Case ID: f2d_6/html/1021-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of Rosario LA ROSA, Bankrupt; Louis M. Taylor, as Trustee, etc., Petitioner.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    April 6, 1925.)
    No. 266.
    Petition to Revise Order of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Petition to revise an order in bankruptcy entered in the District Court for the Southern District of New York. Boyd & Co. sought to reclaim certain goods sold by them to the bankrupt a few days before petition filed. Boyd’s agent called upon the bankrupt for the purpose of selling the goods, no representations were made and no questions asked. Petition in reclamation was granted on the ground semble that the sale was so near bankruptcy as to justify presumption of all the facts necessary to support the petition. The trustee sought review.
    Remington & Meek, of New York City, for Trustee. Lesser Bros., of New York City (William Lesser and Samuel L. Müller, both of New York City, of counsel), for Boyd & Co.
    Before ROGERS, HOUGH, and MANTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

It is sufficient to refer to Hyman v. Trow, etc., Co. (C. C. A.) 261 F. 991, In re Aarons & Co., 193 F. 646, 113 C. C. A. 514, and In re American, etc., Co., 173 F. 489, 97 C. C. A. 486, to show that either in bankruptcy or in an equity receivership the facts shown were whoHy insufficient to justify rescission. Petitioner showed nothing except that he had sold the goods in the ordinary course of trade, and did not even undertake to bear the burden of proof which under the cases cited lay upon him. Order reversed, with costs.