Climenson v. Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtRudkin, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The claim of preference arising under the Bankruptcy Act presents no difficulty. The question is one of fact, and a review of the testimony would serve no purpose. Suffice it to say that, if the question were an open one in this court, we would find much difficulty in reaching the conclusion that the claimant knew or had reasonable cause to believe that the payments in question were intended to operate as preferences, and in the face of an adverse finding by the referee, approved by the District Court, the appeal on this branch of the caséis without merit.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Thompson v. Huron Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1892
- Conover v. HullWashington Supreme Court · 1895
- Nixon v. Joshua Hendy Machine WorksWashington Supreme Court · 1909
- State ex rel. Strohl v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1899
- Jones v. Hoquiam Lumber & Shingle Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Swender v. EmpieCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1924
- Brooks v. Ray Young Parsons Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1923