In re Ballard
| Citation | 279 F. 574 |
| Parties | In re BALLARD. |
| Decision Date | 27 February 1922 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas |
[Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted]
John F. Murphy, of Dallas, Tex., for bankrupt.
Lawther & Pope, of Dallas, Tex., for trustee.
Holland & Bartlett, of Dallas, Tex., for Dallas County State Bank.
Morris & Williamson, of Dallas, Tex., for Oak Cliff State Bank & Trust Co.
Byrd E. White, of Lancaster, Tex., for White & Co.
K. R. Craig and John W. George, both of Dallas, Tex., for Mrs. Wallace B. Smith.
Read, Lowrance & Bates, of Dallas, Tex., for J. R. Smith.
Burgess, Burgess, Chrestman & Brundidge, of Dallas, Tex., for Fairbanks, Morse & Co.
Davis, Johnson & Handley, of Dallas, Tex., for Anglo-American Mill Co.
W. P. Donaldson, of Dallas, Tex., for receiver of Farmers' & Merchants' Bank.
Claude McCallum, of Dallas, Tex., for E. R. Cox and others.
Short & Field, Synnott & Duggan, W. P. Donaldson, and A. B. Flanary, all of Dallas, Tex., for Farmers' & Merchants' Bank of Cedar Hill.
This is a review of an order made by Hon. E. M. Baker, referee in bankruptcy of the Dallas division, wherein and by which he fixes the rights of classes of claimants and also individual claimants against the estate of the bankrupt, Elijah F. Ballard. The petitions for review include what are in fact several made by W. J. Lawther, trustee of the estate; that of E. R. Cox et al.; that of Farmers' & Merchants' Bank of Cedar Hill and M. O. Durrett, its receiver; and that of Oak Cliff State Bank & Trust Company. By agreement of the parties the causes were consolidated, heard together, and one order was entered by the referee, taking care of the various contests involved.
The issues made and submitted to the referee, and decided by him, were many and complicated. The manner in which this bankrupt conducted a banking and a milling business at Cedar Hill and another milling business at Lancaster, both places in Dallas county, is found the reason for this. He organized this bank, having little or no funds of his own, and interested with him in it a number of the substantial farmers and citizens of this little place. He was manager and cashier of the bank. Those associated with him in the bank reposed all confidence in him. He built this flour mill at Cedar Hill and proceeded to operate it for himself. He secured parties to become interested with him at Lancaster, and erected a flour mill there. He used for himself the moneys deposited in the Cedar Hill bank, through overdrafts.
Those interested in the bank with him, those interested with him in the flour mill at Lancaster, the farmers of the community who sold him their wheat, which was put into his large bins at Cedar Hill, also those who contracted with him for the machinery which he put into his mills at Cedar Hill and Lancaster, also those who sold him his various properties also the individuals who loaned him money and the banks...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marshall-Wells Co. v. Kramlich
...Ogden Packing & Provision Co. v. Wyatt, 59 Utah 481, 22 A. L. R. 359, 204 P. 978; Rice v. Sanger Bros., 27 Ariz. 15, 229 P. 397; In re Ballard, supra.) it appears that the representations which it is claimed constitute an estoppel were made about a matter which the law requires to be made o......
-
Burk-Waggoner Oil Ass'n v. Hopkins
... ... Wehrmann, 202 U.S ... 295, 26 Sup.Ct. 613, 50 L.Ed. 1036; Claggett v ... Kilbourne, 66 U.S. (1 Black) 346, 17 L.Ed. 213; ... Crocker v. Malley, 249 U.S. 223, 39 Sup.Ct. 270, 63 ... L.Ed. 573, 2 A.L.R. 1601; Eliot v. Freeman, 220 U.S ... 178, 31 Sup.Ct. 360, 55 L.Ed. 424; In re Ballard ... (D.C.) 279 F. 574; Malley v. Howard (C.C.A.) ... 281 F. 363; In re Associated Trust (D.C.) 222 F ... 1012; Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Smietanka (D.C.) ... 275 F. 60; Malley v. Bowditch, 259 F. 809, 170 ... C.C.A. 609, 7 A.L.R. 608; In re Parker (D.C.) 275 F ... 868; Roberts v ... ...
-
In re Estes
...American Trust & Savings Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 259 S.W. 993; Mayfield Company v. Harlan & Harlan, Tex. Civ.App., 184 S.W. 313. 6 In re Ballard, D.C., 279 F. 574. 7 Richardson v. Washington, 88 Tex. 339, 31 S.W. 614; Lawson v. First National Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 150 S.W.2d 279. 8 Camden Fire In......
-
Andrew v. State Bank of New Hampton
...157 F. 49, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1100 (C. C. A. 6th Circuit); In re A. Bolognesi & Co., 254 F. 770 (C. C. A. 2d Circuit); In re Ballard, 279 F. 574 (District Court Texas); Schuyler v. Littlefield, 232 U. S. 707, 34 S. Ct. 466, 58 L. Ed. 806;Hewitt v. Hayes, 205 Mass. 356, 91 N. E. 332, 137 Am......