In re Lowe, 3764.
| Decision Date | 30 January 1941 |
| Docket Number | No. 3764.,3764. |
| Citation | 36 F. Supp. 772 |
| Parties | In re LOWE. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Kentucky |
A. Y. Martin and Jack E. Fisher, both of Paducah, Ky., for bankrupt.
Eaton & Eaton, of Paducah, Ky., for Mrs. Alma Lowe.
Mrs. Alma Lowe, the former wife of the bankrupt, has filed objections to the discharge of the bankrupt. Although several grounds are specified, apparently only one is urged upon the Court, namely — that a judgment held by Mrs. Lowe in the amount of $1,450 is a liability of the bankrupt for obtaining money by false pretenses or for wilful and malicious injury to the property of another, and that under the provisions of Section 17 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 35, this claim is not dischargeable in bankruptcy. The referee entered an order discharging the bankrupt but further provided that "this discharge shall not affect or bar the claim of Alma Lowe represented by her judgment for $1450.00 obtained in the McCracken Circuit Court prior to the 23d day of May, 1939." The bankrupt has petitioned for a review of that provision of the order.
The judgment obtained by Mrs. Lowe was in the McCracken Circuit Court upon a note executed by the bankrupt to her in the amount of $1,450. Mrs. Lowe claims that the consideration was the repayment to her of money which the bankrupt withdrew from her checking account without authority, and so testified in the state court action, although in that action the defense was really a plea of payment. The bankrupt claimed that the note was executed as a settlement of property and alimony claims when the parties became separated and was later cancelled by the parties becoming reconciled and returning to live together. In the hearing on the objections to the discharge in the bankruptcy proceedings, the bankrupt requested the right to introduce evidence which would prove that the note referred to was not a liability for obtaining money by false pretenses or for malicious injury to the property of another. The referee refused to receive this evidence and considered only the evidence presented in the trial of the case in the state court. Attorneys for both the bankrupt and the objecting creditors have vigorously briefed the question as to whether or not this action of the referee was erroneous, and also whether or not his ruling that the claim was not dischargeable in bankruptcy was erroneous. We are of the opinion that such questions are not properly presented in this proceeding and need not be decided.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
First Nat. Bank v. Haymes
...is no. Courts have said in this connection that the right to a discharge and its effect 'are wholly distinct propositions.' In In re Lowe, 36 F.Supp. 772, the court 'Section 14 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 32, fixes the right to a discharge, and Section 17 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 ......
-
Csatari v. General Finance Corporation
...by a Federal Court with the orderly processes of a state court which would normally hear and decide the question. See also In re Lowe, D.C.,W.D.Ky., 36 F.Supp. 772. Other instances in which the Federal Court refused to exercise such jurisdiction are shown by In re Devereaux, 2 Cir., 76 F.2d......
-
In re Scandiffio
...D.C.Cal. 1930, 47 F.2d 949; In re Millkofsky, D.C. N.Y.1936, 17 F.Supp. 127; In re Sutton, D.C.N.Y.1937, 19 F.Supp. 892; In re Lowe, D.C.Ky.1941, 36 F.Supp. 772; In re Anthony, D.C.Ill.1941, 42 F.Supp. 312; see also this Court's opinions in Re McCarthy, 1942, 45 F.Supp. 323; Francine v. Bab......
-
In re Gentile
...hereafter of such claims. Whether such claims are dischargeable in bankruptcy is not involved in this proceeding. In re Lowe, D.C.W.D.Ky., 36 F.Supp. 772. There may be other debts in cases of this type, which are not connected with gambling activities, against which a bankrupt gambler has a......