In re Marks Bros.
135 F. 448, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 323
This text of 135 F. 448 (In re Marks Bros.) 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
In re Marks Bros., 135 F. 448, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 323 (E.D. Pa. 1905).
Opinion
The sixth reason for a new trial in this case is as follows:
“The learned trial judge erred in his charge to the jury wherein he charged them that it was necessary, in order for them to find a verdict for the respondents, to find that the petitioning creditors had secured control of the judgment of Frederick Geiger, under which the execution issued which was averred to be the act of bankruptcy.”
Upon the authority of In re Williams, 14 N. B. R. 132, Fed. Cas. No. 17,706, Clark v. Henne, 11 A. B. R. 595, 127 Fed. 288, 62 C. C. A. 172, and Simonson v. Sinsheimer, 95 Fed. 954, 37 C. C. A. 337, it is clear that this part of the charge of the court is error, and a new trial is therefore granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
In re Williams
29 F. Cas. 1327 (E.D. Michigan, 1876)
Clark v. Henne & Meyer
127 F. 288 (Fifth Circuit, 1904)
Simonson v. Sinsheimer
95 F. 948 (Sixth Circuit, 1899)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
135 F. 448, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-marks-bros-paed-1905.