CORCORAN

v.

ROYAL DEVELOPMENT CO.

Citator

Cited By

• Cushman v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 153 F.2d 510 (2d Cir. 1946)
  …the trust estate. The presence of an expectable reversion is a strong indication that the Clifford doctrine will apply. See Hormel v Helvering, 312 U.S. 552, 61 S.Ct. 719, 85 L.Ed. 1037; Com’r v. Barbour, 2 Cir., 122 F. 2d 165,166, certiorari denied 314 U.S. 691, 62 S.Ct. 361, 86 L.Ed. 553; Helvering v. Elias, 2 Cir., 122 F. 2d 171, certiorari denied 314 U.S. 692, 62 S.Ct. 361, 86 L.Ed. 553. But where the chance that the grantor will ever get anything is so remote as it is here, it certainly cannot be consi…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• In re Graco, Inc., 364 F.2d 257 (2d Cir. 1966)
  …e seems little authority on the point, but what there is supports [*260] the proposition that the failure to examine the debtor under oath does not render the proceedings a nullity. Thus, in In re Conway, 121 F. 2d 972, 975 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 314 U.S. 691, 62 S.Ct. 361, 86 L.Ed. 553 (1941), a district court had vacated an order of the referee adjudicating the debtor in a Chapter XI proceeding a bankrupt because the debtor had not been examined under section 336 of the Act. The Court of Appeals for th…