IN RE CINTRA REALTY CORPORATION
| Decision Date | 21 February 1967 |
| Docket Number | Docket 30969.,No. 310,310 |
| Citation | 373 F.2d 321 |
| Parties | In the Matter of CINTRA REALTY CORPORATION, Alleged Bankrupt. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
James O. Porter, Buffalo, N. Y., for appellant Cintra Realty Corp.
Alexander C. Cordes, Buffalo, N. Y. (John R. Lytle and Phillips, Lytle, Hitchcock, Blaine & Huber, Buffalo, N. Y., on the brief), for appellee Fleet-Wing Corp.
Before MEDINA, ANDERSON and FEINBERG, Circuit Judges.
On July 14, 1966, a petition in bankruptcy was filed against the Cintra Realty Corporation by Fleet-Wing Corporation, an unsatisfied judgment creditor. When the initial attempt to serve an actual agent of Cintra failed, Fleet-Wing obtained an order extending the time for service and for service on the Secretary of State of the State of New York. Service pursuant to this order was not timely and on August 24th, a second extension was obtained. This second order set the return date as September 13th and service was completed on August 29th. The mode of service was specified as follows:
ORDERED, that said Phillips, Lytle, Yorkey, Letchworth, Hitchcock & Blaine, as attorneys for said Fleet-Wing Corporation, give notice to said Cintra Realty Corporation by directing the U. S. Marshal to serve said Petition and subpoena upon Cintra Realty Corporation by delivering a copy of said subpoena and Petition to the Secretary of State of the State of New York, who is duly authorized by the Laws of the State of New York to accept service on behalf of said Cintra Realty Corporation, and by mailing a copy of said subpoena and Petition to the corporation at its last known address.
The Secretary of State mailed a copy of the petition to Cintra but it was returned marked "address unknown." Cintra had moved its office but had failed to notify the Secretary of State. The attorneys for Fleet-Wing did nothing further to give Cintra notice of the proceeding.
The principal point made by Cintra as appellant here is that the District Court had no jurisdiction to make the adjudication of bankruptcy because service of process, while it would have been sufficient under the New York State and federal rules, N.Y.C.P.L.R., Section 311 (1), N.Y. Business Corporation Law, McKinney's Consol.Laws, c. 4, Section 306, Fed.Rules of Civ.Proc. 4(d) (3) and (7), was not in strict compliance with the order made by Judge Henderson. The claim is that the order requires two mailings, one by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Proulx v. Goulet
... ... Cf. In re Cintra Realty Corp., 373 F.2d 321 (2nd Cir. 1967) ... Moreover, someone — presumably ... ...
-
Kontes Glass Company v. Lab Glass, Inc.
... ... KONTES GLASS COMPANY, Appellant, ... LAB GLASS, INC., Cenco Instruments Corporation, Edward B. Brown ... No. 15892 ... United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit ... Argued ... ...
-
Gough v. Agent Orange Settlement Fund
...(per curiam) (internal quotation marks omitted), " '[e]ven if the order be deemed ambiguous,' " id. (quoting In re Cintra Realty Corp., 373 F.2d 321, 322 (2d Cir.1967)). A court's interpretation of its own order will not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of discretion. See, e.g., Truskoski ......
-
IN THE MATTER OF CINTRA REALTY CORPORATION
...Porter, was adjudicated an involuntary bankrupt in September 1966, an order approved by this court in February 1967. In re Cintra Realty Corp., 373 F.2d 321 (2d Cir. 1967). The record shows this to be a classic case of mingling of allegedly separate corporate and personal assets in one busi......