United States v. Greenhill

Second Circuit

United States v. Greenhill

305 F.2d 289

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJune 29, 1962

DocketNo. 369, Docket 27372

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 305 F.2d 289 (United States v. Greenhill) 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

United States v. Greenhill, 305 F.2d 289 (2d Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We summarily affirm the conviction of the appellant Kalman Greenhill for fraudulently transferring property of the Westco Steel Company in contemplation of a bankruptcy proceeding by said company and with the intent to defeat the bankruptcy law in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152, as we find no merit in the appellant’s contentions.

The trial judge committed no errors in his rulings on evidence and the appellant’s requests that an accountant’s report be produced. In any event, appellant was not harmed by his lack of the report in question, since apparently it would not have been admissible as evidence, and was based on books which were available to the appellant.

The charge to the jury was fair and accurate and adequately covered all the matters on which the jury required instruction. There was ample evidence to support the verdict.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

We summarily affirm the conviction of the appellant Kalman Greenhill for fraudulently transferring property of the Westco Steel Company in contemplation of a bankruptcy proceeding by said company and with the intent to defeat the bankruptcy law in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152, as we find no merit in the appellant’s contentions.

The trial judge committed no errors in his rulings on evidence and the appellant’s requests that an accountant’s report be produced. In any event, appellant was not harmed by his lack of the report in question, since apparently it would not have been admissible as evidence, and was based on books which were available to the appellant.

The charge to the jury was fair and accurate and adequately covered all the matters on which the jury required instruction. There was ample evidence to support the verdict.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 F.2d 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-greenhill-ca2-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack