28 U.S.C. § 1692
Process and orders affecting property in different districts
In proceedings in a district court where a receiver is appointed for property, real, personal, or mixed, situated in different districts, process may issue and be executed in any such district as if the property lay wholly within one district, but orders affecting the property shall be entered of record in each of such districts.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1978–2024 · leading case: Securities & Exchange Commission v. Bilzerian
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Bilzerian (2004)
“28 U.S.C. § 1692 . Finally, “to invoke § 1692, a receiver first must comply with 28 U.”
W. Henry Haile, Receiver-Appellant v. Henderson National Bank, Cleveland J. Bridges and Betty Bridges (1981)
“In addition, 28 U.S.C. § 1692 now provides: In proceedings in a district court where a receiver is appointed for property, real, personal or mixed, situated in different districts, process may issue and be executed in any such district as if the property lay wholly within one…”
Donell v. Keppers (2011)
“] Plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause where he argued that the Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant through the interplay of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(k)(l)(D), 28 U.S.C. § 1692 , and 28 U.S.C. § 754 . [Doc.”
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Ross (2007)
“…districts, process may issue and be executed in any such district as if the property lay wholly within one district.” 28 U.S.C. § 1692 . Some courts have held that the interplay between § 754 and § 1692 operates analogously to statutes that confer the power to effect service…”
U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Nesbitt Bellevue Property LLC (2012)
“28 U.S.C. § 1692 . As a general matter, when a receiver is sought pursuant to Rule 66 in a diversity case, “the appointment of a receiver in equity is not a substantive right but is a remedy that is ancillary to the primary relief prayed for in the suit.”
Klein v. Cornelius (2015)
“In addition, 28 U.S.C. § 1692 provides that where a receiver is appointed for property located in different districts, “process may issue and be executed in any such district as if the property lay wholly within one district.”
The American Freedom Train Foundation, Etc. v. Peter L. Spurney (1984)
“§ 754 and its companion statute governing service of process; 28 U.S.C. § 1692 . These statutes vest receivers with jurisdiction over all corporate property, wherever situated, provided that copies of the complaint and order of appointment are filed in the district court for…”
Janvey v. Alguire (2011)
“” Section 754 and 28 U.S.C. § 1692 provide the appropriate statutory authority for the Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction in this case.”
Select Creations, Inc. v. Paliafito America, Inc. (1994)
“See 28 U.S.C. § 1692 ; Haile, 657 F.2d at 826 (“The process authorized by § 1692 is not ‘extra-territorial’ but rather nationwide — The appointment court’s process extends to any judicial district where receivership property is found____ As such, the minimum contacts analysis,…”
Carney v. Beracha (2014)
“Step two requires a statute authorizing service of the defendant outside the relevant court, such as 28 U.S.C. § 1692 . Id. Step three, the invocation of section 1692, requires that a receiver comply with section 754’s filing requirements.”
Carney v. Lopez (2013)
“Step two requires a statute authorizing service of the defendant outside the relevant court, such as 28 U.S.C. § 1692 . Id. Step three, the invocation of section 1692, requires that a receiver complies with section 754’s filing requirements.”
Treasure Salvors, Inc. v. Unidentified Wrecked & Abandoned Sailing Vessel (1978)
“The upholding of jurisdiction is also fully in accord with the provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1692 regarding property in different districts: In proceedings in a district court where a receiver is appointed for property, real, personal, or mixed, situated in different districts,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.