Stelling v. G. W. Jones Lumber Co.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The following Is the opinion of the district court (SEAMAN, District Judge): “The amount involved in this controversy is considerable, and the testimony has been heard in open court The absence of conflict in matters material to the issue is noteworthy,—especially in view of the disputes heretofore existing,—and the issues are thereby simplified.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The following Is the opinion of the district court (SEAMAN, District Judge): “The amount involved in this controversy is considerable, and the testimony has been heard in open court The absence of conflict in matters material to the issue is noteworthy,—especially in view of the disputes heretofore existing,—and the issues are thereby simplified. No actual fraud appears, and the issue raised as to constructive fraud is clearly set aside by the testimony. The contract in writing between the bankrupts and…
1Opinion of the Court
JENKINS, Circuit Judge.
The cause comes properly before us by appeal. The proceeding below was not one “in bankruptcy,” as the term is employed in section 25 of the bankruptcy act (30 Stat. c. 541), but was in substance a bill in equity by the trustee against a stranger, of which the court below had jurisdiction by the consent of the appellee, but not otherwise. Bardes v. Bank, 178 U. S. 524, 20 Sup. Ct. 1000, 44 L. Ed. 1175. The suit was an independent suit in the nature of an equitable replevin, of which we take jurisdiction by appeal, not by virtue of the bankruptcy act, but under the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bardes v. Hawarden BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Blakeslee v. RossmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
- Boonville Nat. Bank of Boonville v. BlakeyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1901
- Manufacturers' Bank of Milwaukee v. RugeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Norwegian Plow Co. v. HanthornWisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re RuschCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1902
- Hyman v. SemmesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1928
- Williamson v. RichardsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1913
- In re Shipley Stave & Lumber Co.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1939