green
Positive treatment
2.6 score
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Atlas Corporation v. W. Rodney Devilliers and Orco Corporation, Betty Junedevilliers, Plaintiff-Intervenor v. Emilio Naranjo, Third-Party William C. Marchiondo, Intervenor, Kendall O. Schlenker, as Guardian Ad Litemfor Minorchildren. Atlas Corporation v. W. Rodney Devilliers and Orco Corporation, Betty June Devilliers, Plaintiff-Intervenor v. Emilio Naranjo, Third-Party William c.marchiondo, Intervenor, Kendall O. Schlenker, as Guardian Ad Litem for Minorchildren,apellant. Atlas Corporation v. W. Rodney Devilliers and Orco Corporation v. Betty Junedevilliers, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee, Emilio Naranjo, Third-Partydefendant, William C. Marchiondo, Intervenor, Kendall O. Schlenker, as Guardianad Litem for Minorchildren. Atlas Corporation v. W. Rodney Devilliers and Orco Corporation v. Betty Junedevilliers, Plaintiff-Intervenor, Emilio Naranjo, Third-Party Defendant,william C. Marchiondo, Intervenor-Appellee, Kendall O. Schlenker, as Guardianad Litem for Minorchildren
Rosenwald & Son v. Baca, 28 N.M. 276 , 210 P. 1068 (1922); cf. Cabot v. First National Bank of Santa Fe, 81 N.M. 795 , 474 P.2d 478 (1970) 7 Rule 56(e) F.R.Civ.P., 28 U.S.C.; see 6 Moore's Federal Practice, P56.22 (1) 8 E.g., In Re Elliott, 83 F.Supp. 771 (E.D.Pa.1948), aff'd 173 F.2d 895 (3rd Cir. 1949); Menick v. Goldy, 131 Cal. App.2d 542 , 280 P.2d 844 (1955); Englander v. Jacoby, 132 N.J.Eq. 366, 28 A.2d 292 (1942); Sweney v. Carroll, 118 N.J.Eq. 208, 178 A. 539 (1935); Gillette v. Davis, 296 S.W. 658 (Tex.Civ.App.1927); see generally 37 AmJur.2d Fraudulent Conveyances 80; 37 C.J.S.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Krasny v. Gi Nam (In Re Gi Nam)
See also In re Elliott, 83 F.Supp. 771, 773 (E.D.Pa.1948) (emphasis added) (stating that “Pennsylvania law, which has adopted the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, places the burden of going forward with the evidence upon the wife, when property belonging to her husband is transferred to her while he is in debt, to show that he was solvent or that she paid a fair consideration for the property.”), aff 'd, 173 F.2d 895 (3d Cir.1949); Nimick v. Shuty, 440 Pa.Super. 87, 99 , 655 A.2d 132, 138 (1995) (emphasis added) (applying rule of law applicable to § 354 of the UFCA that the movant/credi…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Purcell
The burden is heavier on the wife of the debtor when she is the grantee: “the burden is on the wife to show by clear and satisfactory evidence, beyond that required of other creditors, that at the time of the transfer he [the conveyor] was solvent or that she paid full consideration.” Winter v. Welker, 174 F.Supp. 836, 843 (E.D.Pa.1959) (emphasis added); see also In re Elliott, 83 F.Supp. 771, 773 (E.D.Pa.1948), aff'd, 173 F.2d 895 (3d Cir.1949).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
G & G Cards & Gifts, Inc. v. Berman (In Re Berman)
See, e.g., In re Elliot, 83 F.Supp. 771, 773-74 (E.D.Pa.1948), aff 'd per curiam, 173 F.2d 895 (3d Cir.1949) (debtor denied discharge based upon his concealment of an asset — an equitable interest in a house in which he lived and paid the mortgage); cf., Molden v. Lucas (In re Molden), 300 F.2d 5, 8 (7th Cir.1962) (where the court found that although the bankrupt had quit-claimed his interest in jointly-owned property to his wife, a secret trust cannot be found where it was his wife who not only made the total cash down payment on the house, but also paid the mortgage, taxes and all other ex…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sacklow v. Vecchione
See also In re Elliot, 83 F.Supp. 771 (E.D.Pa. 1948), aff’d, 173 F.2d 895 (3 Cir. 1949), in which a concealment was found and a discharge denied because the bankrupt had failed to list as an asset an interest in the house in which he lived and on which he had repaid a $1600 mortgage.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY
v.
Nellie Irene TROUTMAN, Administratrix of Estate of Phillip A. Troutman
v.
Nellie Irene TROUTMAN, Administratrix of Estate of Phillip A. Troutman
No. 10746.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Feb 15, 1949.
Hubert T. Willis, of Louisville, Ky., for appellant., Herman Cohen and Lawrence S. Grau-man, both of Louisville, Ky., for appellee.
Published
PER CURIAM.
This appeal from a judgment entered on a jury verdict awarding $17,000 damages to appellee, as administratrix of Phillip A. Troutman, who was electrocuted through the alleged negligence of the appellant company in failing to provide a reasonably safe place in which the decedent could perform the work which he was ordered to do by his foreman, came on to be heard; and the cause having been duly considered on the record and on the oral arguments and briefs of attorneys for the contending parties, and it appearing that there is substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury and that no reversible error is found in the proceedings below; and for the reasons given in the opinion of the district judge, 83 F.Supp. 501, in acting upon the motion of appellant for a judgment non obstante veredicto and upon the supplemental motion for a new trial; the judgment is affirmed.