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.
STANDARD IRON WORKS et al., Appellants, v. Geo. E. STOOKEY and Wilbur Trescott, Trustee of Construction Service Co., Bankrupt, Appellees, 1930 — 45 F.2d 1019 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
STANDARD IRON WORKS et al., Appellants, v. Geo. E. STOOKEY and Wilbur Trescott, Trustee of Construction Service Co., Bankrupt, Appellees
45 F.2d 1019·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1930
Before BUFFINGTON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and THOMPSON, District Judge.
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
STANDARD IRON WORKS et al., Appellants, v. Geo. E. STOOKEY and Wilbur Trescott, Trustee of Construction Service Co., Bankrupt, Appellees.
No. 4382.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Dec. 4, 1930.
Walter L. Hill and Leo G. Knoll, both of Scranton, Pa., for appellants.
Clarence Balentine, of Scranton, Pa., and Joseph E. Fleitz, of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., for appellees.
Before BUFFINGTON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and THOMPSON, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.]
BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.
In this ease the trustee in bankruptcy, after notice to creditors and hearing by the ■referee and in pursuance of his order, sold to Stookey, the appellee, the interest of the bankrupt in a building contract. Thereafter Stookey paid the purchase money to the trustee, who still retains it. Eight months later tho appellants, creditors of the bankrupt, petitioned the referee to set the sale aside on the ground of alleged fraud and concealment on the part of Stookey. On hearing, the referee refused their petition. The court below sustained the action of the referee. A study of the proofs in the case satisfies ns that no error was committed by the court in so doing.
Accordingly, the order entered below is affirmed.