Legal Opinion

Beaver Board Cos. v. Imbrie

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided January 21, 1924No. 147PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHough, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). The petition before us asks relief against receivers, who obtained the property affected without notice or knowledge of any of petitioner’s asserted rights. Such rights are now affirmatively propounded; therefore by every rule of law the burden of proof is strongly on the petitioners.

The story told may fairly be called extraordinary, and in proportion as an allegation of fact departs from the usual, the demand for clarity in proof increases. The ultimate fact asserted is that a banker, who received a deposit, of his own motion intended to give the depositor…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Casey v. CavarocSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. In re Interborough Consol. Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1923
  3. Wadd v. . HazeltonNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  4. Easton v. German-American BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  5. In re A. E. Fountain, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Poirier & McLane Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1975
  2. In Re Prudence Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1938
  3. Ketterer v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1936
  4. Poirier & McLane Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1975

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API