Source: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Date: 1897-12-06
Jurisdiction: United States
Docket: No. 912
Citation: 84 F. 18
Opinion
PER CURIAM. Notwithstanding the ingenióos and able argument of counsel for appellant, we are unable to perceive in this case other than an effort to establish as a preferential debt a claim for the stipulated compensation for the use of cars, or, as it is generally called, “car rental.” Under the authority of Thomas v. Car Co., 149 U. S. 95, 13 Sup. Ct. 824, this cannot be done. The order is therefore affirmed.