Hammerman, II v. Arlington Federal Savings & Loan Association

385 F.2d 835

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided November 10, 1967·No. 11663·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

I. H. HAMMERMAN, II, Trustee of Panitz & Co., Inc., F. G.
Enterprises, Inc., Joppa Farms, Inc., and P. & R.
Service and Supply, Inc., Debtors, Appellant,
v.
ARLINGTON FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, Appellee.

No. 11663.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued Nov. 6, 1967.
Decided Nov. 10, 1967.

Fenton L. Martin, Baltimore, Md. (Frederick J. Singley, Jr., and Hinkley & Singley, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellant.

David F. Albright, Baltimore, Md. (Bradley T. J. Mettee, Jr., and Semmes, Bowen & Semmes, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellee.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, MARVIN JONES,* Senior Judge, and BUTZNER, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

While we think the District Court had jurisdiction to inquire into the matter, particularly to determine the bona fides of the partnership in which the bankrupt was a limited partner, we agree, for the reasons stated in the opinion of the District Court, filed on July 6, 1967,1 that the bankrupt's interest as a limited partner gave the bankruptcy court no power to administer real estate owned by the partnership or to enjoin its sale under foreclosure by the mortgagee.

Affirmed.

*

Sitting by designation

1

In re Panitz & Co., D.Md., 270 F.Supp. 448

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

I. H. HAMMERMAN, II, Trustee of Panitz & Co., Inc., F. G.
Enterprises, Inc., Joppa Farms, Inc., and P. & R.
Service and Supply, Inc., Debtors, Appellant,
v.
ARLINGTON FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, Appellee.

No. 11663.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued Nov. 6, 1967.
Decided Nov. 10, 1967.

Fenton L. Martin, Baltimore, Md. (Frederick J. Singley, Jr., and Hinkley & Singley, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellant.

David F. Albright, Baltimore, Md. (Bradley T. J. Mettee, Jr., and Semmes, Bowen & Semmes, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellee.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, MARVIN JONES,* Senior Judge, and BUTZNER, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

While we think the District Court had jurisdiction to inquire into the matter, particularly to determine the bona fides of the partnership in which the bankrupt was a limited partner, we agree, for the reasons stated in the opinion of the District Court, filed on July 6, 1967,1 that the bankrupt's interest as a limited partner gave the bankruptcy court no power to administer real estate owned by the partnership or to enjoin its sale under foreclosure by the mortgagee.

Affirmed.

*

Sitting by designation

1

In re Panitz & Co., D.Md., 270 F.Supp. 448

Hammerman, II v. Arlington Federal Savings & Loan Association, 385 F.2d 835 (4th Cir. 1967).

Pincite

385 F.2d 835 (Hammerman, II v. Arlington Federal Savings & Loan Association) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Turner v. Lee (In Re Minton Group, Inc.)

46 B.R. 222 (S.D. New York, 1985)

Jordan v. Randolph Mills, Inc.

29 B.R. 398 (M.D. North Carolina, 1983)

Evans v. Galardi

546 P.2d 313 (California Supreme Court, 1976)

In re Imperial "400" National, Inc.

429 F.2d 671 (Third Circuit, 1970)

In the Matter of Imperial "400" National, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Bristol Financial Corporation, a New Jersey Corp., Imperial "400" Corporation, a Nevada Corp., Imperial "400" Land Corporation, a Delaware Corp., Motor Hotel Properties, Inc., a New Jersey Corp., Trans-National Development Corporation, a New Jersey Corp., Four Hundred Construction Corporation, a Delaware Corp., National Motel Construction Company, a California Corp., and Trans-World Motel Supply Corporation, a California Corp., Management Directions, Inc., Debtors. Appeal of Douglas I. Kuball. Appeal of Mary Ellen Kuball

429 F.2d 671 (Third Circuit, 1970)