In re Kuffler

Citation127 F. 125
PartiesIn re KUFFLER.
Decision Date10 December 1903
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)

I. L. Bamberger, for petitioner.

Benjamin Tuska, for respondent.

Before LACOMBE and TOWNSEND, Circuit Judges, and HOLT, District Judge [1]

PER CURIAM.

The bankrupt filed a petition for discharge on November 22, 1899. Petitioning creditors filed specification is opposition thereto on February 28, 1900, and the whole matter was on that day referred to a referee. Nothing further was done in the matter until September 30, 1903, when creditors presented to the court a petition asking that the petition for discharge be dismissed for want of prosecution. This application was opposed by the bankrupt, but decision was adverse to him, and an order was entered on October 13, 1903, directing 'that the application and proceedings of the said Adolf Kuffler herein for this discharge be, and the same are hereby, dismissed. ' It is sought to review this order by a petition for review under section 24b, Bankr. Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 553 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3432).

The provisions of the section cited refer to cases not provided for by appeal. Section 25 allows appeals to be taken in bankruptcy proceedings as in equity cases 'from a judgment granting or denying a discharge. ' The determination of the court below dismissing the application for discharge when so long a time had elapsed that said application could not be reviewed was, in substance and effect; a judgment denying a discharge. As such it can be reviewed only by appeal.

The motion to dismiss is granted.

---------

Notes:

[1] Holt, District Judge, did not participate in the decision, because the appeal was from an order made by him.

---------

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • In re Friend
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • January 3, 1905
    ... ... to dismiss is presented by the bankrupts ... That ... the method of review provided for in section 25a must be ... pursued in the cases therein named is explicitly decided in ... In re Good, 99 F. 389, 39 C.C.A. 581, and in In ... re Kuffler, 127 F. 125, 61 C.C.A. 259. See, also, ... Loveland on Bankruptcy (2d Ed.) pp. 809, 816 ... [134 F. 782] ... This ... court, in In re Rouse, Hazard & Co., 91 F. 96, 33 C.C.A. 356, ... reviewed on original petition an order regarding the ... priorities of certain claims, but the ... ...
  • In re Holmes
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • October 25, 1905
    ... ... matter of law under section 24b an appealable order or ... judgment could not be maintained, and numerous decisions have ... [142 F. 392] ... been rendered to the effect that the right of appeal and the ... right of revision are exclusive each of the other. In re ... Kuffler, 127 F. 125, 61 C.C.A. 259; In re Worcester ... County, 102 F. 808, 811, 42 C.C.A. 637, 641; First ... Nat. Bank v. State Nat. Bank, 131 F. 430, 433, 65 C.C.A ... 414, 417; In re Friend, 134 F. 778, 67 C.C.A. 500, ... 503; In re Mueller, 135 F. 715, 68 C.C.A. 349. This ... theory, however, ... ...
  • Levy v. Industrial Finance Corporation
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • January 11, 1927
    ...of Loving, 224 U. S. 183, 32 S. Ct. 446, 56 L. Ed. 725; Cook Inlet Coal Fields Co. v. Caldwell (C. C. A. 4th) 147 F. 475; In re Kuffler (C. C. A. 2d) 127 F. 125; In re Mueller (C. C. A. 6th) 135 F. 711; Remington on Bankruptcy (3d Ed.) par. The specifications of objections filed by three of......
  • Lindeke v. Converse
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • August 26, 1912
    ... ... If that court had ... granted the motion, it would thereby have finally denied her ... application for her discharge, and she could have invoked a ... review by this court of that decision by an appeal under ... section 25a of the Bankruptcy Law. In re Kuffler, ... 127 F. 125, 61 C.C.A. 259; Matter of Semons, 72 ... C.C.A. 683, 140 F. 989, 15 Am.Bankr.Rep. 822. But its refusal ... to grant the motion was not more discretionary than its grant ... of it would have been. The controlling facts presented at the ... hearing of the motion were undisputed ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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