In re La Rosa
6 F.2d 1021, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2197
Opinion
It is sufficient to refer to Hyman v. Trow, etc., Co. (C. C. A.) 261 F. 991, In re Aarons & Co., 193 F. 646, 113 C. C. A. 514, and In re American, etc., Co., 173 F. 489, 97 C. C. A. 486, to show that either in bankruptcy or in an equity receivership the facts shown were whoHy insufficient to justify rescission. Petitioner showed nothing except that he had sold the goods in the ordinary course of trade, and did not even undertake to bear the burden of proof which under the cases cited lay upon him. Order reversed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In re La Rosa, 6 F.2d 1021, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 2197 (2d Cir. 1925).
6 F.2d 1021 (In re La Rosa) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In re American Knit Goods Mfg. Co.
173 F. 480 (Second Circuit, 1909)
Fichtel v. Barthel
173 F. 489 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1909)
In re Sol. Aarons & Co.
193 F. 646 (Second Circuit, 1912)
Hyman v. Trow Directory Printing & Bookbinding Co.
261 F. 991 (Second Circuit, 1919)