Girard Trust Co. v. Amsterdam, 10097.
| Decision Date | 27 May 1942 |
| Docket Number | No. 10097.,10097. |
| Parties | GIRARD TRUST CO. v. AMSTERDAM et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Roland W. Granat, of Miami Beach, Fla., for appellant.
No appearance for appellees.
Before FOSTER, HUTCHESON, and McCORD, Circuit Judges.
Girard Trust Company, a Pennsylvania corporation, in various capacities as trustee, held eleven judgments obtained in courts of Pennsylvania against Philip Amsterdam, a citizen of Florida. By complaints filed in the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Florida, the Trust Company sought judgments against Amsterdam based upon the Pennsylvania judgments. It further sought to subject Amsterdam's property to the claims, and to set aside a certain conveyance of property to Jefferson Holding Company, a Florida corporation. It was alleged that the conveyance of an apartment house to Jefferson Holding Company by Philip Amsterdam was fraudulent and made for the purpose of hindering and delaying his creditors; that Philip Amsterdam was the owner of all stock in this corporation; and that such stock as was issued and held in the name of others was "in fact held by them in trust for Philip Amsterdam". The complaints were consolidated, interventions were allowed, and all parties in interest were brought into the proceedings.
Jefferson Holding Company was organized in March, 1935, and its 100 shares of stock were issued to four persons: 25 shares each to Philip Amsterdam, Annie K. Amsterdam, Ben Amsterdam, and Annie Amsterdam. In the proceedings in the trial court it clearly appeared that the conveyance of the property to the corporation by Philip Amsterdam was in no wise fraudulent or for the purpose of hindering or delaying creditors, and accordingly the allegation of fraudulent conveyance was abandoned by the Trust Company. It was also definitely established that the 50 shares of stock issued to Ben Amsterdam and his wife, Annie Amsterdam, had been issued for full and adequate consideration, and that Ben and Annie Amsterdam were in fact bona fide owners of the 50 shares of stock standing in their name. The validity of their stock holdings is not now questioned.
After a trial without a jury, the court held the Pennsylvania judgments to be valid, entered judgment against Philip Amsterdam for the full amount of these judgments plus interest and costs, and enjoined Amsterdam and the Jefferson Holding Company from selling, transferring, "or in any wise disposing of or encumbering" the 25 shares of stock which had been issued to him. The injunction was to continue "until modified or vacated in connection with proceedings to subject the said stock to the payment of said judgments". The court also retained jurisdiction "for further proceedings in connection with the subjecting of said stock of Philip Amsterdam toward the payment of said judgment". Contrary to the contention of Girard Trust Company, the court held...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dann v. Studebaker-Packard Corporation, 13940.
...Co., 8 Cir., 1944, 145 F.2d 389, 400; Knapp v. Imperial Oil & Gas Products Co., 4 Cir., 1942, 130 F.2d 1, 3-4; Girard Trust Co. v. Amsterdam, 5 Cir., 1942, 128 F.2d 376, 377; accord, Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Wabash, St. L. & Pac. Ry. Co., 1895, 157 U.S. 225, 228-229, 15 S.Ct. 576, 39 L.Ed. 68......
-
Roberts v. Williams
...will not be disturbed unless it is abused." Heay v. Phillips, 201 F.2d 220, 14 Alaska 132 (9th Cir. 1952); Girard Trust Co. v. Amsterdam, 128 F.2d 376 (5th Cir. 1942). The trial judge's statement, supra, denying the continuance, indicates he considered all the aspects of the case including ......
-
Grunewald v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
...Lessmann v. Commissioner, 327 F.2d 990, 996 (8 Cir. 1964); McDonnell v. Tabah, 297 F.2d 731, 733 (2 Cir. 1961); Girard Trust Co. v. Amsterdam, 128 F.2d 376, 377 (5 Cir. 1942); Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. Kent, 309 F.2d 891 (6 Cir. 1962), petition for certiorari dismissed 372 U.S. 982, ......
-
Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Meyn
...remand for a mere formal compliance with the rules. Helfer v. Corona Products, Inc., 8 Cir., 127 F.2d 612, 615; Girard Trust Co. v. Amsterdam, 5 Cir., 128 F.2d 376, 377; Knapp v. Imperial Oil & Gas Products Company, 4 Cir., 130 F. 2d 1, 3; Goodacre v. Panagopoulos, 72 App.D.C., 25, 110 F.2d......