In re Watkinson

• Decision Date: 22 June 1906
• Docket Number: 1,184.
• Citation: 146 F. 142
• Parties: In re WATKINSON et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

146 F. 142

In re WATKINSON et al.

No. 1,184.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

June 22, 1906

See 142 F. 782, 143 F. 602.

Arthur G. Dickson, for trustee.

Max L Powell, for claimants.

HOLLAND District Judge.

The plaintiff in this case sold merchandise to the alleged bankrupts, and received payments on account, as set forth in the following statement:

1901 Terms Feb. 14 To Mdse. 4 Mos. $ 176 58 June 5 " 175 38 7 " 173 64 15 " 122 30 28 " 59 66 29 " 103 80 --$811 36 July 19 " 220 00 23 " 10 00 26 " 535 32 Aug. 14 " 364 02 24 " 180 60 Sept 6 " 175 08 1901 11 " 176 04 June 29 By $176 58 Cash......... 30 " 178 20 Oct. 10 By 634 78 --$ 811 36 Cash......... 26 " 177 78 Balance........... 2,565 92 Oct. 8 " 183 30 " " 182 88 2 " 182 70 --------- ----------- $3,377 28 $3,377 28 --------- --------- 1902 Jan. 1 To balance $2,565 92 It will be noticed that there are payments amounting to $811.36. Goods sold from February 14, 1901, to June 29, 1901, inclusive, total the same amount.

The question certified is whether or not Joseph Wild & Co., the claimants, can prove the balance of their claim, to wit $2,565.92, without surrendering the sum of $634.78, received by them on October 10, 1901, which is said to be preferential. The bankrupts were insolvent from January 1 1901, but the first goods were delivered by the plaintiffs to them on February 14, 1901. The account was open long prior to four months preceding the filing of the petition in bankruptcy, and had been running from February 14, 1901, down to October 8, 1901, when the last delivery of merchandise to the bankrupts took place. Two days later, October 10, 1901, the sum of $634.78 was paid to the plaintiffs. This was the last transaction between them, and within four months of the time of the presentation of the petition in bankruptcy. There were no subsequent credits. It was simply a payment on account of a former indebtedness, and it is ruled by In re Colton Export & Import Co., 10 Am.Bankr.Rep. 14, 121 F. 663, 57 C.C.A. 417. The cases of Jaquith v. Alden, 118 F. 270, 55 C.C.A. 364 (same case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States, and reported in 9 Am.Bankr.Rep. 773, 23 Sup.Ct. 649, 47 L.Ed. 717), and Yaple v. Dahl-Millikan Grocery Co., by the same court, reported in 11 Am.Bankr.Rep. 596, 24 Sup.Ct. 552, 48 L.Ed. 776, rule that were a debt for goods sold to the bankrupt upon a running account was all incurred within four months prior to filing a petition in bankruptcy, and while the alleged bankrupt was insolvent, of which fact the creditor was ignorant, payment on account did not constitute preferential transfers, under section 60a of the bankrupt act of July 1, 1898 (chapter 541, 30 Stat. 562 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3445)), which must be surrendered, under section 57g, 30 Stat. 560 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3443), before the creditor can prove his claim, although the greater part thereof was for goods sold before the last payment was...