Calvin B. Wells v. Gene Wilkinson, Tr. in Bankr. of Hudson's, Inc., Bankrupt, 374 F.2d 504 (5th Cir. 1967). · Go Syfert
Calvin B. Wells v. Gene Wilkinson, Tr. in Bankr. of Hudson's, Inc., Bankrupt, 374 F.2d 504 (5th Cir. 1967). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Cited for
At page 505 cited at this page1 citing case
  • In Re Weisser, 1 B.R. 206 (M.D. Fla. 1979).published
    Additionally, since the general rule is that a debtor under Chapter XI will remain in possession, although acting as a trustee, Wells v. Wilkinson, 374 F.2d 504, 505 (5th Cir. 1967), the debtor is more likely to have control and direction…
Other citing cases1 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Calvin B. WELLS, Appellant,
v.
Gene WILKINSON, Trustee in Bankruptcy of Hudson’s, Inc., Bankrupt, Appellee
22478_1.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Mar 13, 1967.
Published opinion
374 F.2d 504
1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7123
Jesse S. Guillot, New Orleans, La., for appellant., Robert G. Nichols, Jr., Jackson, Miss., for appellee.
Rives, Wisdom, Connally.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

This appeal is by a receiver in bankruptcy dissatisfied with his fee. The case arose in a Chapter XI arrangement proceeding. The Referee appointed Wells receiver when the debtor filed a voluntary petition for arrangement. The order provided that the debtor was to continue to operate its business. When the Referee approved the debtor’s proposed arrangement, he again appointed Wells receiver and also undertook to appoint him as trustee. No trustee is, as a rule, appointed in a Chapter XI proceeding unless there is a prior pending bankruptcy proceeding. 11 U.S.C. § 732.

Wells claims the maximum compensation as (1) receiver with limited powers, which he was at first; (2) receiver, which he was after the Referee accepted the debtor’s arrangement; and (3) as trustee, which he never was. Wells was entitled to compensation for his services in categories (1) and (2). The Referee awarded him compensation for these services, although not the maximum allowable under 11 U.S.C. § 76. The actual compensation is within the discretion of the court, and to win a reversal the receiver must show “that such discretion was plainly abused.” In re Myley Electrical Supply Co., 2 Cir. 1923, 287 F. 524, 526. We find no abuse of discretion. The judgment is

Affirmed.