In the Matter of Ernest Paul and Emil Paul, Individually and Trading as Philadelphia China Company, Bankrupts, William T. Gennetti, Trustee

Third Circuit

In the Matter of Ernest Paul and Emil Paul, Individually and Trading as Philadelphia China Company, Bankrupts, William T. Gennetti, Trustee

351 F.2d 311, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 4221

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided October 22, 1965·No. 15257_1·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We agree with the district court that the referee in bankruptcy had a reasonable basis for concluding that Emil Paul was not a knowing participant in the complained of financial statement and statement of affairs transactions in this bankruptcy.

That part of the order of the district court affirming the order of the Referee, granting discharge to Emil Paul, which is the only part of said order from which appeal has been taken, wilí be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

We agree with the district court that the referee in bankruptcy had a reasonable basis for concluding that Emil Paul was not a knowing participant in the complained of financial statement and statement of affairs transactions in this bankruptcy.

That part of the order of the district court affirming the order of the Referee, granting discharge to Emil Paul, which is the only part of said order from which appeal has been taken, wilí be affirmed.

In the Matter of Ernest Paul and Emil Paul, Individually and Trading as Philadelphia China Company, Bankrupts, William T. Gennetti, Trustee, 351 F.2d 311, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 4221 (3d Cir. 1965).

Pincite

351 F.2d 311 (In the Matter of Ernest Paul and Emil Paul, Individually and Trading as Philadelphia China Company, Bankrupts, William T. Gennetti, Trustee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.