Ross v. Stroh

Citations

• 165 F. 628
• 91 C.C.A. 616
• 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4795

Syllabus

<p>1. Bankruptcy (§ 114*) — Receivership—Collateral Attack.</p> <p>Where claimants instituted proceedings, in the nature of a replevin suit, against a bankrupt’s receiver to recover personal property, their only claim to relief depending on their ownership or right of possession of the property which the receiver had seized, they could not in such proceeding collaterally attack the official status of the receiver or the regularity of the proceedings leading to his appointment.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. § 165; Dec. Dig. § 114.*]</p> <p>2. Bankruptcy (§ 444*) — Petition for Review — Record.</p> <p>While neither the bankruptcy act nor the general bankruptcy orders prescribe the practice in proceedings on revisory petitions, the matters of law of which revision is sought must be in some manner clearly presented.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. § 922; Dec. Dig. § 444.*]</p> <p>3. Bankruptcy (§ 446*) — Appeal—Petition for Review — Scope of Review.</p> <p>Where an appeal is taken in bankruptcy, as authorized by Bankr. Act (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat 553 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3431]), § 24a, it is the duty of the appellate court to review the facts as well as the law, on proper assignments of error, as required by Gen. Bankr. Order 36 (18 Sup. Ct. ix) and Court of Appeals Rule 11 (150 Fed. xvii, 79 G. O. A. xvii), but if the matter is brought up on a petition for review, authorized by Bankr. Act, § 24b (30 Stat. 553 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3432]), only questions of law, fairly presented by the petition and record, can be considered.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. § 929; Dec. Dig. § 446.*</p> <p>Appeal and review in bankruptcy cases, see note to In re Eggert, 43 O. C. A. 9.]</p> <p>4. Bankruptcy (§ 447*) — Petition for Review — Dismissal Without Prejudice.</p> <p>Where, on a petition for review In bankruptcy, there were no sufficient specifications of legal erro