In re Cornell

Decision Date05 October 1899
Citation97 F. 29
PartiesIn re CORNELL.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

Quincy A. Gates, for bankrupt.

BROWN, District Judge.

The issue in the creditors' suit is not identical with that presented under the specifications in opposition to discharge. A decision adverse to the defendants in the creditors; suit would not necessarily determine the right to discharge. If one of the intents of the assignment of April 13, 1896, was to hinder payment of the existing suit, that would authorize a decree for the plaintiff and yet be no sufficient ground to deny a discharge under the bankrupt act. To have this effect there must be evidence of concealment of property from the trustee. Section 29. This can only be made out by evidence by some remaining property in trust for the bankrupt's use existing at the time of the petition in bankruptcy. The specifications do not in terms charge this; but assuming them to be sufficient to raise the question, the evidence (all of which is returned to me, after the hearing was closed) proves sufficiently that the assignee, Frank Cornell, had paid out considerably more than all the value acquired by the assignment, and has been even allowed a claim of $5,000 and upwards for still further advances to the bankrupt, which shows clearly that there was no property of the bankrupt remaining, or concealed by him, at the time of the petition. The specifications are therefore disproved, and the discharge is granted.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • In re Jacobs
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • 27 Marzo 1906
    ...facts somewhat like the present. In re Keefer (D.C.) 135 F. 885; In re Howell (D.C.) 105 F. 594; In re Crist (D.C.) 116 F. 1007; In re Cornell (D.C.) 97 F. 29; re Fitchard (D.C.) 103 F. 742, 745; In re Goodale et al. (D.C.) 109 F. 783; In re Gaylord, 112 F. 668, 50 C.C.A. 415; Fields v. Kar......
  • In re Seavey
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 1 Enero 1912
    ... ... 'property' in fraud of creditors. The judgment of the ... Supreme Court has so found, and the bankrupt is bound by it ... I refer to In re Skinner (D.C., Iowa) 3 ... Am.Bankr.Rep. 163, 165, 97 F. 190. And see, also, the ... implication in Re Cornell (D.C., N.Y.) 3 ... Am.Bankr.Rep. 172, 173, 97 F. 29. I also refer to In ... re McGurn (D.C., Nev.) 4 Am.Bankr.Rep. 459, 462, 102 F ... 743, In re Baird 84 Cal. 95, 24 P. 167, and ... Kerrison, Assignee, v. Stewart & Co., 93 U.S. 155, ... 162, 23 L.Ed. 843 ... I am ... aware ... ...
  • Paxton v. Scott
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • 19 Noviembre 1902
    ...the debtor's discharge as soon as consistent with justice. Lowell, Bankruptcy, page 302, and cases cited; In re Crenshaw, 95 F. 632; In re Cornell, 97 F. 29. The effect of discharge is personal to the bankrupt and it does not affect any lawful lien, charge or incumbrance existing on his pro......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT