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.
Robert J. McKAY, J. Albert McKay and Thomas J. McKay, Trustees of the Estate of James McKay, Deceased, Appellants, v. Arthur R. ATWOOD, Receiver of The Duquesne National Bank of Pittsburgh, Appellee, 1935 — 76 F.2d 1014 · caselaw · US
General
Robert J. McKAY, J. Albert McKay and Thomas J. McKay, Trustees of the Estate of James McKay, Deceased, Appellants, v. Arthur R. ATWOOD, Receiver of The Duquesne National Bank of Pittsburgh, Appellee
76 F.2d 1014·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1935
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
Robert J. McKAY, J. Albert McKay and Thomas J. McKay, Trustees of the Estate of James McKay, Deceased, Appellants, v. Arthur R. ATWOOD, Receiver of The Duquesne National Bank of Pittsburgh, Appellee.
No. 5502.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
March 20, 1935.
Ella Graubart, Charles F. C. Arensberg, and Patterson, Crawford, Arensberg & Dunn, all of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellants.
Mortimer B. Lesher, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellee.
Before BUFFINGTON, DAVIS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.]
BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.
In the court below, the trustees of the estate of James McKay filed a bill against the receiver of the Duquesne National Bank to have the bank adjudged to have held some $11,000 as a trust account which should be paid in preference to general depositors. On final hearing, the court below dismissed the bill. Thereupon the trustees, took this appeal.
The case turns on the construction of written documents, depends on its own facts, and no general principles are involved. Those writings were analyzed and construed in a comprehensive opinion.
Finding ourselves in accord therewith, we affirm the case on the judge’s opinión (D. C.) 10 F. Supp. 475.