In re Alaska American Fish Co.
| Decision Date | 08 June 1908 |
| Docket Number | 626. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington |
| Parties | In re ALASKA AMERICAN FISH CO. et al. |
F. H Kelly, for petitioners.
Charles Bedford, for respondent.
This is an involuntary bankruptcy case, instituted in this court against two corporations, one being organized under the laws of the state of Washington and the other a California corporation. The home office and principal place of business of the Washington corporation is at the city of Tacoma, its business was catching, preserving by salt, and marketing salt water fish, and it owned a plant for carrying on that industry in Alaska. Fish, as a commodity of merchandise requires the application of process for its preservation, as well as labor in packing the same in suitable receptacles for handling and transportation. Therefore I hold that the business of said corporation was a manufacturing business within the meaning of the bankruptcy law, and that it is subject to be adjudicated a bankrupt.
The California corporation appears to have been organized with the object of becoming the successor of the Washington corporation. The evidence, although meager, indicates that there was an understanding among its promoters that it was to take over the property and assume the obligations of the Washington corporation. Its home office is at Oakland, Cal.; but the business appears to have been conducted by a manager at Tacoma, who was also the manager of the Washington corporation, and the petitioners allege that its transactions were so intermingled with the business of its predecessor that, for the protection of the rights of creditors, it is necessary to include it as a party in this proceeding, so that administration of the estate as a unit may be under the direction of one court. This ground of jurisdiction is disputed, and the case was referred to a special master to take evidence and report the same to the court. The evidence is meager, as I have remarked; but it is uncontradicted, and it indicates that the joint manager of the two corporations continued the business of the former without apparent change as to methods or employes, and that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to separate the accounts and segregate the liabilities, and that a separation of the two concerns in bankruptcy proceedings will be impracticable.
The record does not disclose any conflict of jurisdiction by reason of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Central Trust Co. of Illinois v. George Lueders & Co.
...manufacturing establishments. See Engle v. Sohn, supra; State v. American Sugar Ref. Co., 108 La. 603, 628, 32 So. 965; In re Alaska American Fish Co. (D.C.) 162 F. 498. the Engle Case (which involved exemption from taxation) 'canned fruits' were included in the illustrative category of art......
-
In re I. Rheinstrom & Sons Co.
... ... decision that it was not in the case of State v. American ... Sugar Refining Company, 51 La.Ann. 562, 25 So. 447. The ... decisions of that court show ... men, women, and children in that time. Not to mention the ... fruit and fish, four pounds of condensed milk were put up ... in 1912 for each inhabitant of the United States ... decision in the case of In re Alaska American Fish ... Company (D.C.) 162 F. 498, is not without decided ... bearing on the matter ... ...
-
Stone v. Eacho, 4894.
...Withers v. White, 269 U.S. 554, 46 S.Ct. 18, 70 L.Ed. 408; Salt Lake Valley Canning Co. v. Collins, 9 Cir., 176 F. 91; In re Alaska American Fish Co., D.C., 162 F. 498; In re Southwestern Bridge & Iron Co., D.C., 133 F. 568; Remington on Bankruptcy, 4th Ed., vol. 1, sec. In the case of In r......
-
State v. Hennessy Co.
...Canning Co. v. Lehmann-Higginson Grocery Co., 70 Kan. 664, 79 P. 141, 70 L. R. A. 653. Fish packing: In re Alaska American Fish Co. (D. C.) 162 F. 498. Ship building: Columbia Iron Works v. National Lead Co., 127 F. 99, 62 C. C. A. 99, 64 L. R. A. 645;In re Marine Construction & Dry Dock Co......