In re Lawrence
| Decision Date | 22 December 1904 |
| Docket Number | 105. |
| Citation | 134 F. 843 |
| Parties | In re LAWRENCE et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
W. M. Marshall, for appellant.
Albert Reynaud, for appellee.
Before WALLACE, TOWNSEND, and COXE, Circuit Judges.
This case depends upon a question of fact, which has been decided adversely to the appellant by the referee, and by the district judge in review of the referee. This court should not disturb these findings, unless they are manifestly unsupported by the evidence. So far from this being so, we are of the opinion that the evidence abundantly supports them.
Order affirmed, with costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Abrams v. Astor, 20987.
...are "clearly erroneous." Unless we can come to that conclusion the findings are to be given effect, as we have many times held. In re Lawrence, 2 Cir., 134 F. 843; In re Oriel, 2 Cir., 23 F.2d 409; Oneida Valley Nat. Bank v. Balish, 2 Cir., 130 F.2d 255; Morris Plan Industrial Bank v. Hende......
- In re American Steel Supply Syndicate, Inc.
-
In re Shapiro
...his findings unless they are manifestly unsupported by the evidence. In the matter of Musgrave, D.C., 27 F.Supp. 341, 343; In re Lawrence, 2 Cir., 134 F. 843. General order in bankruptcy No. 47, 11 U.S.C.A. following section 53, provides in "Unless otherwise directed in the Order of referen......
-
IN RE RIDDLESBURG MINING CO., 22128.
...his findings unless they are manifestly unsupported by the evidence. In the Matter of Musgrave, D.C., 27 F.Supp. 341, 343; In re Lawrence, 2 Cir., 134 F. 843. Upon an examination of the mortgage and contract instruments and a review of the testimony adduced in most exhaustive hearings encom......