Adams v. City of Sarasota

Fifth Circuit

Adams v. City of Sarasota

83 F.2d 1005, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 2706

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 6, 1936

DocketNo. 8060

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 83 F.2d 1005 (Adams v. City of Sarasota) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adams v. City of Sarasota, 83 F.2d 1005, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 2706 (5th Cir. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The city of Sarasota, a municipality of Florida, filed a petition in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida., under the provisions of sections 78, 79, and 80 of the National Bankruptcy Act, added by the Act of May 24, 1934 (11 U.S. C.A. §§ 301-303), for approval and1 confirmation of a plan of readjustment of its indebtedness. Appellants, owners of certain bonds of the city, were permitted to intervene in opposition thereto and, urging the unconstitutionality of the law on various grounds, prayed for the dismissal of the proceeding. From an adverse ruling this appeal was prosecuted.

On the authority of Ashton v. Cameron Comity Water Improvement District No. One., 56 S.Ct. 892, 80 L.Ed.-, decided May 25, 1936, the judgment is reversed and the case remanded, with instructions to dismiss the proceeding.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The city of Sarasota, a municipality of Florida, filed a petition in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida., under the provisions of sections 78, 79, and 80 of the National Bankruptcy Act, added by the Act of May 24, 1934 (11 U.S. C.A. §§ 301-303), for approval and1 confirmation of a plan of readjustment of its indebtedness. Appellants, owners of certain bonds of the city, were permitted to intervene in opposition thereto and, urging the unconstitutionality of the law on various grounds, prayed for the dismissal of the proceeding. From an adverse ruling this appeal was prosecuted.

On the authority of Ashton v. Cameron Comity Water Improvement District No. One., 56 S.Ct. 892, 80 L.Ed.-, decided May 25, 1936, the judgment is reversed and the case remanded, with instructions to dismiss the proceeding.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 F.2d 1005, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 2706, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-city-of-sarasota-ca5-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack