L. F. Popell Co., Inc., Debtor v. Delta Airlines, Inc., and J. Thomas Callahan Advertising Inc.

323 F.2d 50, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4196
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedSeptember 18, 1963
Docket28453_1
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 323 F.2d 50 (L. F. Popell Co., Inc., Debtor v. Delta Airlines, Inc., and J. Thomas Callahan Advertising Inc.) 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
L. F. Popell Co., Inc., Debtor v. Delta Airlines, Inc., and J. Thomas Callahan Advertising Inc., 323 F.2d 50, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4196 (2d Cir. 1963).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The debtor, L. F. Popell Co., Inc., a Florida corporation, has moved for a stay pending determination of its appeal from an order of the District Court for the Southern District of New York which, pursuant to § 32(b) of the Bankruptcy Act, transferred a proceeding under Chapter XI of that Act, begun by the debtor in that district, to the Southern District of Florida where, as the court found, the debtor has its principal place of business. 1 The creditors who sought the transfer have cross-moved to dismiss the appeal as frivolous; a creditors’ committee has joined the debtor in objecting to transfer.

*51 If the appeal had probable merit, the ease would be one where a stay ought be granted. But we are convinced it has none, for the reasons stated in Judge Feinberg’s opinion in the District Court. The Southern District of New York was not a district where the debtor had its principal place of business, resided or had its domicile, as provided in § 2 a(l); assuming that the provisions of § 32 are sufficient to have allowed retention, the judge in no way abused his discretion in finding that the interests of the parties would not be “best served” thereby. Accordingly we affirm the order of transfer and thereby render both motions moot.

Affirmed. The mandate will issue forthwith.

1

. In contrast to transfer orders under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404(a) and 1406(a), the order here Is appealable since § 24(a) of the Bankruptcy Act includes interlocutory orders in “proceedings in bankruptcy.” In re Flexton Corp., 208 F.2d 869 (2 Cir. 1953).

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

Related

In Re New Haven Radio, Inc.
23 B.R. 762 (S.D. New York, 1982)
In Re Barnes
689 F.2d 193 (D.C. Circuit, 1982)
Barnes v. Whelan
689 F.2d 193 (D.C. Circuit, 1982)
Young Properties Corp. v. United Equity Corp.
534 F.2d 847 (Ninth Circuit, 1976)
In Re Kerr's Inc.
253 F. Supp. 742 (S.D. New York, 1966)
Kelbert v. Travelers Insurance
245 F. Supp. 31 (S.D. New York, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
323 F.2d 50, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/l-f-popell-co-inc-debtor-v-delta-airlines-inc-and-j-thomas-ca2-1963.