wise then filed a complaint in intervention on behalf of W. H. Kent and 200 other stockholders.
