AMERICAN STREET FLUSHING MACHINE COMPANY, PETITIONER,

v.

ST. LOUIS STREET FLUSHING MACHINE COMPANY ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Maggio v. Zeitz in Bankruptcy, 333 U.S. 56 (U.S. 1948)
  …mitment order should not issue. Other decisions are to the same effect. See, for example, American Trust Co. v. Wallis, 126 F. 464; Samel v. Dodd, 142 F. 68, cert. den. 201 U. S. 646; In re Nisenson, 182 F. 912; In re Holden, 203 F. 229, cert. den. 229 U. S. 621; In re McNaught, 225 F. 511; Dittmar v. Michelson, 281 F. 116; In re Davison, 143 F. 673; In re Marks, 176 F. 1018; In re Elias, 240 F. 448; Freed v. Central Trust Co. of Illinois, 215 F. 873; In re Nevin, 278 F. 601; Johnson v. Goldstein, 11 F. 2d…
• In re H. Magen Co., 10 F.2d 91 (2d Cir. 1925)
  …d property, or otherwise rebut the trustee’s prima facie case by credible testimony.” Our attention is called to In re Haring (D. C.) 193 F. 168, affirmed sub nom. In re Holden, 203 F. 229, 121 C. C. A. 435, and that a writ of certiorari was denied 229 U. S. 621, 33 S. Ct. 1049, 57 L. Ed. 1355. In that ease the referee found that the bankrupt had failed “to account for property, or money, or both, of the value of $4,000, and that such amount belongs to this estate and is withheld from the trustee thereof.”…
• In re Sequoia Auto Brokers, Ltd., Inc. v. Ira P. Idell, 827 F.2d 1281 (9th Cir. 1987)
  …in bankruptcy____”); see also In re Rubin, 378 F. 2d 104, 106 (3d Cir.1967); O’Hagan v. Blythe, 354 F. 2d 83, 84 (2d Cir.1965); In re Haring, 193 F. 168, 171 (W.D.Mich.1912), aff'd sub nom. In re Holden, 203 F. 229 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, [*1286] 229 U.S. 621, 33 S.Ct. 1049, 57 L.Ed. 1355 (1913). Section 41 of the 1898 Act, ch. 541, 30 Stat. 544, 556 (codified as amended at 11 U.S.C. § 69 (1976)) (repealed 1978), defined contemptuous behavior before a referee and provided that the facts of such behavior…