In the Matter of the Sussin Corporation, a Corporation, Alleged Bankrupt. Carl E. Freeman v. The Sussin Corporation
This text of 227 F.2d 121 (In the Matter of the Sussin Corporation, a Corporation, Alleged Bankrupt. Carl E. Freeman v. The Sussin Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
On several prior occasions, including, inter alia,, In re Garden City Brewery, 7 Cir., 1954, 208 F.2d 377, we reiterated our reluctance, buttressed by sound precedent, to annul referees’ findings, certificates and reports confirmed by district judges sitting in bankruptcy. The prolix record, now before us, is utterly devoid of any legal basis for departing from our prior decisions. We also point out, at the threshold of this opinion that the Sussin Corporation has not yet been adjudicated a bankrupt and any question of its solvency is absent from the current appeal. Our order granting super-sedeas, entered November 30, 1954, contains its own expiration date. Since the brief and record contain confusing designation of the participants in this proceeding we shall identify them by their respective personal names.
Carl E. Freeman filed a verified involuntary petition, February 20, 1953, to adjudicate Sussin Corporation, incorporated in Illinois, as a bankrupt and thereafter Richard Rex Parkin was appointed receiver. Parkin, acting in that capacity, petitioned for a rule on Freeman seeking to compel the turnover of certain notes and cash. In his single creditor petition, Freeman claimed $13,-680 from Sussin for moneys loaned and services rendered. Responding to that petition, Sussin denied both its insolvency and the existence of any indebtedness to Freeman. Sussin also asserted several defensive counter-claims against Freeman. The district judge appointed the receiver, March 20, 1953, at the request of Freeman, through his counsel, and at the same time referred the matter to Referee MacChesney. When that referee’s term of office expired the case was referred, generally, to Austin Hall, Referee in Bankruptcy. Freeman’s petitions for review of several orders,1 entered by Hall, were denied and dismissed by order entered September 24, 1954, confirming Hall’s report, from which Freeman now appeals. In each of the four instances where he entered orders complained of by Freeman, the Referee filed comprehensive certificates pertaining to Freeman’s petitions for review. Freeman, in substance, would have us re-weigh the evidence shown in this 1616 page record and evaluate the credibility2 of witnesses who appeared be[123]*123fore the Referee. We decline to do so. For that reason it is unnecessary to perform an autopsy on the evidence and then state our version of what is traced in the record. Freeman, in our opinion based upon careful examination of his briefs, has, simply raised tenuous points in his appeal.
No sound reason appearing for disturbing the district judge’s final order of confirmation, the judgment appealed is afiirmed.
Aifirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
227 F.2d 121, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-the-sussin-corporation-a-corporation-alleged-bankrupt-ca7-1955.