The District Court entered judgment for petitioner, although it
struck from the record an affidavit offered in evidence by
petitioner in support of his claim. The Court of Appeals reversed
on the ground that petitioner had failed to prove his claim. In
doing so, it refused to consider the action of the District Court
in striking the affidavit, because petitioner had not
cross-appealed.
Held:
1. If the District Court erred in striking the affidavit, a
cross-appeal by petitioner was not prerequisite to the Court of
Appeals' considering the affidavit in support of the District
Court's judgment. P.
352 U. S.
281.
2. On remand of this case, the Court of Appeals should consider
the questions of the admissibility and weight of the affidavit and
whether relevant admissible evidence established a constructive
trust under Illinois law. P.
352 U. S.
281.
229 F.2d 232 reversed and remanded.
PER CURIAM.
We granted certiorari in this case to review a judgment of the
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 229 F.2d 232, reversing
an order of the District Court for the Southern District of
Illinois, sitting in bankruptcy, which required respondent as
trustee of a bankrupt's estate to pay $27,400 to petitioner. 351
U.S. 949. The District Court's order was based on a finding that,
subsequent to
Page 352 U. S. 281
the date of the adjudication of bankruptcy, the bankrupt had
obtained money by fraud from the petitioner and had turned over
$27,400 of that money to respondent. At the hearing before the
District Court, petitioner had sought to introduce into evidence an
affidavit in which the bankrupt stated that he had paid $36,000 of
the money he had received from petitioner to the respondent. At the
conclusion of the hearing, the District Court sustained
respondent's motion to strike the affidavit.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that petitioner had failed
to prove that any specific portion of the money that he had given
the bankrupt became a part of the funds in the hands of respondent.
Because petitioner had not cross-appealed, the Court of Appeals
held that it could not consider the action of the District Court in
striking the bankrupt's affidavit from the record.
A successful party in the District Court may sustain its
judgment on any ground that finds support in the record. If the
District Court was in error in striking an admissible affidavit, a
cross-appeal was not a prerequisite for the Court of Appeals to
rule on the admissibility of the affidavit, and finding it
admissible, to find that it afforded evidence in support of the
District Court judgment.
United States v. American Railway
Express Co., 265 U. S. 425,
265 U. S.
435�436;
Langnes v. Green, 282 U.
S. 531,
282 U. S.
538�539. Since the Court of Appeals did not consider the
admissibility and weight of the affidavit, we remand to the Court
of Appeals for its consideration of those issues.
The claim in this case is that relevant, admissible evidence
established a constructive trust. Whether it did so or not is a
question of Illinois law. The Court of Appeals, in the view it took
of the case before it, did not reach this local question. On
remand, that question too must be considered by the Court of
Appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
