Perry

Perry v. Baumann

Good Law
128 F.2d 727·1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 3678
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 8, 1942No. 10050California344 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Mathews, J.

On September 4, 1941, we reversed an order dismissing a proceeding brought by appellant, William H. Perry, under § 75 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 203 , and remanded the case to the District Court with directions to find the facts specially, state separately its conclusions of law, and thereupon enter the appropriate judgment.

Appellant, upon remand of the case, requested a retrial thereof.. The request was refused, and properly so, as our mandate did not direct or contemplate a retrial. Complying with our mandate, the court found the facts, stated its conclusions, and entered a judgment dismissing the proceeding. From that judgment this appeal is prosecuted.

The provisions of § 75 apply to farmers. Subsection (r) of § 75 defines the term “farmer” as including “not only an individual who is primarily bona fide personally engaged in producing products of the soil, but also any individual who is primarily bona fide personally engaged in dairy farming, the production of poultry or livestock, or the production of poultry products or livestock products in their unmanu-factured state, or the principal part of whose income is derived from any one ■ or more of the foregoing…

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.