In re Steinberg, 313.
| Decision Date | 19 May 1944 |
| Docket Number | No. 313.,313. |
| Citation | 143 F.2d 942 |
| Parties | In re STEINBERG. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Louis Engelberg, of New York City, for bankrupt-appellant.
Henry W. Parker, of New York City (Martin B. Nadle, of New York City, on the brief), for objecting creditor-appellee.
Before L. HAND, CHASE, and FRANK, Circuit Judges.
The referee's finding that the bankrupt "knowingly" made a false oath binds us, for the referee saw and heard the bankrupt testify and we cannot, therefore, go behind his conclusions as to credibility. The only question is whether the oath was "fraudulently made." We would be inclined to say no, if this were a case of first impression; as the bankrupt had no assets, the omission of the claims of his relatives could not have been designed to prefer them, and it is difficult to perceive any fraudulent purpose, either in those omissions or the failure to include the claim for taxes. Perhaps the omission of the insurance agent's claim shows a fraudulent purpose. But we need not consider that question. For we bow to the precedents which, in practical effect, have read the word "fraudulently" out of the statute by the use of the phrase, "an intentional untruth in a matter material to the issue which is itself material." In re Slocum, 2 Cir., 22 F.2d 282, 285; In re Zoffer, 2 Cir., 211 F. 936; In re Marshall, 2 Cir., 47 F.2d 209. Under those authorities it is enough that the false oath here was knowingly made.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
784 Cafe Inc. v. Chin (In re Stanley Lang Chin Fdba Law Office of Stanley L. Chin)
...meeting of creditors held pursuant to § 341(a). Moreo v. Rossi (In re Moreo), 437 B.R. 40, 61 (E.D.N.Y. 2010) (citing In re Steinberg, 143 F.2d 942, 942-43 (2d Cir. 1944) ). The burden is on the plaintiff to prove each element by a preponderance of the evidence. Beer Sheva Realty Corp. v. P......
-
In Re Vincent Moreo
...debtor during examinations under oath, such as testimony during the meeting of creditors held pursuant to § 341(a). In re Steinberg, 143 F.2d 942, 942-43 (2d Cir.1944) (concluding that, where there was evidence that debtor knowingly omitted certain creditors from schedule of debts annexed t......
-
Capital One Equip. Fin. Corp. v. Singh (In re Singh)
...during the meeting of creditors held pursuant to § 341(a). In re Moreo, 437 B.R. 40, 61 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2010) (citing In re Steinberg, 143 F.2d 942, 942–43 (2d Cir. 1944) ). In this case, there is no dispute that statements made by the Debtor in his Petition, schedules, SOFA and in his tes......
-
In re Weinbaum
...404 F.2d 312 (2d Cir. 1968); Simon v. Agar, 299 F.2d 853 (2d Cir. 1962); In re Tabibian, 289 F.2d 793 (2d Cir. 1961); In re Steinberg, 143 F.2d 942 (2d Cir. 1942); Morris Plan Industrial Bank v. Henderson, supra, and thus, they will not be upset. Moreover, the bankruptcy judge's application......