Court Opinion

ID: 6848570
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-23 20:32:38.034932+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:05:01.588524
License: Public Domain

L. HAND, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
The last payment I should have held to be a preference, except for Jaquith v. Alden, 189 U. S. 78, 23 S. Ct. 649, 47 L. Ed. 717, Yaple v. Dahl-Millikan Grocery Co., 193 U. S. 526, 24 S. Ct. 552, 48 L. Ed. 776, and Wild v. Provident Trust Co., 214 U. S. 292, 29 S. Ct. 619, 53 L. Ed. 1003. I am not sure that I understand on what principle those cases rest, hut I cannot distinguish them on the facts. While they construed the Bankruptcy Act (11 USCA), not the New York Business Corporation Law (Consol. Laws, c. 4), it seems to me that, until the Court of Appeals decides otherwise, we should assume that the meaning of the term, “preference,” should he taken as the same in each. There could be no intent to prefer, if the act in contemplation would not have effected a preference. On the authority of the cases cited and for that reason alone, I concur.