Summary

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Emil v. Hanley — Opinion of the Court

It seems clear that such a foreclosure receiver is included within § 2, sub. a (21) where proceedings under Ch. X have supervened. But the fact that a foreclosure receiver is included for one purpose does not necessarily mean that he is included for another. Plans of reorganization under Ch. X may (§ 216) and commonly do affect the rights of mortgagees. Hence § 148 provides that an order approving a petition under Ch. X operates to stay a pending mortgage foreclosure or other proceeding to enforce a lien against the debtor's property.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Emil v. Hanley — Opinion of the Court

And § 256 and § 257 provide that the trustee (or debtor) acquires all rights in, and the right to immediate possession of, the property of the debtor under the control of a receiver or trustee appointed in a prior proceeding in any federal or state court. That is to say, a Ch. X proceeding supersedes a pending mortgage foreclosure. We thus find § 2, sub. a (21) , performing the same function when applied to Ch. X proceedings [7] as it does when applied to ordinary bankruptcy.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Emil v. Hanley — Opinion of the Court

Does § 2, sub. a [21] go further and apply to a case where a receiver is appointed within four months of bankruptcy as an incident to enforcement of a mortgage lien whose validity is not challenged? Prior to the Chandler Act such proceedings were not superseded by bankruptcy. They survived bankruptcy, the interest of the estate in them being protected by the intervention of the bankruptcy trustee.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature