In re Beihl
| Decision Date | 10 February 1910 |
| Docket Number | 3,511. |
| Citation | 176 F. 583 |
| Parties | In re BEIHL. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
Franklin Spencer Edmonds, for George W. Edmonds.
George P. Rich, for trustee.
The facts of this dispute are not in question, and may be thus stated:
A voluntary petition was filed by the bankrupt on July 2, 1909. A few days before-- on June 25th-- his landlord had distrained for rent upon the horses and wagons now in controversy. The District Court restrained the sale, and thereupon George W. Edmonds claimed to be the owner of the articles levied upon, averring that Beihl had sold them to him on May 10th, and was in possession under a lease made by Edmonds on the same day. The transaction was as follows Beihl, who was a retail dealer in coal, owed Edmonds $255.53 for coal previously bought. In consideration of this debt and of Edmonds' promise to furnish more coal to be used by Beihl in his retail trade, the bankrupt made a bill of sale of the horses and wagons. This document sells the property for an expressed consideration of $1, saying nothing about the other considerations.
On the same day Edmonds made a lease of the horses and wagons to Beihl for one year from May 15th, at a rental of $1 a month. The agreement provides for the return of the property at the end of the year in good order, save for reasonable wear, and gives to Beihl an option to buy for $10 within one month thereafter, but expressly declares that Beihl may only exercise this option if he has then paid all his indebtedness to Edmonds. Under these agreements Edmonds delivered to the bankrupt a further quantity of coal, valued at $925. The landlord's claim amounted to $487.73, and it was finally arranged before the referee that Edmonds should pay this sum, should take over the horses and wagons at a valuation of $1,250, and should pay to the trustee the balance in excess of the landlord's claim if it should be decided that the lease was not valid against the general creditors of the bankrupt. The transaction of May 10th was in good faith, but there was no delivery of possession; Beihl continued to use the horses and wagons in his business until the petition in bankruptcy was filed.
Upon these facts the referee (Richard S. Hunter, Esq.) held that 'the net result of this arrangement was undoubtedly under the Pennsylvania law a pledge or mortgage of this property,' and ordered Edmonds to pay...
To continue reading
Request your trial