Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

In the Matter of Minniola O. Miller, Debtor-Appellant, 22305_1 (1952)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Number: 22305_1 Visitors: 1
Filed: Jun. 19, 1952
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 198 F.2d 267 In the Matter of Minniola O. MILLER, Debtor-Appellant. No. 264, Docket 22305. United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit. Argued June 4, 1952. Decided June 19, 1952. Before AUGUSTUS N. HAND, CLARK and FRANK, Circuit Judges. 1 Minniola O. Miller, pro se. 2 Ufa E. Guthrie, pro se. 3 Hugh Meade Alcorn, Jr., Henry P. Bakewell, Hartford, Conn., of counsel, for appellee Town of Suffield. 4 Elihu H. Berman, Hartford, Conn., for appellee Malvy Realty Co. 5 PER CURIAM. 6 Judge Smith has d
More

198 F.2d 267

In the Matter of Minniola O. MILLER, Debtor-Appellant.

No. 264, Docket 22305.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued June 4, 1952.
Decided June 19, 1952.

Before AUGUSTUS N. HAND, CLARK and FRANK, Circuit Judges.

1

Minniola O. Miller, pro se.

2

Ufa E. Guthrie, pro se.

3

Hugh Meade Alcorn, Jr., Henry P. Bakewell, Hartford, Conn., of counsel, for appellee Town of Suffield.

4

Elihu H. Berman, Hartford, Conn., for appellee Malvy Realty Co.

5

PER CURIAM.

6

Judge Smith has discussed all the pertinent questions raised by the appellant, 106 F. Supp. 40. He decided that she had proposed no practicable plan of rehabilitation, that her charges of bad faith and fraud were groundless, and dismissed her final petition under the Frazier-lemke Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 203, and certain counterclaims under the Sherman and Clayton Acts, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq. We concur in his action and are convinced that it is past the time when this appellant should be allowed by any means to further prevent her creditors from proceeding in the State Courts to liquidate thier claims.

7

Affirmed.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer