Legal Opinion
In Re Weissman
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 9, 1927No. 171PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSwan, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). These proceedings were brought before us both by appeal and by petition to revise. To resort to both methods of bringing up the record is wholly unnecessary. Appeal is the proper procedure. In re Prudential Lithograph Co., 270 F. 469 (C. C. A. 2) ; In re Gold, 210 F. 410 (C. C. A. 7); Hewit v. Berlin Machine Works, 194 U. S. 296, 24 S. Ct. 690, 48 L. Ed. 986; Taylor v. Voss, 271 U. S. 176, 46 S. Ct. 461, 70 L. Ed. 889; Remington, Bankruptcy (3d Ed.) § 3688. We shall consider the case on the appeal.
There is no doubt of the right of a vendor to reclaim his…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Cunningham v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Hewit v. Berlin MacHine WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Taylor v. VossSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Eaton, Cole Burnham Co. v. . AveryNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Smith v. Township of Au GresCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1906
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Anaconda-Ericsson, Inc. v. Hessen (In Re Teltronics Services, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 1983
- In Re MeiselmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
- Manly v. Ohio Shoe Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1928
- Council Commerce Corp. v. Sterling Navigation Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1977
- Hiller v. OlmsteadCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1931
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.