Legal Opinion
In re Vulcan & Reiter Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 29, 1947No. 240, Docket 20556PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Per curiam
The order is affirmed on the opinion of the Special Master which rends as follows:
“In this matter, the amount sought to be recovered represents a part of the sums deposited for the purpose of a composition which was confirmed.
“The composition called for the payment of 30% to creditors which this petitioner received.
“Petitioner seeks to recover the total amount on deposit, namely $818.50, which is less than 70% o£ petitioner’s original claim.
“In my opinion, petitioner’s prayer must be denied. T base tny opinion on the legal nature of ;i confirmed composition which is binding- on all creditors…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cumberland Glass Manufacturing Co. v. De Witt & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Myers v. International Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- In re LaneDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1902
- In Re KornbluthCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- Pennsylvania R. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1938
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In Re Folding Carton Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1983
- Dillard v. YeldellDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1975
- In re Vulcan & Reiter Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1948
- United States v. RiveraDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1948