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.
Elliott FREDERICK, Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Estate of Wilmer Sales Co., a Corporation, Bankrupt, Plaintiff in Error, v. MOTORS MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Defendant in Error, 1925 — 3 F.2d 1019 · caselaw · US
Corporations
Elliott FREDERICK, Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Estate of Wilmer Sales Co., a Corporation, Bankrupt, Plaintiff in Error, v. MOTORS MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Defendant in Error
3 F.2d 1019·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1925
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
Elliott FREDERICK, Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Estate of Wilmer Sales Co., a Corporation, Bankrupt, Plaintiff in Error, v. MOTORS MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Defendant in Error.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
March 2, 1925.)
No. 3250.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania; W. H. Seward Thomson, Judge.
See, also, 1 F.(2d) 437.
M. J. Hosack and Redden & Weddell, all of Pittsburgh, Pa., for plaintiff in error.
Wilbur F. Galbraith, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for defendant in error.
Before BUF-FINGTON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
This action was brought here by writ of error of Elliot Frederick, trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of the Wilmer Sales Company, to review the action of the trial judge in giving binding instructions for the defendant, Motors Mortgage Corporation. The business transactions among the parties connected directly or indirectly are all clearly set forth in the lucid opinion of the learned trial judge in overruling a motion for a new trial. We entirely agree with his reasoning and conclusions, and accordingly affirm the judgment on his opinion. 1 F.(2d) 438.