Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Gardner

Seventh Circuit

Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Gardner

5 F.2d 1019, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2849

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedMay 1, 1925

DocketNo. 3497

StatusPublished

This text of 5 F.2d 1019 (Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Gardner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Gardner, 5 F.2d 1019, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2849 (7th Cir. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

PAGE, Circuit Judge.

This court, in Re O’Gara Coal Co., Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Gardner, 278 F. 509, and the Supreme Court in Gardner, as Trustee, etc., v. Chicago Title & Trust Co., as Receiver, etc., 261 U. S. 453, 43 S. Ct. 424, 67 L. Ed. 741, 29 A. L. R. 622, had under consideration the two claims here in question, and those opinions sufficiently state the facts. In reversing this court, the Supreme Court ordered: “The bankruptcy court may allow the bank’s claim for such sum only as may seem to the court to be owing above the value of the security (section 57e), and may withhold dividends upon that sum until the debt due to the trustee has. been paid. Western Tie & Lumber Co. v. Brown, 196 U. S. 502, 511.” Thereafter the referee entered the following: “Order claim of William C. Niblack, receiver of La-Salle Street Trust & Savings Bank, be allowed for $2,105.07; collateral held by claimant to be surrendered to trustee on payment of claim.” The referee’s certificate to the court, on petition for review of that order, shows that the referee in no way considered the security or its value. The court, on review, considered only the referee’s certificate. Because of the failure to follow the mandate of the Supreme Court, the order of the bankruptcy court is reversed, with direction to follow that mandate.

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

PAGE, Circuit Judge.

This court, in Re O’Gara Coal Co., Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Gardner, 278 F. 509, and the Supreme Court in Gardner, as Trustee, etc., v. Chicago Title & Trust Co., as Receiver, etc., 261 U. S. 453, 43 S. Ct. 424, 67 L. Ed. 741, 29 A. L. R. 622, had under consideration the two claims here in question, and those opinions sufficiently state the facts. In reversing this court, the Supreme Court ordered: “The bankruptcy court may allow the bank’s claim for such sum only as may seem to the court to be owing above the value of the security (section 57e), and may withhold dividends upon that sum until the debt due to the trustee has. been paid. Western Tie & Lumber Co. v. Brown, 196 U. S. 502, 511.” Thereafter the referee entered the following: “Order claim of William C. Niblack, receiver of La-Salle Street Trust & Savings Bank, be allowed for $2,105.07; collateral held by claimant to be surrendered to trustee on payment of claim.” The referee’s certificate to the court, on petition for review of that order, shows that the referee in no way considered the security or its value. The court, on review, considered only the referee’s certificate. Because of the failure to follow the mandate of the Supreme Court, the order of the bankruptcy court is reversed, with direction to follow that mandate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 F.2d 1019, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2849, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-title-trust-co-v-gardner-ca7-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack