NOLLMAN & CO.
v.
WENTWORTH LUNCH COMPANY
The pertinent part of the headnote in this case is as follows:
A corporation engaged principally in running hotels is not a corporation engaged principally in trading or mercantile pursuits, within the meaning of § 4, subs, b, of the Bankruptcy Act of 1898.
Where' Congress has not expressly declared a word to have' a particular meaning, it will be presumed to have used the word in its well-understood public and judicial meaning, and cases based on a declaration made by Parliament that the word has a certain meaning are not in point in determining the intent of .Congress in using the word.
An qccupation that is not trading is not a mercantile pursuit.
A corporation not otherwise amenable to the Bankruptcy Act does not become so because it incidentally engages in mercantile pursuit; and so held as to a hotel company which, in addition to inn-keeping in which it was principally engaged, conducted a small store as an 'incident to its hotel business.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Weedin v. Wong Jun, 7 F.2d 311 (9th Cir. 1925)…was some testimony that he held the title of assistant manager, but none that he bought foodstuff or that he had the decision of any important matters. The court relied upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in Nollman & Co. v. Wentworth Lunch Co., 217 U. S. 591, 30 S. Ct. 694, 54 L. Ed. 895, and Toxaway Hotel Co. v. Smathers, 216 U. S. 439, 30 S. Ct. 263, 54 L. Ed. 558. In the first of those eases it was held that a eorp oration, principally or solely engaged in carrying on a general restaurant business,…
Authorities Cited
- Toxaway Hotel Co. v. Smathers & Co., 216 U.S. 439 (U.S. 1910)