Legal Opinion

South Chester Tube Co. v. Naismith

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided September 21, 1934No. 5444PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DAVIS, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from a deeree of the District Court refusing to segregate the proceeds of a sale for the account of the appellants.

On January 9, 1933, McDowell & Co. owned assets found by the court to be worth more than $200,000 on December 23, 1932-, and presumably of that value on January 9th. On that day, January 9th, McDowell & Co. sold and transferred these assets to the Mercer Tube & Manufacturing Company, hereinafter called the Mercer Company, in consideration of the assumption by it of the liabilities of McDowell & Co. which were admitted to be $34,018.46, but…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. First Nat. Bank of Cincinnati v. FlershemSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. Central Improvement Co. v. Cambria Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
  3. Baker Motor Vehicle Co. v. HunterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
  4. Cobb v. Interstate Mortgage CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1927

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Godina v. OSWALDSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  2. Sheffit v. KoffSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  3. United States v. Vibradamp CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1966
  4. Landers, Frary & Clark v. Vischer Products Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1952
  5. Godina v. OSWALDSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API