Court Opinion

ID: 9442803
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:00:34.046451+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:14.666053
License: Public Domain

L. HAND, Circuit Judge
concurring.
I prefer to rest my vote on the plaintiff’s failure to prove that he transferred the shares in 1934. The judge found that the proxy and the transfer were executed at the same time; if so, since they directly contradicted each other, the plaintiff did not *741carry the burden of proving a transfer in 1934. True, the judge did not expressly so find, but we are justified from his subsidiary finding in making the inference ourselves. For that reason I think that we may properly leave unanswered the question whether, if the transfer followed the proxy, the transaction was entered into for profit, as to which I am not so clear as I could wish.