Windmuller v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Windmuller v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.

2 D.C. 146

District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided July 1, 1935·No. Equity No. 57931·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

BAILEY, J.

I think that the Reconstruction Finance Corporation was empowered by law to make the loans in question to a de facto corporation or to individuals conducting a banking business and to receive as security for the loan assets of the banker. The plaintiff does not offer to do equity by tendering the amount of money advanced and apart from any other question this failure to offer to do equity requires the dismissal of the bill. Her rights, if any, are not against the defendants to this suit.

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

MEMORANDUM

BAILEY, J.

I think that the Reconstruction Finance Corporation was empowered by law to make the loans in question to a de facto corporation or to individuals conducting a banking business and to receive as security for the loan assets of the banker. The plaintiff does not offer to do equity by tendering the amount of money advanced and apart from any other question this failure to offer to do equity requires the dismissal of the bill. Her rights, if any, are not against the defendants to this suit.

Windmuller v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 2 D.C. 146 (D.C. 1935).

Pincite

2 D.C. 146 (Windmuller v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.