In re J. F. Pierson, Jr., & Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
In Bankruptcy. In the matter of the bankruptcy of J. F. Pierson, Jr., & Co. Omnibus customers’ reclamation proceeding.
1Opinion of the Court
LEARNED HAND, District Judge.
[1] Gorman v. Littlefield, 229 U. S. 19, 33 Sup. Ct. 690, 57 L. Ed. 1047, held that, when a broker had enough stocks in his box to meet all his obligations, it would be presumed that he had purchased them to keep good those obligations. Just what there was “revolutionary” in that doctrine I confess is not apparent to me, except that it reversed the rule theretofore obtaining for a short time in this circuit. Schuyler v. Littlefield, 232 U. S. 707, 34 Sup. Ct. 466, 58 L. Ed. 806, did not affect or modify this ruling in the least, but it did’ hold that the same rule…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Schuyler v. LittlefieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Gorman v. LittlefieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- In re T. A. McIntyre & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910
- In re EnnisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1911
- West v. W. A. McLaughlin & Co.'s TrusteeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1908
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Guardian Trust Co. v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
- In re J. C. Wilson & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1917
- In re Walter J. Schmidt & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1923
- Van Bomel v. Irving Trust Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1931