Opinion ID: 587252
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Agriculture Order.

Text: 27 The district court deemed the Agriculture Order admissible pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 803(8)(C). 758 F.Supp. at 893 n. 3. Rule 803(8)(C) establishes a hearsay exception for reports ... of public offices or agencies ... setting forth ... factual findings resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law, unless the sources of information or other circumstances indicate lack of trustworthiness. 28 Assuming that the rule applies by its terms to the Agriculture Order, however, that order lends no support to the existence of a § 196(b) statutory trust. 4 Rather, the Agriculture Order involved an inquiry whether Rotches had violated another provision of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 202(a) (1988), and expressly stated: a statutory trust as required by Section 206(b) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 196(b), is not involved here. 29 Bankers Trust contends on appeal that Liberty Mutual introduced no evidence other than the Bankruptcy Orders and the Agriculture Order in support of the establishment of a statutory trust, so summary judgment should be awarded to Bankers Trust. There are substantial indications in the record, however, that a § 196(b) statutory trust was in fact established. See also In re Arbogast & Bastian, Inc. (Gibson v. Arbogast & Bastian, Inc.), 42 B.R. 633, 636 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.1984) (ruling that plaintiff in that case was a beneficiary of a § 196(b) statutory trust of which Arbogast was trustee). Liberty Mutual should have an opportunity to proffer admissible evidence on this issue. As stated in 10A Charles A. Wright, Arthur R. Miller, & Mary K. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2728, at 190 (2d ed. 1983), when the evidence offered in opposition to [a motion or cross-motion for summary judgment] is defective in form but is sufficient to apprise the court that there is important and relevant information that could be proffered to defeat the motion, summary judgment ought not to be entered. 30 We accordingly assume for present purposes that a § 196(b) statutory trust was established in which Arbogast was the trustee for the benefit of the Sellers, and next address the question whether that trust extends to the receivables and other property of Rotches in the possession of Bankers Trust. 31