Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
A. WEINTRAUB, etc., Appellant, v. M. B. and G. D. DANIELS, etc., Appellees, 1929 — 30 F.2d 550 · caselaw · US
Bankruptcy
A. WEINTRAUB, etc., Appellant, v. M. B. and G. D. DANIELS, etc., Appellees
30 F.2d 550·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1929
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
A. WEINTRAUB, etc., Appellant, v. M. B. and G. D. DANIELS, etc., Appellees.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
January 7, 1929.
No. 3913.
David S. Malis, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.
Elston C. Cole and Josiah H. Marvis, both of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellees.
Before BUFFINGTON, WOOLLEY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
We find no error in the conclusion reached by the judge of the court below. 30 F.(2d) 548. In view, amongst others, of the allegations of the petition that the bankrupt was insolvent, and knew of his insolvency, we are of opinion that the judge was justified in his decree, which is hereby affirmed.