In re Osborn
| Decision Date | 27 August 1900 |
| Docket Number | 2,016. |
| Parties | In re OSBORN. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of New York |
Horace McGuire, Jr., for trustee.
Abraham Benedict, for bankrupt.
This is a review of an order made by Quincy Van Voorhis, Esq. deciding that certain property claimed by the bankrupt to be exempt is not exempt property, but is a part of the assets of the estate, and belongs to the trustee as such. The question raised by the rulings of the referee are certified to the district judge for his opinion thereon. It appears that the property, tools, and implements of a baker, claimed as exempt, with other property then owned by the bankrupt, were sold by the sheriff by virtue of an execution issued to him upon a judgment recovered in the supreme court of the state of New York by Mary S. Osborn against the bankrupt. The plaintiff in that action became the purchaser at such sale and the property was then and there delivered to her by the sheriff. The bankrupt made no claim that the property was exempt, made no objection to the sale, nor to the delivery of the property to the purchaser. Thereafter the defendant in that action was adjudicated a bankrupt in an involuntary proceeding. At the first creditors' meeting objection was made to proof of Mary S.
Osborn's debt upon the ground that, by reason of the judgment and execution sale, she had obtained a preference. Thereupon the judgment creditor proved for the full amount of her debt offering to surrender to the trustee, when appointed, all the property purchased by her at the execution sale, or to pay the value of such of it as could not be surrendered to the trustee. After the appointment of the trustee, she did surrender to him all of the property which the bankrupt now claims to be exempt. The referee has decided that the bankrupt is not entitled to any of the property, so sold on execution, as exempt property, and holds that the plaintiff in the action acquired a valid title under the sheriff's sale as between herself and the bankrupt, and the property is still hers, unless it belongs to the trustee; that the bankrupt has no longer any claim upon it, and that the bankrupt act only invalidates a sheriff's sale in the interest of the general creditors of the bankrupt; it does not invalidate it as to the bankrupt himself; that it is at least doubtful whether any of the various articles of property in question would come within the description of 'tools and implements of a mechanic,' or 'working tools,' within the meaning of sections 1390, 1391, Code Civ. Proc. N.Y. I cannot agree with the decision of the referee.
The commonly accepted definition of a mechanic is 'any skilled worker with tools; one who has learned a trade. ' The conduct of the business of baking requires skill and experience in that trade, and necessitates the use of implements and working tools. Implements and tools of the value of $275, necessary to enable him to carry on his trade, are exempt. In re Peterson (D.C.) 95 F. 417, 2 Am.Bankr.R. 630.
By section 6 of the bankruptcy act it is provided that the bankrupt may have 'the exemptions which are prescribed by the state laws. ' The bankrupt, being a householder, is entitled, under subdivision 6, Sec. 1390, Code Civ. Proc. N.Y., to 'tools and implements of a mechanic necessary to the carrying on of his trade, not exceeding in value twenty-five dollars'; and, under section 1391, he is entitled, in addition to the foregoing, to 'working tools, * * * not exceeding in value two hundred and fifty dollars.' By section 7, subd. 8, the bankrupt may make claim for such exemptions as he may be entitled to; and by section 47a, subd. 11, it is the duty of the trustee to 'set apart the bankrupt's exemptions, and report the items and estimated value thereof to the court as soon as practicable after his appointment.' In re Hopkins, 1 Am.Bankr.R. 214; In re Friedrich, 40 C.C.A 378, 100 F. 284, 3 Am.Bankr.R. 801; In re Hill (D.C.) 96 F....
To continue reading
Request your trial