Rhodes v. Kurtz
80 F.2d 1018, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 3340
This text of 80 F.2d 1018 (Rhodes v. Kurtz) 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
Rhodes v. Kurtz, 80 F.2d 1018, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 3340 (3d Cir. 1936).
Opinion
This case turns on the question whether the petitioner was a farmer and, as such, entitled to the benefit of the federal- statute here involved (Bankr.Act, § 75, as amended, 11 U.S.C.A. § 203). The court below and the referee both found he was not a farmer. Finding ourselves in entire accord with this holding, the order of the court below is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
§ 203
11 U.S.C. § 203
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
80 F.2d 1018, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 3340, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rhodes-v-kurtz-ca3-1936.