Case Name: HENRY HENTZ & CO. et al. v. LOVELL
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1912-01-02
Citations: 192 F. 762
Docket Number: No. 2,176
Parties: HENRY HENTZ & CO. et al. v. LOVELL.
Judges: Before PARDEE and SHELBY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 192
Pages: 762–762

Head Matter:
HENRY HENTZ & CO. et al. v. LOVELL.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
January 2, 1912.
Petition for Rehearing Denied February 6, 1912.)
No. 2,176.
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Alabama.
Action by William S. Lovell, trustee, etc., against Henry Hentz & Co. and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.
Reversed and remanded.
Daniel Partridge, Jr., for plaintiffs in error.
Walker Percy, A. Benners, and Borden Burr, for defendant in error.
Before PARDEE and SHELBY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This was an action brought by William S. Lovell, as trustee of Knight, Yancey & Co., bankrupts, against Henry Hentz & Co. and others based on transactions between said bankrupts and Henry Hentz & Co., involving the sale of cotton by the bankrupts and the obtaining of the price from the buyers by spurious bills of lading, for which genuine bills of lading were subsequently issued. The facts are such that the case raises the same questions that have just been decided adversely to the trustee by this court in the case of Wm. S. Lovell, Trustee, etc., v. Isidore Newman & Son, 192 Fed. 753. The court below directed a verdict in favor of the trustee. 181 Fed. 555. This direction conflicts with the view of the court expressed in the said opinion and judgment rendered to-day.
It follows that the judgment of the Circuit Court must be reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.