In re Flanders
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. The receiver appointed by the District Court upon the filing of a petition in involuntary bankruptcy against Flanders, a wholesale leather merchant at the city of Chicago, took possession of the bankrupt’s property, including the leather which is the subject of this controversy.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. The receiver appointed by the District Court upon the filing of a petition in involuntary bankruptcy against Flanders, a wholesale leather merchant at the city of Chicago, took possession of the bankrupt’s property, including the leather which is the subject of this controversy. Thereupon the American Patent Leather Company, the appellee, of Newark, N. J., a manufacturer of patent and enameled leather, filed its petition in the bankruptcy proceeding, seeking restoration of certain leather taken…
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, Circuit Judge
We entertain no question of the correctness of the decree appealed from. The rule by which to distinguish between a bailment and a conditional sale we consider as decided in the case of In re Galt, 56 C. C. A. 470, 120 Fed. 64. We there held that, if the sender has a right to compel return of the thing sent, it is a bailment, and not a sale, and that in a sale there must be an agreement, express- or implied, to pay the purchase price of the thing sold. The cases of Chickering v. Bastress, 130 Ill. 206, 22 N. E. 542, 17 Am. St. Rep. 309, and Peoria Manufacturing Company v. Lyons, 153 Ill. 427,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chickering v. BastressIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
- In re GaltCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1903
- Lenz v. HarrisonIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- Peoria Manufacturing Co. v. Lyons ex rel. David Bradley Manufacturing Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1894
- In re RabenauDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1902
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- In re Columbus Buggy Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Norris v. Boston Music Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Rotterman v. General Mills, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1953
- Mitchell Wagon Co. v. PooleCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
- General Electric Co. v. BrowerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1915
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.