Case Name: Henry SCHNEIWIND, Jr., and Irving Trust Company as Trustee of Susquehanna Silk Mills, Debtor, Debenture Bondholders Committee; L. F. Dommerich Company; E. Gerli Company, Inc.; Mitsui & Company, Ltd., and Nippon Ki- Ito Kaisha, Ltd., Appellants, v. Benjamin K. FOCHT and W. W. McCulloch, Ancillary Receivers of the Susquehanna Silk Mills, Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1936-05-06
Citations: 83 F.2d 1015
Docket Number: No. 5774
Parties: Henry SCHNEIWIND, Jr., and Irving Trust Company as Trustee of Susquehanna Silk Mills, Debtor, Debenture Bondholders Committee; L. F. Dommerich Company; E. Gerli Company, Inc.; Mitsui & Company, Ltd., and Nippon Ki— Ito Kaisha, Ltd., Appellants, v. Benjamin K. FOCHT and W. W. McCulloch, Ancillary Receivers of the Susquehanna Silk Mills, Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 83
Pages: 1015–1016

Head Matter:
Henry SCHNEIWIND, Jr., and Irving Trust Company as Trustee of Susquehanna Silk Mills, Debtor, Debenture Bondholders Committee; L. F. Dommerich Company; E. Gerli Company, Inc.; Mitsui & Company, Ltd., and Nippon Ki— Ito Kaisha, Ltd., Appellants, v. Benjamin K. FOCHT and W. W. McCulloch, Ancillary Receivers of the Susquehanna Silk Mills, Appellees.
No. 5774.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
May 6, 1936.
Breed, Abbott & Morgan, of New York City, for appellants Henry Schneiwind, Jr., and Irving Trust Co., as trustees of Susquehanna Silk Mills, debtor.
Shearman & Sterling, of New York City, for appellant Debenture Holders’ Protective Committee.
Hughes, Schurman & Dwight, of New York City, for appellants L. F. Dommerich & Co. and E. Gerli & Co., Inc.
Putney, Twombly & Hall,- of New York City, for appellants Mitsui & Co., Ltd., and Nippon Ki-Ito Kaisha, Ltd.
Charles II. Tuttle, Sanford II. E. Freund, Frank C. Fisher, and Lemuel Skidmore, all of New York City, of counsel.
Abram Salsburg, of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., for appellees.
Before BUFFINGTON, DAVIS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
After argument and full consideration had, it is ordered that the decree below appealed from be vacated, and it is further ordered that each of the ancillary receivers, in addition to the $3,500 heretofore allowed them, be awarded the sum of $1,500, which additional sum of $1,500 will make the total allowance to each of the said ancillary receivers $5,000 in all.