In re Foerst

Decision Date15 April 1899
Citation93 F. 190
PartiesIn re FOERST.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

William Riley, for creditors.

Edward Bittner, for bankrupt.

BROWN District Judge.

Upon an examination of the bankrupt and other witnesses before the referee in behalf of the trustee and creditors, objection being made to questions put to the wife of the bankrupt during her examination as respects moneys which she held, and when and how received, the question as to the admissibility of this testimony has been certified to the court.

There is no precise rule governing the admissibility of such testimony, other than that it should be reasonably pertinent to the subject of inquiry. In general, a large latitude of inquiry should be allowed in the examination of persons closely connected with the bankrupt in business dealings, or otherwise, for the purpose of discovering assets and unearthing frauds, upon any reasonable surmise that they have assets of the debtor. The intent of the bankrupt law is that only the debtor dealing honestly with his property shall be discharged; and that any proper assets of the estate, however concealed, shall be made available to creditors. The examination for this purpose is of necessity to a considerable extent a fishing examination. The extent to which it shall be permitted to go, must be determined by the sound judgment of the officer before whom it is taken. Reasonable examination should not be allowed to be checked by constant objections that the materiality of the answer may not be immediately apparent, where no harm can arise to the witness from the disclosure, if the transaction is honest. If the result of such an examination may often be a considerable amount of immaterial testimony, this is a much less evil than to stifle examination by technical rules which would defeat the purpose of the act, and discredit the administration of the law in the interest of creditors. Unreasonable discursiveness in the examination will be in some measure checked by making it at the expense of the examining party if plainly frivolous or prolix, it should be stopped. Where questionable proceedings have been disclosed, greater latitude in the prosecution of inquiries should be allowed and the precise form or order in which the questions are put can scarcely be deemed material.

Upon the above general principles, and upon the matters already disclosed on this examination, I think the witness should...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 cases
  • In re Symington
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Maryland
    • 10 Junio 1997
    ...140 B.R. 197 (S.D.Ohio 1992). Its obvious purposes are the discovery of assets of the estate and the exposure of fraudulent conduct. In re Foerst; 93 F. 190 (S.D.N.Y. BANKRUPTCY EXAMINATIONS PREDATED DISCOVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure became effective on ......
  • In re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Southern District of New York
    • 17 Enero 1991
    ...L.Ed. at 452. In one of the earliest published cases involving the scope of inquiry of a non-bankrupt under the Act, the District Court in In re Foerst There is no precise rule governing the admissibility of such testimony, other than that it should be reasonably pertinent to the subject of......
  • In re GHR Companies, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Massachusetts
    • 27 Julio 1984
    ...Corp., 33 B.R. 451, 453 (Bankr.D.Mass. 1983). The examination has also been likened to a necessary "fishing expedition." In re Foerst, 93 F. 190, 191 (S.D.N.Y.1899). The clear intent of Rule 2004 (and its predecessor rules) is to give parties in interest an opportunity to examine individual......
  • In re Insull Utility Investments
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 24 Enero 1934
    ...to inquire summarily into the existence of assets that may be collected and distributed. In the search a wide range is given. In re Foerst, D.C., 93 F. 190; In re Horgan, 2 Cir., 98 F. 414; In re Wilcox, 2 Cir., 109 F. 628; In re Samuels, 2 Cir., 215 F. 845. It has been stated that in the e......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Chapter 10 Gone Fishing: The Fundamentals of Rule 2004
    • United States
    • American Bankruptcy Institute Building Blocks: Essential Tools for the Bankruptcy Practitioner
    • Invalid date
    ...appears to have been in a nineteenth century opinion that shortly followed the enactment of the Bankruptcy Act. See In re Foerst, 93 F. 190, 191 (S.D.N.Y. 1899) ("The examination...is of necessity to a considerable extent a fishing examination."). Since then, there have been scores of repor......

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