In re Stylerite, Inc.
| Decision Date | 31 March 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 5279.,5279. |
| Citation | 120 F. Supp. 485 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Hampshire |
| Parties | In re STYLERITE, Inc. |
John W. King, Manchester, N. H., for petitioner.
Robert D. Branch, Asst. U. S. Atty., Concord, N. H., for referee in bankruptcy.
Petitions for review of orders of the referee in bankruptcy disallowing proofs of claim of five wage earners of the bankrupt.
Stylerite, Inc., a corporation established under the laws of the state of New Hampshire, with principal place of business at Manchester, New Hampshire, filed a voluntary petition in bankruptcy in this court, and on March 24, 1953, was adjudicated a bankrupt. After reference, notice of the first meeting of creditors was sent to the creditors listed in the schedules, setting the date for such meeting as April 10, 1953. All petitioners were duly listed in the schedules as priority wage earners and creditors, and received this notice, at the bottom of which is the following:
At the meeting, Alice Yergeau, a petitioner herein, was duly examined as an officer of the corporation relative to its affairs. Present were the other four petitioners, one of whom asked the referee the following question: "What about our wages?", and received the following answer: "Wages under the law have a priority and come first, after administration expenses, if there is any money." Notice of the final meeting to be held October 28, 1953, was duly mailed to the creditors and other interested parties. At this meeting, petitioners learned that they were not to share in the distribution of the assets since they had filed no proofs of claim in accordance with the provisions of Section 57 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 93. Subsequently, on November 5, 1953, before distribution of the assets, the petitioners filed documents captioned "Amended Proof of Claim" for wages earned within three months of the filing of the petition. The referee found that these were not actually amended proofs of claim, but were merely proofs of claim belatedly filed, in that no actual proofs of claim were seasonably filed in the manner and during the time required by Section 57, sub. a and sub. n of the Act, and ruled that since the statute is mandatory, the claims must be disallowed.
The sole question presented is whether the alleged amended proofs of claim filed with the referee should have been treated as the proper filing of claims under the statute. The pertinent and applicable parts thereof are as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Matter of Evanston Motor Co., Inc.
...Cir.1934) (In re Killanna Realty & Construction Co.); In re Moro Supply Co., 229 F.Supp. 129, 130 (E.D.Ark.1963); In re Stylerite, Inc., 120 F.Supp. 485, 488 (D.N.H.1954). In another case demonstrating the insufficiency of mere evidence that a debt exists, it was held that the testimony of ......
-
In re Callery, 97-48586.
...after the bar date has expired. Hutchinson v. Otis, Wilcox & Co., 190 U.S. 552, 23 S.Ct. 778, 47 L.Ed. 1179 (1903); In re Stylerite, Inc., 120 F.Supp. 485 (D.N.H.1954). However, post-bar date amendments should not be allowed if it is in actuality a new claim against the estate. In re Clamp-......
-
In re Imperial Sheet Metal, Inc.
...& Construction Co., Inc., 68 F.2d 718 (2d Cir. 1934); In re Peck & Hills Furniture Co., 10 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.N.Y.1935); In re Stylerite, Inc., 120 F.Supp. 485 (D. N.H.1954)." "42. In re Lipman, 65 F.2d 366 (2d Cir. "43. In re Killanna Realty & Construction Co., Inc., supra, note 41." "44. Ma......
-
In re Martin Edsel, Inc.
...general consideration that some inequitable result would follow. Burton Coal Co. v. Franklin Coal Co., et al., supra; In re Stylerite, Inc., 120 F.Supp. 485 (D.C. N.H.1954); In re Harmack Produce Co., 44 F.Supp. 1 (S.D.N.Y.1942); 1 Collier on Bankruptcy, par. 2.09 at 172 (14th ed. 1962); 3 ......