Legal Opinion

South American Shoe Corp. v. Kurtz (In Re Silberman)

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 13, 1983No. 19-11359PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By EMIL F. GOLDHABER, Bankruptcy Judge:

The issue at bench is whether the plaintiff’s two complaints against the receivers should be granted. We conclude that both complaints should be denied and that the counterclaims asserted by the intervenors against the plaintiff should be granted.

The facts of the instant case are as follows: 1 On April 4, 1975, Silberman, Inc., t/a Wyman, Inc., Risoli, Inc., Dalsimer’s, Inc. and Duttly, Inc. (“the debtor”), filed a petition under Chapter XI of the Bankruptcy Act (“the Act”). 2 On April 8,1975, Gene Gisburne 3 and Sidney L. Kurtz (“the receivers”)…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Revere Press, Inc. v. BLUMBERGSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  2. William B. Tanner Co., Inc., and Pepper & Tanner, Inc. v. Wioo, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
  3. McClelland v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  4. Sgarlat v. GriffithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Lambert v. Durallium Products Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Stardust Inn, Inc. v. Doshi (In Re Stardust Inn, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Bonner v. Hiser (In Re St. Mary Hospital)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1989
  3. In Re PaolinoUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API