In re Burton Coal Co.
Cases that cite this one
31 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- United States Ex Rel. Farmers Home Administration v. Bottles (In re Bottles) (United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. Illinois 1982)
- Central States Corp. v. Luther. In re Garden Grain & Seed Co., Inc (10th Cir. 1954)
- Izdebski v. Central Ice Cream Co. (In re Central Ice Cream Co.) (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1987)
- Paso Del Norte Oil Co. v. Geib (5th Cir. 1985)
- Uranga v. Geib (5th Cir. 1985)
- In re Imperial '400' National Inc. (District Court, D. New Jersey 1974)
- Kroh v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1992)
- The First State Bank and Trust Company of Guthrie, Oklahoma v. Sand Springs State Bank of Sand Springs, Oklahoma (1st Cir. 1976)
- In re Equity Funding Corporation of America (United States District Court for the Central District of California 1975)
- First Nat. Bank in Houston, Texas v. Lake (1st Cir. 1953)
- In re International Power Securities Corporation (3d Cir. 1948)
- In re Aztec Supply Corp. (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois 2009)
- Peterson v. Berg (In re Berg) (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois 2008)
- Hansen v. Finn (In re Curry & Sorensen, Inc.) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 1986)
- In re S I Acquisition, Inc. (United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas 1986)
- Citizens Bank & Trust Co. v. Melrose Park National Bank (In re Crystal Manufacturing & Packaging, Inc.) (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1986)
- Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. (In re Dr. C. Huff Co.) (United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Kentucky 1984)
- Murdock v. Allina (In re Curtina International) (United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York 1981)
- Equity Funding Corporation of America v. Loeffler (9th Cir. 1975)
- In the Matter of Law Research Service, Inc. v. John Herbert Crook (2d Cir. 1975)
- Bache & Co. v. Loeffler (9th Cir. 1975)
- In the Matter of Theodore J. Richmond, Debtor. Jean Richmond v. United States of America (3d Cir. 1972)
- In re Richmond (District Court, D. New Jersey 1970)
- In the Matter of Brookwood Country Club, Debtor. Thomas B. McGuire v. Ralph A. Cohen (7th Cir. 1964)
- In re Bargain City, U.S.A., Inc. (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 1962)
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
Upon the filing of an involuntary petition for the reorganization of the debtor, Burton Coal Company, and an answer by the debtor, an order of approval and leave to file was entered.
One of the creditors was the Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company. Its claim was secured by stock of the debtor company. MacDonald and Cook claimed to be the owners of this same common stock of the debtor. An application was made to a special master for an order establishing appellee’s superior right to the common stock of the debtor. Appellants resisted this and challenged appellee’s superior lien on the stock. The master and the court found for appellee and against MacDonald and Cook, who appealed.
In this court they assail the jurisdiction of the District Court. They raise but one question, which they state to be: “Does a court of bankruptcy, in administering the bankruptcy law, have, jurisdiction and power to determine a'dispute between parties, concerning ownership of and title to property in which neither the debtor corporation nor its trustee has any interest?”
In support of their position denying jurisdiction, appellants cite: Bankruptcy Act 1938, Section 2, subsection a(7), 11 U.S.C. A. § 11, sub. a (7); Brumby v. Jones et al., 5 Cir., 141 F. 318; McGrath v. Lubliner & Trinz Theatres, Inc., et al., 7 Cir., 100 F.2d 646; Nixon v. Michaels, et al., 8 Cir., 38 F.2d 420.
Appellee concedes that ordinarily a court of bankruptcy would not, take jurisdiction of a controversy between two parties over a matter concerning which trustee of the bankrupt estate has no interest. There is, however, an exception to this rule; namely, where the debtor is seeking a reorganization, and it is necessary to ascertain the title to the stock where the approval of the stockholders is necessary to a reorganization. It is also necessary where the approval of the debt- or’s reorganization requires the affirmative vote of creditors, and the amount of a secured creditor’s claim is dependent upon its title to, and the value of, the collateral which, in this case, is the debtor company’s common stock.
It is clear that a reorganization of the debtor can not be had without the approval of the creditors. Appellee is a creditor, but the extent of its claim can not be ascertained until the value of the collateral which secures it is determined. The value of its security involves (a) the market value of the stock, and (b) the determination of the controversy between appellants and appellee, both of whom claim the stock.
It was impossible to administer the estate, or to reorganize the debtor, without *449 ■determining the controversy between appellants and appellee respecting this stock. Upon that determination depended the amount of appellee’s claim against the debtor. Because of such fact, the jurisdiction of a court of bankruptcy is extended beyond what it ordinarily would be. It extends to disputes such as existed between appellants and appellee, without the settlement of which reorganization cannot proceed. United States F. & G. Co. v. Bray, 225 U.S. 205, 32 S.Ct. 620, 56 L.Ed. 1055; In re Railroad Supply Co., 7 Cir., 78 F.2d 530.
The decree of the District Court is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.