In re Sawilowsky
| Decision Date | 17 October 1922 |
| Docket Number | 2366. |
| Citation | 284 F. 158 |
| Parties | In re SAWILOWSKY. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida |
Sabel & Reinstine, of Jacksonville, Fla., for petitioner.
Johnson & McIlvaine, of Jacksonville, Fla., for respondent.
Marks Marks & Holt, of Jacksonville, Fla., for trustee.
On October 5th a rule was issued on the petition of Samuel Sawilowsky, Jacob L. Jacobs, and Myam Joel upon Thomas C Sutker to show cause why the bill of sale theretofore issued to him by the trustee in bankruptcy should not be delivered up for correction in the description of the property conveyed. To this rule the respondent, the purchaser of the bankrupt assets at the trustee's sale, filed a motion to dismiss the rule and also a return to the rule. The trustee at the hearing applied to be made a party, and, upon the application being allowed, filed a similar motion and return.
The facts may be succinctly stated as follows: Samuel Sawilowsky doing business as Children's Bootery, was adjudicated a bankrupt, and upon a meeting of creditors a resolution was passed authorizing a sale of the assets at public or private sale, to be approved by the referee. Subsequently an order was passed by the referee that the trustee sell the stock of merchandise and fixtures at public outcry. Pursuant to this order the trustee advertised the sale at public outcry, the entire stock of ladies, misses, and children's shoes, hosiery, findings, and store fixtures of Samuel Sawilowsky, trading as Children's Bootery. Upon the sale being had, Thomas C. Sutker was the highest bidder, and the sale was confirmed by the referee, and a bill of sale executed by the trustee in which the stock of goods, fixtures, the good will, and trade-name was transferred to the purchaser.
There were a number of questions raised at the hearing: Whether the parties had a standing in this cause to bring this proceeding; whether in this proceeding the question could be adjudicated, etc. These various questions it does not seem to me are necessary to be adjudicated here except in so far as the right of the bankrupt to proceed in this manner. The decision of that question depends on whether the trade-name passed to the trustee. If the trade-name passed to the trustee, then it seems to me that the bankrupt has no standing to complain of the description of the property in the bill of sale. The creditors might do so, but under the Bankruptcy Act (Comp. St....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Children's Bootery v. Sutker
... ... COUNSEL ... George ... C. Bedell and Sabel & Reinstine, all of Jacksonville, for ... appellants ... Johnson ... & McIlvaine, of Jacksonville, for appellee ... OPINION ... STRUM, ... In 1920 ... the appellant Samuel Sawilowsky entered the retail shoe ... business in Jacksonville, dealing principally in ... children's shoes, stockings, and their accessories. As a ... means of identifying his business before the public, and for ... the purpose of attracting and retaining patronage, he adopted ... the trade-name, 'The ... ...
-
Mason, In re
...and it is also unclear whether a debtor, once adjudicated a bankrupt, is a proper party to attack a sale by the estate. In re Sawilowsky, 284 F. 158, 159 (S.D.Fla.1922) (once adjudicated a bankrupt, debtor had no standing to attack sale of property of the estate); see also In re Rose, 86 F.......
-
In re Sawilowsky
...the trade-name and good will were appropriated and sold for the benefit of the creditors. As I have had occasion heretofore to point out (284 F. 158), the bankrupt, having parted with his for the benefit of his creditors, can have no interest in the method of the disposal of same, and is no......