Case ID: f_246/html/0124-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "FOSTER, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ULLMAN, STERN & KRAUSSE v. COPPARD.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    November 12, 1917.)
    No. 3077.
    Bankruptcy @=>303(2), 341 — Preferences—Adjudication—What Constitutes. ' r
    A judgment of a referee in bankruptcy, disallowing, on objections by tbe trustee, a claim against tbe bankrupt’s estate, on the ground that tbe claimant bad received a preference, is res judicata on tbe question of preference, and admissible in evidence in a subsequent suit by tbe trustee to recover tbe preference.
    In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Texas; Duval West, Judge.
    Suit by M. Coppard, trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of the Ains-worth Mercantile Company, against Ullman, Stern & Krausse. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
    Affirmed.
    Henry A. Hirshberg and W. H. Kennon, both of San Antonio, Tex., for plaintiff in error.
    Jas. D. Crenshaw, of San Antonio, Tex., for defendant in error.
    Before WAUKER, Circuit Judge, and ROSTER, District Judge.
   FOSTER, District Judge.

The only question presented in this case is whether the judgment of the referee, disallowing, on the objections interposed by the trustee in bankruptcy, a claim against the bankrupt estate by plaintiff in error, on the ground that the creditor had received a preference, constituted res adjudicata on the question of preference, and was admissible in evidence in a subsequent suit by the trustee to recover the preference. The District Court affirmatively so ruled, and with this we concur.

Affirmed.