In re Rasmussen
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtMayer, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). At the outset is presented,-a curious question of practice. «The order did not amend the adjudication, but held that the petition and proceedings other than adjudication should be amended by adding Firth’s name as a general partner. Such an order is a proceeding in bankruptcy, and reviewable, if at all, by petition to revise. Bankruptcy Act, § 24b (Comp. St. § 9608). As the court, by its order, found as a fact that Firth did not act in good faith, and had full knowledge of the dummy transaction, and as we cannot review the facts on petition to revise, no…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- White v. . EisemanNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Crehan v. . MegargelNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Webster v. LanumCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905
3Cited by2 opinions
- Henningsen v. HowardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Cohen v. SchultzCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1930