Eisnaugle v. Blank

125 F. Supp. 390, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2677
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 26, 1954
DocketCiv. No. 14405
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 125 F. Supp. 390 (Eisnaugle v. Blank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Eisnaugle v. Blank, 125 F. Supp. 390, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2677 (E.D. Pa. 1954).

Opinion

CLARY, District Judge.

This is an action brought by the trustee in bankruptcy of a shoe manufacturing corporation under Section 60, sub. b of the Bankruptcy Act to recover certain allegedly preferential payments and the value of certain returned merchandise received by defendants from the corporation within four months of the date of the filing of an involuntary petition in bankruptcy by general creditors. Recovery is sought under the provisions of Title 11 U.S.C.A. § 96, subs, a and b. Upon pleadings and proof, I make the following

Findings of Fact

1. Plaintiff, Richard L. Eisnaugle, is the duly qualified and acting Trustee in Bankruptcy of Schroeder Shoe Company, a bankrupt corporation, located in Portsmouth, Ohio.

2. An involuntary petition in bankruptcy was filed against the Schroeder Shoe Company by general creditors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, on the 16th day of April 1952, and the corporation was adjudicated a bankrupt on May 27, 1952.

3. The United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, by Order dated October 3, 1952 authorized plaintiff to bring this action in this Court.

4. Individual defendants, Lester Blank and Jerome G. Blank, are copartners trading as Edward Blank Sons & Co., whose principal place of business is located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

5. The Schroeder Shoe Company, a corporation, was at all material times engaged in the manufacture and wholesale disposition of women’s shoes. The manufacturing plant of the corporation was located in Sciotoville, Ohio, which community is contiguous with Portsmouth, Ohio.

6. Defendant partners manufacture and sell leather used by shoe manufacturers.

7. The Schroeder Shoe Company had been a customer of defendants since April of 1949 and had made numerous purchases of leather after that time and during the period running to December 21, 1951.

8. All sales of Edward Blank Sons & Co. to the Schroeder Shoe Company were made on thirty day credit terms.

9. The last sale made to Schroeder Shoe Company, prior to those which are the subject of this dispute, was on September 4, 1951 in the amount of $451.75. [392]*392Payment of this amount was made on November 16, 1951.

10. The first sale involved in this dispute was made on November 9, 1951 in the amount of $691.02.

11. On or about December 17, 1951, defendants received Schroeder Shoe Company’s check for $691.02 in payment of the above shipment. This check was postdated December 24, 1951.

12. Defendants deposited said check in their Philadelphia bank on December 24, 1951, and in due course the check was returned unpaid for the reason that there were insufficient funds in the drawer’s Portsmouth, Ohio account.

13. On-January 3, 1952, Lester Blank telephoned Mr. Schroeder, the President of and a very substantial stockholder in the bankrupt corporation, with regard to the returned check. Mr. Schroeder told defendant that there had been an oversight as to that check and instructed that it be redeposited. This was done on January 4, 1952.

14. The next attempted payment involved was a check of the Schroeder Shoe Company received by defendants on or about December 20, 1951 in the amount of $450. This was apparently intended as part payment on an indebtedness for leather purchased on November 15, 1951 in the amount of $1,288.29. This check was postdated December 28, 1951, and was deposited by defendants in their Philadelphia bank on December 27, 1951. This check was also returned on January 7, 1952, because of insufficient funds in the drawer’s Portsmouth, Ohio account.

15. Lester Blank called Mr. Schroeder on the same day, with respect to the above check, and was told that a shipment of shoes had just been made for which payment was expected soon, and that there was nothing to worry about. Schroeder instructed Blank to redeposit the check but Blank told him .he would be out to see him about it. Schroeder also told Blank that he expected money from a shipment of shoes to Oppenheim Collins in New York on which $26,000 was due and that the checks would be paid out of those monies.

16. The bankrupt had also made purchases from defendants on November 26, 1951 in the amount of $113.72, November 29, 1951 in the amount of $155.-87, December 13, 1951 in the amounts of $489.68 and $307.75, and one on December 21, 1951 in the amount of $200.82. All these amounts were entered as debits against Schroeder Shoe Company on the books of defendants as of the respective dates set out above.

17. On January 2, 1952, defendants received from the Schroeder Shoe Company a returned shipment of leather which was the same leather of the value of $200.82 which defendants had sent out under their book entry of December 21, 1951. Defendants accepted the returned shipment and entered the purchase price, $200.82, on their books as a credit in favor of the debtor.

18. On January 4, 1952, a like return of leather was made as set out in the finding immediately above. These returned goods were a portion of those which were shipped on December 13, 1951 and the shoe company was given credit for $64.66.

19. In pursuance of his statement to Schroeder Shoe Company, set out in Finding No. 15, Lester Blank traveled to Cincinnati, Ohio, on January 9, 1952, and on the following day traveled to Portsmouth, Ohio, arriving there early in the morning.

20. Blank first went to the National Bank of Portsmouth on which the aforesaid checks were drawn and at which bank the Schroeder Shoe Company maintained its only bank accounts.

21.. Blank then and there presented the check for $450 which he still held for payment and was informed by a bank official that there were no funds on deposit from which the check could be paid and further that the prior redeposited check for $691.02 was being held and had not been paid for the same reason.

22. Lester Blank thereupon visited the factory of the shoe company and de[393]*393manded of Dale Lloyd, a sometime bookkeeper for the corporation, payment of all obligations to defendants, past due, presently due, and not yet due. He further stated that if payment of all such sums was not immediately forthcoming that he, Blank, would institute bankruptcy proceedings and shut down the operation of the business.

23. Dale Lloyd then called Schroeder to the factory and Lester Blank repeated his demands to the latter. He further stated to Schroeder that he knew the names of the principal supplier creditors of the corporation and the amounts due them. The information in that regard which he possessed and made known to Schroeder proved to be accurate.

24. Defendant, Lester Blank, then attempted to ascertain from Schroeder the exact amount of the total liabilities of the corporation and the value of its assets. This information was only partially furnished because the books of the corporation had not been kept up to date and did not then present a complete and accurate picture of the then current status.

25. Lester Blank was told by Schroeder that there was on that day no funds available to pay him but that a check was expected from the corporation’s factor on the following day sufficient to satisfy Blank’s demands, i. e., to be paid in full.

26.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
125 F. Supp. 390, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eisnaugle-v-blank-paed-1954.