In the Matter of Admiral Container Corporation, Debtor. Doris Z. Dodd, a Creditor

Third Circuit

In the Matter of Admiral Container Corporation, Debtor. Doris Z. Dodd, a Creditor

193 F.2d 330

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedJanuary 3, 1952

Docket10554

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 193 F.2d 330 (In the Matter of Admiral Container Corporation, Debtor. Doris Z. Dodd, a Creditor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In the Matter of Admiral Container Corporation, Debtor. Doris Z. Dodd, a Creditor, 193 F.2d 330 (3d Cir. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss this appeal as moot is denied.

This is an appeal from an order of the District Court in a Chapter XI, 11 U.S.C.A. § 701 et seq., bankruptcy proceeding which confirmed the Debtor’s plan of arrangement. The plan was before the District Judge on two occasions. After the first hearing the matter was returned to the Referee for 'further testimony. D.C., 95 F.Supp. 723. Following the second hearing the Court below confirmed and approved the plan. Our independent scrutiny of the record leads us to the conclusion that the Referee’s findings of fact, at the very least are not clearly erroneous and that the District Court’s affirmance of those findings was not such' a plain mistake as would result in the defeat of justice. The judgment of the District Court will therefore be affirmed. In re Wolf, 3 Cir., 165 F.2d 707.

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

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss this appeal as moot is denied.

This is an appeal from an order of the District Court in a Chapter XI, 11 U.S.C.A. § 701 et seq., bankruptcy proceeding which confirmed the Debtor’s plan of arrangement. The plan was before the District Judge on two occasions. After the first hearing the matter was returned to the Referee for 'further testimony. D.C., 95 F.Supp. 723. Following the second hearing the Court below confirmed and approved the plan. Our independent scrutiny of the record leads us to the conclusion that the Referee’s findings of fact, at the very least are not clearly erroneous and that the District Court’s affirmance of those findings was not such' a plain mistake as would result in the defeat of justice. The judgment of the District Court will therefore be affirmed. In re Wolf, 3 Cir., 165 F.2d 707.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 F.2d 330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-admiral-container-corporation-debtor-doris-z-dodd-a-ca3-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack