Bankers Trust Company, Trustee v. Lewis D. Freeman, Trustee of New York, Ontario and Western Railway Company, Debtor

Second Circuit

Bankers Trust Company, Trustee v. Lewis D. Freeman, Trustee of New York, Ontario and Western Railway Company, Debtor

245 F.2d 200, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4354

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJune 7, 1957

Docket24437_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 245 F.2d 200 (Bankers Trust Company, Trustee v. Lewis D. Freeman, Trustee of New York, Ontario and Western Railway Company, Debtor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bankers Trust Company, Trustee v. Lewis D. Freeman, Trustee of New York, Ontario and Western Railway Company, Debtor, 245 F.2d 200, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4354 (2d Cir. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by secured creditors of this insolvent railroad system from an order holding that claims of creditors should be classified and priorities determined. These proceedings for the reorganization of the system have been pending for twenty years in the hope, which has proved more and more vain as time has passed, that the railroad might be saved. So the United States— an interested creditor for tax claims of around seven and a half million dollars— says: “Put plainly and bluntly, these proceedings should have been dismissed a decade ago.” At any rate, the Interstate Commerce Commission on August 16, 1956, put a final quietus on the proceedings by refusing approval of all proposed plans of reorganization, finding no plan possible either now or in the foreseeable future, and recommending that the district court dismiss these proceedings.

Against this background the decision on appeal for the classification of claims dated October 30, 1956, presents serious questions of jurisdiction and propriety. But we need not go into them because of later action below, of which we take judicial notice. Ira S. Bushey & Sons v. W. E. Hedger Transp. Corp., 2 Cir., 167 F.2d 9, certiorari denied W. E. Hedger Transp. Corp. v. Ira S. Bushey & Sons, 335 U.S. 816, 69 S.Ct. 36, 93 L.Ed. 371, and cases cited at 167 F.2d 12, note 2. On January 31, 1957, without taking action looking toward classification of claims, the court granted the several motions to dismiss pending before it and completely terminated the proceedings, except the trustee’s account and discharge of bond, together with allowances, as to which it expressly reserved jurisdiction. And it ordered the entire property and assets transferred and delivered to the receivers appointed in the government’s tax foreclosure action now pending in the court below. This renders the announced intent to classify quite moot, as the United States suggests. In view of this development the appeal is Dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by secured creditors of this insolvent railroad system from an order holding that claims of creditors should be classified and priorities determined. These proceedings for the reorganization of the system have been pending for twenty years in the hope, which has proved more and more vain as time has passed, that the railroad might be saved. So the United States— an interested creditor for tax claims of around seven and a half million dollars— says: “Put plainly and bluntly, these proceedings should have been dismissed a decade ago.” At any rate, the Interstate Commerce Commission on August 16, 1956, put a final quietus on the proceedings by refusing approval of all proposed plans of reorganization, finding no plan possible either now or in the foreseeable future, and recommending that the district court dismiss these proceedings.

Against this background the decision on appeal for the classification of claims dated October 30, 1956, presents serious questions of jurisdiction and propriety. But we need not go into them because of later action below, of which we take judicial notice. Ira S. Bushey & Sons v. W. E. Hedger Transp. Corp., 2 Cir., 167 F.2d 9, certiorari denied W. E. Hedger Transp. Corp. v. Ira S. Bushey & Sons, 335 U.S. 816, 69 S.Ct. 36, 93 L.Ed. 371, and cases cited at 167 F.2d 12, note 2. On January 31, 1957, without taking action looking toward classification of claims, the court granted the several motions to dismiss pending before it and completely terminated the proceedings, except the trustee’s account and discharge of bond, together with allowances, as to which it expressly reserved jurisdiction. And it ordered the entire property and assets transferred and delivered to the receivers appointed in the government’s tax foreclosure action now pending in the court below. This renders the announced intent to classify quite moot, as the United States suggests. In view of this development the appeal is Dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 F.2d 200, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4354, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bankers-trust-company-trustee-v-lewis-d-freeman-trustee-of-new-york-ca2-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack