Tankersley v. Credit Executives Service Corp.

Fifth Circuit

Tankersley v. Credit Executives Service Corp.

492 F.2d 1379, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 9009

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 24, 1974

DocketNo. 73-3957

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 492 F.2d 1379 (Tankersley v. Credit Executives Service Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tankersley v. Credit Executives Service Corp., 492 F.2d 1379, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 9009 (5th Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Burton Tankersley, an unsecured creditor, appeals from the district court’s judgment setting aside a transfer of money to him by his son, Daniel L. Tankersley, a bankrupt. The district court determined that the bankrupt’s transfer of funds made within four months of a creditors’ petition seeking to have Daniel Tankersley adjudicated a bankrupt was a preferential transfer and thus fell within the proscriptions of Section 60 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C. § 96 (1970).

The evidence fully supports the lower court’s resolution of the facts. The record demonstrates that within four months of the creditor’s petition, the bankrupt permitted his property to be transferred to Credit Executives Sex-vice Cox-poration, a liquidator of insolvent estates. Under this liquidation, approximately one-half of the bankrupt’s liquidated assets were received by appellant, an unsecured creditor. Both appellant and the bankrupt knew that liquidation would result in this transfer to appellant to the detriment of the bankrupt’s other creditors. All the requirements of Section 60 have been established and a x-eci-tation of the facts here would serve no legitimate purpose. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Burton Tankersley, an unsecured creditor, appeals from the district court’s judgment setting aside a transfer of money to him by his son, Daniel L. Tankersley, a bankrupt. The district court determined that the bankrupt’s transfer of funds made within four months of a creditors’ petition seeking to have Daniel Tankersley adjudicated a bankrupt was a preferential transfer and thus fell within the proscriptions of Section 60 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C. § 96 (1970).

The evidence fully supports the lower court’s resolution of the facts. The record demonstrates that within four months of the creditor’s petition, the bankrupt permitted his property to be transferred to Credit Executives Sex-vice Cox-poration, a liquidator of insolvent estates. Under this liquidation, approximately one-half of the bankrupt’s liquidated assets were received by appellant, an unsecured creditor. Both appellant and the bankrupt knew that liquidation would result in this transfer to appellant to the detriment of the bankrupt’s other creditors. All the requirements of Section 60 have been established and a x-eci-tation of the facts here would serve no legitimate purpose. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Daniel Leslie Tankersley, D/B/A Competitive Carpet Company, and Linda Witt Tankersley, Bankrupts v. Credit Executives Service Corporation, Burton Tankersley, No. 73-3957. Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5th Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5th Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I

492 F.2d 1379 (Fifth Circuit, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

492 F.2d 1379, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 9009, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tankersley-v-credit-executives-service-corp-ca5-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack