Retsloff

India Tire & Rubber Co. v. Retsloff

Good Law
38 F.2d 73·1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 2266
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 10, 1930No. 5981California428 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Dietrich, J.

Strictly speaking, no question of law is involved, and the issues of fact may be briefly explained. For some time prior to June 18,1928, Gilbert S. Gordon ran a small gasoline station at Sam Diego, Cal., and in connection therewith sold automobile tires and other supplies.. On the date mentioned he was adjudicated a voluntary bankrupt. From time to time he had made purchases on eredit from the appellant, a wholesale tire dealer, and at the time of the adjudication he was indebted to it on that account in the sum of $9;938.54. For this amount it presented to the trustee in bankruptcy a claim in due form, which, after hearing, was disallowed upon the ground that claimant was chargeable with having received a preference. It is conceded that on April 18, 1928, appellant took over from Gordon automobile tires for which eredit was given him in the amount of $2,546.84 on his open account, which then exceeded $11,999. For some time Gordon had been,ill, his business was in a failing condition, and for a considerable period he had been unable to meet his overdue obligations. It is not controverted that in fact the transaction effected a preference.

In the court below, as here, there were…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.