Case Name: In re ACKERMAN et al. In re STEHLI SILKS CORPORATION
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1924-03-10
Citations: 297 F. 224
Docket Number: No. 281
Parties: In re ACKERMAN et al. In re STEHLI SILKS CORPORATION.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 297
Pages: 224–224

Head Matter:
In re ACKERMAN et al. In re STEHLI SILKS CORPORATION.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
March 10, 1924.)
No. 281.
■Appeal and error @=>1022(1) — «Concurring findings of fact by special master and District Court not disturbed.
Concurring findings of fact by the special master and the District Court,, to the effect that a creditor, seeking to rescind a sale, did not rely on bankrupt’s false financial statement, is considered important on appeal
^rs>For other eases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in .ail Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. '
In the matter of Gizella Oesterreicher Ackerman and others, individually and as co-partners composing the firms of the Gizella Importing Company and G. Oesterreicher & Co., bankrupts, in which Alexander Forger was appointed receiver. From an order denying a reclamation by the Stehli Silks Corporation, .creditor, it appeals.
Order affirmed.
Austin McEanahan, Merritt & Ingraham, of New York City (H. P. Coursen, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Bondy & Schloss, of New York City (E. E. Bondy, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.
Before HOUGH, MANTON, and MAYER, Circuit Judges. '

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The sole question presented is whether the creditor appellant, in making the sales sought to be rescinded, relied solely, or indeed mainly, upon an admittedly false financial statement made by bankrupts. In a careful and persuasive opinion the special master found that no such reliance was given by appellant. To this finding of fact the lower court agreed. The importance attached to such concurring findings is too well established to need citation.
We see no reason to disagree, and affirm the order, with costs.