(defendants challenged trial court’s appointment of an independent farm manager to safeguard property pending a final determination of the parties’ rights to 640 acres of farmland owned by various family members; in affirming the trial court’s order, the court first ruled that jurisdiction existed pursuant to Ill. S. Ct. R. 307(a)(2), allowing an appeal from an interlocutory order appointing a “receiver”; appointment of an independent manager was necessary because plaintiffs’ property and profits were in danger of waste or misconduct since one of the defendants was managing the farm; trial court had no duty to recuse himself because he owned only a de minimis number of shares in the bank he appointed to manage the property, and the trial court’s inquiry to the bank as to whether it still provided management services was not an improper ex parte communication).
Huggins v. Harrison, No. 4-12-0956, 2013 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1496 (Jul. 2, 2103)
Date of decision:
The Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation does not provide legal advice. Any information provided on this website is not intended to be a substitute for legal services from a competent professional. The Center's work is supported by fee-based seminars and generous private gifts. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in the material contained on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Iowa State University.