Henry Hentz & Co. v. Lovell

Fifth Circuit

Henry Hentz & Co. v. Lovell

192 F. 762, 113 C.C.A. 48, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1958

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 2, 1912

DocketNo. 2,176

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 192 F. 762 (Henry Hentz & Co. v. Lovell) 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

Henry Hentz & Co. v. Lovell, 192 F. 762, 113 C.C.A. 48, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1958 (5th Cir. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This was an action brought by William S. Lovell, as trustee of Knight, Yancey & Co., bankrupts, against Henry Hentz & Co. and others based on transactions between said bankrupts and Henry Hentz & Co., involving the sale of cotton by the bankrupts and the obtaining of the price from the buyers by spurious bills of lading, for which genuine bills of lading were subsequently issued. The facts are such that the case raises the same questions that have just been decided adversely to the trustee by this court in the case of Wm. S. Lovell, Trustee, etc., v. Isidore Newman & Son, 192 Fed. 753. The court below directed a verdict in favor of the trustee. 181 Fed. 555. This direction conflicts with the view of the court expressed in the said opinion and judgment rendered to-day.

It follows that the judgment of the Circuit Court must be reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.

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

PER CURIAM.

This was an action brought by William S. Lovell, as trustee of Knight, Yancey & Co., bankrupts, against Henry Hentz & Co. and others based on transactions between said bankrupts and Henry Hentz & Co., involving the sale of cotton by the bankrupts and the obtaining of the price from the buyers by spurious bills of lading, for which genuine bills of lading were subsequently issued. The facts are such that the case raises the same questions that have just been decided adversely to the trustee by this court in the case of Wm. S. Lovell, Trustee, etc., v. Isidore Newman & Son, 192 Fed. 753. The court below directed a verdict in favor of the trustee. 181 Fed. 555. This direction conflicts with the view of the court expressed in the said opinion and judgment rendered to-day.

It follows that the judgment of the Circuit Court must be reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 F. 762, 113 C.C.A. 48, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1958, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-hentz-co-v-lovell-ca5-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack