Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

IN RE T. R. GOODLATTE & SONS

DISTRICT COURT, D. NEW JERSEY


May 24, 1941

In re. T. R. GOODLATTE & SONS, Inc.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: WALKER

WALKER, District Judge.

T.R. Goodlatte & Sons, Inc., a corporation *fn1" , filed *fn2" , its petition for voluntary reorganization under the then Section 77B of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. ยง 207.

By November 16, 1938, the attempts to reorganize had failed, and an order for liquidation was entered. It referred the matter to the Hon. John Grimshaw, Jr., as Referee in Bankruptcy and the trustees were directed to proceed with the liquidation of the debtor's assets. As such trustees they are the owners of certain real property located in the City of Clifton, Passaic County, New Jersey *fn3" , upon which are located factory buildings, oil reducing and storage plants, storage sheds, houses, etc.On March 17, 1939, Neocell Products Corporation *fn4" offered to purchase said land, buildings and improvements, together with other property more particularly set forth in a certain exhibit marked Schedule "B" *fn5" The offer called for title to pass by instruments executed by the duly acting and qualified trustees of the debtor, pursuant to authority and direction of the Court, conveying good and marketable title to said property free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. The authority and direction issued *fn6" and May 15, 1939, was designated for the closing.

 Approximately five days prior to May 15, 1939, the trustees received from the attorney for Neocell and Hygienic Tube & Container Corporation, *fn7" its assignee, a memorandum of alleged objections to the title to the premises to be conveyed *fn8" Neocell and its assignee, Hygienic, were thereafter directed to show cause why *fn9" they should not accept the deed and pay the balance of the purchase price or in the alternative why the property should not be resold for the account of said purchaser, and in the event of loss to the estate, it be directed to pay to the trustees, the amount thereof.

 Hygienic appeared specially and objected to the jurisdiction of the Court to determine summarily that the trustees' title is a good and marketable title, free, clear and discharged of any and all liens and encumbrances as required by said order of April 5, 1939, and without waiving its objection it answered the petition and order to show cause by setting forth its objections to the title proposed to be conveyed by the trustees. The said answer also sought an order granting respondent leave to join the trustees as party defendants in an action for the return of the deposit. A hearing was held and the court ordered *fn10" Neocell and Hygienic to perform specifically. Their petition for review and reversal brings before this court the Referee's certificate of review.

 All the property in the possession of Goodlatte of which it claims the ownership passes, upon the filing of the order to liquidate the assets, *fn11" into the custody of the Court of Bankruptcy *fn12" "having possession, the court is entitled to determine all questions respecting the same. The jurisdiction in such cases is exclusive of the jurisdiction of other courts, although otherwise the controversy would be cognizable in them." *fn13"

 The bankruptcy court has summary jurisdiction to adjudicate the type of questions raised by the objections aforesaid *fn14" ; however, in serving the interest of the estate and the parties, we must determine whether the title objections have been answered by the statutes or decisions of New Jersey, and if they have, then, has the Referee settled them in accordance with said statutes or decisions. We find that they have been answered by the statutes or decisions of New Jersey and believe it sufficient to say the Referee has settled each in accordance therewith *fn15" , and that he has not committed error in finding the facts. He is affirmed in determining that the respondent had no legal excuse for its failure to complete its offer for the real estate of the bankrupt and that he should have and did direct it to complete its bid.

 The motion of the solicitors for Neocell Products Corporation and Hygienic Tube Container Corporation set forth in the notice filed on May 31, 1940, is denied.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.