In re Zeis

245 F. 737, 158 C.C.A. 139, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1540
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedApril 24, 1917
DocketNo. 187
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 245 F. 737 (In re Zeis) 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 Zeis, 245 F. 737, 158 C.C.A. 139, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1540 (2d Cir. 1917).

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal under section 25a (3) of the Bankruptcy Act (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Slat. 553 [Comp. St. 1916, § 9609]), taken March 6, 1916, from a judgment of the District Court rendered February 8, 1916, refusing to give the appellants priority over the trustee in respect to execution issued upon the judgment recovered by them against the bankrupt more than four months before the petition was filed. Matter of Loving, 224 U. S. 183, 32 Sup. Ct. 446, 56 L. Ed. 725. The court found that the appellants had allowed the execution issued on their judgment to become dormant.

The court below was without jurisdiction:

First. Because the appeal was not taken within ten days after the judgment was rendered as required by the act. In re Martin, 201 Fed. 31, 33, 119 C. C. A. 363; Conboy v. Bank, 203 U. S. 141, 27 Sup. Ct. 50, 51 L. Ed. 128.

Second. Because a claim of priority, the debt not being disputed, is not “a debt or claim” within the section. The judgment of the court [738]*738neither allowed nor disallowed any sum, but only denied priority. Holden v. Stratton, 191 U. S. 115, 24 Sup. Ct. 45, 48 L. Ed. 116.

The appeal is dismissed:

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

Related

In Re Jayrose Millinery Co.
93 F.2d 471 (Second Circuit, 1937)
City of New York v. Lattin
93 F.2d 471 (Second Circuit, 1937)
Southern Cooperative Foundry Co. v. Warlick Furniture Co.
185 S.E. 773 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1936)
In re B. W. Scott Book & Art Store, Inc.
12 F. Supp. 18 (W.D. New York, 1935)
Montaigne v. Rossvill Alcohol & Chemical Corp.
73 F.2d 301 (Second Circuit, 1934)
In re Boswell
8 F. Supp. 231 (S.D. New York, 1934)
Minnich v. Gardner
292 U.S. 48 (Supreme Court, 1934)
Frankel v. J. W. Butler Paper Co.
59 F.2d 726 (Seventh Circuit, 1932)
Straton v. New
283 U.S. 318 (Supreme Court, 1931)
Williams v. Standard Oil Co.
219 A.D. 193 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1927)
In re Henningsen
297 F. 821 (Second Circuit, 1924)
In re Fraser
261 F. 558 (W.D. New York, 1919)
In re Monarch Acetylene Co.
245 F. 741 (Second Circuit, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
245 F. 737, 158 C.C.A. 139, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-zeis-ca2-1917.