Nollman & Co. v. Wentworth Lunch Co., 217 U.S. 591 (1910). · Go Syfert
Search
Nollman & Co. v. Wentworth Lunch Co., 217 U.S. 591 (1910). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Nollman & Co.
v.
Wentworth Lunch Company
154.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 18, 1910.
217 U.S. 591
1910 U.S. LEXIS 1989
Mr. Maurice P. Davidson for appellants and petitioners., Mr. Reno R. Billington for appellee and respondent., Mr. William, C. Rosenberg, by permission of the court, filed a brief as amicus curice.-
Per Curiam.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam.

Judgment affirmed on the authority of Toxaway Hotel Company v. Smothers & Co., decided February 21, 1910 (216 U. S. 439). [1]

1

The pertinent part of the headnote in this case is as follows:

A corporation engaged principally in running hotels is not a corporation engaged principally in trading or mercantile pursuits, within the meaning of § 4, subs, b, of the Bankruptcy Act of 1898.

Where' Congress has not expressly declared a word to have' a particular meaning, it will be presumed to have used the word in its well-understood public and judicial meaning, and cases based on a declaration made by Parliament that the word has a certain meaning are not in point in determining the intent of .Congress in using the word.

An qccupation that is not trading is not a mercantile pursuit.

A corporation not otherwise amenable to the Bankruptcy Act does not become so because it incidentally engages in mercantile pursuit; and so held as to a hotel company which, in addition to inn-keeping in which it was principally engaged, conducted a small store as an 'incident to its hotel business.