In re Cronin

CourtU.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
CitationIn re Cronin, 98 F. 584 (D. Mass. 1899)
Decision Date30 December 1899
Docket Number1,535.
PartiesIn re CRONIN.

Edgar R. Champlin, for petitioning creditors.

Lund &amp Welch, for objecting creditor.

Paul R Blackmer, for certain creditors.

John F Cronan, for respondent.

LOWELL District Judge.

This was an involuntary petition, which the respondent moved to dismiss. Two of the three petitioning creditors assented to this motion, and I am satisfied that it would be for the best interest of the creditors that the petition should be dismissed, and the respondent permitted to settle with his creditors by way of compromise, which he is prepared to do fairly and equally. The third petitioning creditor objected to the dismissal of the petition, and desired to proceed to an adjudication. It was not shown that any of the parties were acting in bad faith. If a respondent has committed an act of bankruptcy, and the statutory number of his creditors has duly petitioned for his adjudication as a bankrupt, this court must make the adjudication, even though it is satisfied that a compromise offered by the respondent would be for the best interest of the creditors. Bankruptcy is not a remedy like an injunction or the appointment of a receiver, granted in the discretion of a court of equity. The distribution of a debtor's assets is to be made in bankruptcy if he has committed an act of bankruptcy, and the other statutory requisites have been complied with. Fraud, oppression, or even mistake may, in some cases, be sufficient grounds for dismissal of the petition; but none of these grounds exist here. Lowell, Bankr. p. 39; King v. Henderson (1898) App.Cas. 720. Is the condition altered by the fact that the majority of the petitioners have come to desire a dismissal of the petition, which dismissal is resisted by the minority? Will the assent of a majority of the petitioners enable the court to act for the interest of the creditors by dismissing the petition, or has the minority the right to insist upon an adjudication, if an act of bankruptcy has been committed? I think that in this case the right of the minority is absolute. After petitioners have joined in a petition, they cannot ordinarily withdraw against the wishes of their fellow petitioners. Lowell, Bankr. p. 34; In re Heffron, 10 N.B.R. 213, Fed.Cas.No. 6,321; In re Sargent, 13 N.B.R. 144, Fed.Cas.No. 12,361. In re Indianapolis, C. &amp L.R.Co., 5 Biss. 287, Fed.Cas.No. 7,023, ...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
10 cases
  • In re Elmira Steel Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York
    • April 17, 1901
    ... ... Bankr. Act ... Sec. 58a. And this court could not dismiss these proceedings ... even upon the consent of these petitioners, or upon the ... consent of a majority of this bankrupt's creditors, so ... long as one creditor should object. In re Cronin, 3 ... Am.Bankr.R. 552, 98 F. 584. Again, counsel for the ... Philadelphia creditors say that the subpoena is solely to ... bring the alleged bankrupt into court, which being for his ... benefit, he can waive. But it is more than that. By it the ... length of the day in court of the creditors ... ...
  • Guterman v. Parker & Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • November 20, 1936
    ...discretion in adjudging a respondent a bankrupt. Sheehan & Egan, Inc., et al. v. North Eastern Shoe Co. (C.C.A.) 47 F.(2d) 487; In re Cronin (D.C.) 98 F. 584; In re Lewis F. Perry & Whitney Co. (D.C.) 172 F. 745, 751; Blue Valley Creamery Co. et al. v. Stone (C.C.A.) 80 F.(2d) 483, The decr......
  • In re Bokum Resources Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico
    • July 13, 1982
    ...good faith to prosecute their petition to an adjudication. In re San Jose Baking Co., 232 F. 200, 201 (N.D.Cal.1916). Accord, In re Cronin, 98 F. 584 (D.Mass.1899); In re Bedingfield, 96 F. 190 The Bankruptcy Court is vested with the power to stop attempts by the debtor and its allies to bu......
  • Sheehan & Egan v. North Eastern Shoe Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • February 11, 1931
    ...has been held that the court, in its discretion, may decline to enter a decree of adjudication and order the petition dismissed. In re Cronin (D. C.) 98 F. 584. That was what was done in this case, and we are of the opinion that the court erred in so doing. It should have ordered When an in......
  • Get Started for Free