In re Brown
Decision Date | 05 October 1908 |
Docket Number | 1,601. |
Parties | In re BROWN. v. MAJOR et al. BROWN |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Hiram W. Johnson, for petitioner.
Daniel O'Connell, for respondents.
Before GILBERT, ROSS, and MORROW, Circuit Judges.
This is a petition for the revision, under section 24b of the bankruptcy act of July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 553 (U.S Comp. St. 1901, p. 3432), of an order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
The petition to this court shows that on the 28th day of January 1908, Frieda R. Major, Maude A. Ralston, and Kate A O'Connell, as administratrix of the estate of George P O'Connell, presented a petition to the judge of the court below praying that the present petitioner be adjudged bankrupt. Brown field a demurrer to that petition, which demurrer the court below overruled, and it is that ruling that is here sought to be revised. The real grounds of the demurrer were that the petition for the adjudication in bankruptcy did not show that the petitioners thereto were holders of provable claims against Brown or his estate, that the amount of the alleged claims of the petitioners against the alleged bankrupt was not sufficient to entitle them to the relief sought, and that the averments of the petition filed by the alleged creditors were indefinite and uncertain in certain enumerated particulars.
The petition to which the demurrer was interposed alleged, among other things, that the California Safe Deposit & Trust Company was then, and for more then five years then last past had been, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of California, and until October 30, 1907, conducted a general banking business under the laws of that state, and also carried on the business of a savings and loan corporation, and also of keeping money and other valuable personal property in safe-deposit vaults at agreed rentals, and acted as executor, administrator, guardian, trustee, and receiver, discounted bills of exchange and other evidences of indebtedness, and received moneys on deposit, payable on demand and otherwise; that the whole amount of the capital stock of the company was three millions of dollars, divided into 30,000 shares of the par value of $100 each, of which stock 22,122 shares were subscribed for and issued, 577 of which were issued to and then held by Brown; that on November 1, 1907, Brown was, and for five years prior thereto had been, a director and vice president and manager of the company, and was not, and had not been during the period mentioned, a wage-earner or engaged chiefly in farming or the tilling of the soil; that on October 30, 1907, the company closed its doors and refused to pay on demand the money deposited therein, and refused to pay any of its debts or obligations, and has continued in such refusal, and has kept its doors closed ever since; that on December 7, 1907, the bank commissioners of the state of California adjudged the company insolvent, and that it was dangerous for it to continue to do business, and on December 9th of the same year the Attorney General of the state commenced an action in the name of the people of the state against the company and its officers and directors, in the superior court of the state in and for the city and county of San Francisco, to have the company adjudged insolvent and a receiver thereof appointed, and that on January 3, 1908, a default was entered against such officers and directors, including Brown, and that on January 14, 1908, the said superior court adjudged the company insolvent and appointed a receiver of its property; that the petitioners are creditors of Brown having provable claims amounting in the aggregate, in excess of securities held by them, to the sum of $500, the nature and amount of which are as follows:
'That said California Safe Deposit and Trust Company was insolvent on said December 7th, 1907, and for more than a year prior thereto said J. Dalzell Brown well knew during all that time, and advertised and requested your petitioners and others to deposit their money with said company, and during the months of September and October, 1907, your petitioner Kate A. O'Connell, as such administratrix, deposited the sum of one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four dollars ($1,774.00) with said company, and in the month of October, 1907, said Frieda R. Major deposited the sum of eleven hundred and twenty-five dollars ($1,125.00) with said company, and about July or August, or September, 1907, said Maude A. Ralston deposited the sum of one hundred dollars ($100.00) with said company, said company receiving and keeping each and all of said deposits as a savings bank under the laws of the state of California, agreeing to return said money to said depositors on demand, and the allowance of said deposits by said Brown at said time was a violation of section 562 of the Penal Code of the state of California.'
That petitioners thereafter demanded from said company the payment of the amount of their several deposits of money, which the company refused to pay, and that no part thereof has ever been paid to the petitioners or to any person for them; that the petitioners thereafter demanded from the California Safe Deposit & Trust Company payment of the amount of their said several deposits, no part of which payment has ever been made; that during the three years then last past, and during the term of office of the said Brown, moneys were embezzled and misappropriated by the officers of the company as follows:
The petition of the creditors further alleges that Brown is insolvent, and that within four months next preceding the filing of the petition, while so insolvent, he committed acts of bankruptcy as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Erickson v. Richardson, 7885.
...court in existence under it is binding upon the federal courts. Flash v. Conn, 109 U.S. 371 377, 3 S.Ct. 263, 27 L.Ed. 966." In re Brown (C.C.A.) 164 F. 673, 679; Bryant v. Swofford Bros. Dry Goods Co., 214 U.S. 279, 290, 29 S.Ct. 614, 53 L.Ed. 997; Freuler v. Helvering, 291 U.S. 35, 45, 54......
-
Walker v. Woodside
... ... also is a petition for the revision, under section 24b of the ... bankrupt act of 1898 (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 553 ... (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3432)), of certain orders of the ... District Court for the Northern District of California, ... submitted with the cases of Brown v. Major, 164 F ... 673, and Bartnett v. Major, 164 F. 679, just ... disposed of, and growing out of similar transactions ... In this ... case of Walker, the petitioner here seeks the review of the ... action of the District Court in denying his motion to dismiss ... the amended ... ...
-
In re Bartnett
... ... Charles ... R. Gray and Gray & Cooper, for petitioner ... Daniel ... O'Connell, for respondents ... Before ... GILBERT, ROSS, and MORROW, Circuit Judges ... PER ... On the ... authority of the case of J. Dalzell Brown, Petitioner, v ... Frieda R. Major and Others, Respondents, 164 F. 673, the ... petition for revision is dismissed at the ... ...