U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 1967

In the Matter of Advance Printing & Litho Co., Bankrupt, Rosenthal & Rosenthal, Inc. v. Warren W. Bentz, Trustee in Bankruptcy

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Decided November 30, 1967 · Staley, Kalodner, Forman

387 F.2d 952; 4 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 838 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Warren W. Bentz, Erie, Pa., for appellant., M. E. Maurer, Wexler, Mulder & Weisman, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee., Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen, Philadelphia, Pa., Kupfer, Silberfeld, Nathan & Danziger, New York City, Michael L. Temin, Philadelphia, Pa., Eli S. Silberfeld, New York City, amici curias, National Commercial Finance Conference Inc.

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

Matter of J & L Transport, Inc. (United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin 1986)
In re Appropriate Interest Rate on Secured Claims (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey 1981)
Anderson v. Mobile Discount Corp. (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979)
Steve Tinsman and Nancy Tinsman v. Moline Beneficial Finance Company (7th Cir. 1976)
In re Schrader Body, Inc. (District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania 1970)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by Warren W. Bentz, trustee in bankruptcy, from an order of the district court reversing a decision of the bankruptcy referee.

The district court held that the referee erred in reforming the corporate bankrupt’s contract with Rosenthal & Rosenthal, Inc., a secured creditor, so that the latter would receive $6,000 less from the receiver’s sale of its collateral than the amount due it under its perfected security agreement. In reversing the referee, the district court also held that Rosenthal was entitled to reasonable compensation for attorney’s services rendered.

We have carefully examined the record and can find no error. We will, therefore, affirm the order of the district court on its well-reasoned opinion. In Matter of Advance Printing & Litho Co., 277 F.Supp. 101 (W.D.Pa., 1967).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.