Campbell v. Balcomb
| Decision Date | 04 October 1910 |
| Docket Number | 1,673. |
| Citation | 183 F. 766 |
| Parties | CAMPBELL et al. v. BALCOMB. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Hugh L Burnham, for plaintiffs in error.
F. W Balcomb, pro se.
Before BAKER and SEAMAN, Circuit Judges, and HUMPHREY, District Judge.
Defendant in error instituted this action to recover an alleged preferential payment made by the insolvent to the plaintiffs in error.
At the conclusion of plaintiff's evidence the defendants moved for a directed verdict in their favor. This motion was overruled, and the defendants, determining to stand on the record, introduced no evidence.
An assignment that the declaration is insufficient to support the judgment has not been very seriously urged, and we pass it with the statement that on examination we find each count adequate to withstand objections which were not made until after verdict.
Plaintiff's evidence showed that the defendants on February 6, 1906 being then the owners of a promissory note maturing on February 16, 1906, made by the Lawrence Manufacturing Company (the bankrupt herein), forwarded the note to the Oak Park Savings Bank for collection; that the Lawrence Manufacturing Company was then insolvent, had ceased to do business, was collecting its receivables, and was negotiating a sale of its plant; that this state of affairs was known to the Oak Park Bank; that a sale was consummated on February 10, 1906, and out of the proceeds of this sale and of collections enough was turned over to the bank to cover in full its own claim and that of the defendants; that on February 16, 1906, the bank remitted to the defendants the full amount of the note; that for a long time the bank had been a creditor of the Lawrence Manufacturing Company and the company had been a creditor (depositor) of the bank; that on a petition filed June 9, 1906, the company was adjudged bankrupt, and later the plaintiff was elected trustee. There was no proof that the defendants had any actual notice of the condition and doings of the company.
One contention for reversal is that the knowledge of the bank was not chargeable to the defendants because it was not obtained ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Holbrook v. United States Nat. Bank
...the plaintiff upon this contention. The plaintiff further invokes the language of the statute and the decision in Campbell v. Balcomb, 183 F. 766 (C. C. A. 7th Circuit), to the effect that, whatever may be the effect at common law as to imputed knowledge, the bankruptcy statute is sui gener......
-
Irving Trust Co. v. STATE BANKERS'FINANCIAL CORPORATION
...for holding that the agents' interest to conceal the preferential character of the transaction is entirely irrelevant. Campbell v. Balcomb (C. C. A.) 183 F. 766; Holbrook v. U. S. Nat. Bank (D. C.) 20 F.(2d) 961; In re Henwood & Nowak & Co. (D. C.) 27 F.(2d) 888. To the contrary effect defe......
-
In re Paoli Lithia Springs Hotel Co.
...unfaithful servant could not bind the master. Bank v. Nichols & Shepard Co., 223 Ill. 41, 79 N. E. 38, 7 L. R. A. 752; Campbell v. Balcomb, 183 F. 766, 106 C. C. A. 474 (7th C. C. A.); Am. Nat. Bank v. Miller, 229 U. S. 517, 33 S. Ct. 883, 57 L. Ed. 1310; 2 Corpus Juris, 868, § 549. No cour......
-
Balcomb v. Old Nat. Bank
... ... Before ... BAKER, SEAMAN, and KOHLSAAT, Circuit Judges ... BAKER, ... Circuit Judge ... Plaintiff ... in error failed in his action to recover an alleged ... preferential payment ... With ... one exception the facts are the same as in Campbell v ... Balcomb, 183 F. 766, 106 C.C.A. 474. In both cases the ... collections were made through the Oak Park Bank, of Oak Park, ... Ill., as agent, and the agent knew the insolvent's ... condition and purpose, and 'had reasonable cause to ... believe' that preferences were intended. In the ... ...