From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Firestone Tire Rubber Co. v. Friedman

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Dec 14, 1934
74 F.2d 1013 (3d Cir. 1934)

Opinion

No. 5488.

December 14, 1934.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

Willis Bacon and Burch, Bacon Denlinger, all of Akron, Ohio, and Frank W. Stonecipher and Stonecipher Ralston, all of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant.

Hyman Schlesinger and A.H. Kaufman, both of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellee.

Before BUFFINGTON, WOOLLEY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.


The subject-matter of this case was whether the appellant had received an unlawful preference over the bankrupt's other creditors, and the question involved was whether the court erred in refusing to give binding instructions in favor of the appellant, the alleged preferred creditor. The case depends on its own particular facts, and no principles or precedents are in question. Finding no error on the part of the court in refusing appellant's request for binding instructions in its favor, we limit ourselves to affirming the judgment below.


Summaries of

Firestone Tire Rubber Co. v. Friedman

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Dec 14, 1934
74 F.2d 1013 (3d Cir. 1934)
Case details for

Firestone Tire Rubber Co. v. Friedman

Case Details

Full title:FIRESTONE TIRE RUBBER CO., Appellant, v. Lawrence FRIEDMAN, Trustee, etc

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Dec 14, 1934

Citations

74 F.2d 1013 (3d Cir. 1934)