U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1927

Rutherford v. Elliott

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Decided May 9, 1927 · Denison, Moorman, and Knappen, Circuit Judges

18 F.2d 956; 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 2120 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Wells Goodykoontz, Ira J. Partlow, and Randolph Bias; all of Williamson, W. Va., for appellant., Browning & Reed, of Ashland, Ky., and Stratton & Stephenson, of Pikeville, Ky., for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision.

Allred v. Uttecht (District Court, W.D. Washington 2019)
St. Louis Can Co. v. General American Life Ins. Co. (8th Cir. 1935)
Credit Alliance Cor. v. Atlantic, Pacific & Gulf Refining Co. (8th Cir. 1935)
First Nat. Bank of Weatherford v. Holliday (5th Cir. 1931)
Baer v. Security Trust Co. (4th Cir. 1929)
Ahlstrom v. Ferguson (1st Cir. 1928)
Clements v. Conyers (7th Cir. 1928)
Quinn v. Gardner (8th Cir. 1928)
Clark v. Huckaby (8th Cir. 1928)
Deeley v. Cincinnati Art Pub. Co. (6th Cir. 1928)
Broders v. Lage (8th Cir. 1928)
Stanley's Incorporated Store No. 3 v. Earl (8th Cir. 1928)

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal under section 25a of the Bankruptcy Act The appeal was allowed by the District Judge. Appellee now moves to dismiss because the allowance was not made by this court, and insists that the effect of the amendment of May 27, 1926, is to require such special allowance. The amendment was made in the language of section 24b. As amended, it reads:

“Such power shall be exercised by appeal and in the form and manner of an appeal, except in the eases mentioned in said section 25 to be allowed in the discretion of the appellate court.” 44 Stat. 664.

In view of the known purpose of this amendment, we think the paragraph should be interpreted as if it read:

“Such power shall be exercised by appeal and in the form and manner of to appeal, to be allowed, except in the cases mentioned *957 in said section 25, in the discretion of the appellate eourt.”

The same result will come from inserting, after the second “appeal,” the words “but it is,” or the clause as it is may be read with such expression as to show that “except” modifies “allowed.” An intent to make so vital a change as it would be to abolish all appeals under section 25, unless they were specially allowed by the appellate court, would have been indicated in clearer language.

The motion to dismiss is denied.

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