In re Ennis

Second Circuit

In re Ennis

198 F. 381, 117 C.C.A. 257, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1644

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 13, 1912

DocketNo. 219

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 198 F. 381 (In re Ennis) 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

In re Ennis, 198 F. 381, 117 C.C.A. 257, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1644 (2d Cir. 1912).

Pincite

Opinions

LACOMBE, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). We do not find in the record before us anything to show whether appellant did or did not have actual knowledge of the omnibus proceeding. Had all the statements of fact presented to us upon the oral argument been submitted to the district judge, with a positive statement that Sherwood had no knowledge of the pending omnibus proceeding, it is probable that he would have given appellant an opportunity to prove them, and, if proved, would have administered suitable relief. Certainly under the circumstances thus asserted it would be inequitable to turn his property over to creditors who have no title to it. But the record which has been certified, being a transcript of the record in the District Court, neither proves nor tenders sufficient to call for a determination of the application other or different from that reached in such court.

The order is affirmed.

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

LACOMBE, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). We do not find in the record before us anything to show whether appellant did or did not have actual knowledge of the omnibus proceeding. Had all the statements of fact presented to us upon the oral argument been submitted to the district judge, with a positive statement that Sherwood had no knowledge of the pending omnibus proceeding, it is probable that he would have given appellant an opportunity to prove them, and, if proved, would have administered suitable relief. Certainly under the circumstances thus asserted it would be inequitable to turn his property over to creditors who have no title to it. But the record which has been certified, being a transcript of the record in the District Court, neither proves nor tenders sufficient to call for a determination of the application other or different from that reached in such court.

The order is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 F. 381, 117 C.C.A. 257, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1644, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ennis-ca2-1912.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack