In re Boudreau, 36601.
Decision Date | 30 October 1972 |
Docket Number | No. 36601.,36601. |
Citation | 350 F. Supp. 644 |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut |
Parties | In the Matter of Raymond R. BOUDREAU. |
Frank B. Cochran, New Haven Legal Aid Assn., New Haven, Conn., for petitioner.
Herman S. Hodes, New Haven, Conn., for respondent.
Petitioner Raymond R. Boudreau filed a voluntary bankruptcy petition November 9, 1970. On December 7, 1970, he was ordered to turn over to the trustee any income tax refund he might receive as a result of payments accompanying the joint return he and his wife filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Subsequently, Boudreau spent the proceeds of a March, 1971 refund check in the amount of $680.12 for houshold necessities and car repairs.
On August 19, 1971, the trustee in bankruptcy filed objections to the bankrupt's discharge, and on December 9, 1971, the bankrupt filed a motion to modify the "turn-over" order. After a combined hearing on both motions before Referee Trevethan on December 13, 1971, the motion to modify the turn-over order was denied on April 7, 1972, and the trustee's objections to discharge were sustained on August 1, 1972.
Boudreau now raises two basic arguments in his petition to review his denial of discharge. He also reiterates the issue raised and decided by this Court in the cases of Herbert Sands, No. 36,028, Frank O'Brien, No. 36,197 and Henry A. Kokoszka, No. 37,437 (D.Conn. July 21, 1972). As the petitioner recognizes, his case is indistinguishable from those decisions which held that the tax refund constitutes property that should be turned over to the trustee.
Boudreau's first argument is that since the refund resulted from a joint return and was payable to both him and his wife, she has an equal claim to the refund and therefore her share should not have been ordered turned over to the trustee. He relies primarily on 26 U.S. C. § 6013 governing joint tax returns and pertinent Internal Revenue Service regulations which make co-signors equally liable for deficiencies.
However, the petitioner stipulated that "The bankrupt's wife Jenny did not work during the year 1970 and did not contribute to the family during that year." Stipulation, April 3, 1972.
Clearly state law governs the issue of the wife's property interest in the tax refund check. See 4A Collier on Bankruptcy 70.17(7) (14th Revision); Hayes v. Schafer, 399 F.2d 300, 301 (6th Cir. 1968). While there is no Connecticut case directly on point, the statute governing property rights of husband and wife, Conn.Gen.Stat. § 46-9, emphasizes the independence of each. It provides, "Neither husband nor wife shall acquire by the marriage any right to or interest in any property held by the other before or acquired after such marriage . . ." except survivor benefits.
Further, the only reported case on point rejected the very argument presented here in a state with statutory provisions similar to Connecticut. Matter of Illingworth, 30 REF.J. 134 (D.C. Or.1956). In Illingworth, the Referee held:
See also Snedecor, "Comments on Income Tax Refunds" which follows the Illingworth decision at 30 REF.J. 135 (1956).
There is nothing in Connecticut law to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re Kokoszka
...not rule on the issue in this case, but in a similar case it remanded to the referee for him to exercise his discretion, In Re Boudreau, 350 F.Supp. 644 (D.Conn. 1972). Section 14(c) of the Act requires that a discharge be granted unless a bankrupt has done one of eight things among which i......
-
In re Vongchanh, Bankruptcy No. 09 B 70050 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 6/29/2009)
...394 B.R. 491 (B.A.P. 8th Cir, 2008); Kleinfeldt v. Russell an re Kleinfeld), 287 B.R. 291 (B.A.P, 10th Cir. 2002); In re Boudrcau. 350 F. Supp. 644 (D. Conn. 1972); In re Wetteroff, 324 F. Supp. 1365 (E.D. Mo. 1971); In re Gartmaa 372 B.R, 790 (Bankr. D.S.C. 2007); In re Lock, 329 B.R. S56 ......
-
In re Jones, 73-2496 Summary Calendar.
...to obey a lawful order of the court is an "automatic bar that obviates the need to exercise any discretion," see In re Boudreau, D.Conn.1972, 350 F. Supp. 644, 646. Since the order to complete the schedules was concededly lawful and the bankrupt could point to no impossibility of performanc......
-
Angelo v. Angelo
...must be applied toward the satisfaction of the husband's creditors (Matter of Wetteroff v. Grand, 8 Cir., 453 F.2d 544; Matter of Boudreau, D.C., 350 F.Supp. 644; cf. Matter of Carson, 83 N.J.Super. 287, 199 A.2d 407; Matter of Trecker, 62 Wis.2d 446, 215 N.W.2d 450), following a case decid......