In re Weiner
| Decision Date | 02 November 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 5102.,5102. |
| Citation | 28 F.2d 881 |
| Parties | In re WEINER. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland |
Isidor Blum and Bernhard Cline, both of Baltimore, Md., for bankrupt.
G. Ridgely Sappington, of Baltimore, Md., for objecting creditor.
The question here is whether the bankrupt is entitled to his discharge. Application for same has been duly made, but objection has been filed by a creditor, alleging that the bankrupt has destroyed, concealed, or failed to keep books of account or records from which his financial condition and business transactions might be ascertained. Identical objection was made by the same creditor to the confirmation of a composition of 15 per cent. offered by the bankrupt. A hearing was had, and the court declined to confirm the composition, on the ground that whereas the bankrupt kept certain books of account, these were, for the most part, unintelligible, and, while presumably intended to cover receipts in the bankrupt's business, a small dry goods enterprise, were totally devoid of any disbursement entries. The court concluded that this situation cast at least some doubt as to the bona fides of the bankrupt's conduct of his business.
Section 12d of the Bankruptcy Act (11 USCA § 30(d) provides: "The judge shall confirm a composition if satisfied that (1) it is for the best interests of the creditors; (2) the bankrupt has not been guilty of any of the acts or failed to perform any of the duties which would be a bar to his discharge; and (3) the offer and its acceptance are in good faith and have not been made or procured except as herein provided, or by any means, promises, or acts herein forbidden." It will be seen that the ground on which the court declined to confirm the composition is one of the grounds which is specifically made the basis of a bar to a discharge. Section 14b, 11 USCA § 32(b). However, the prior hearing on the matter of composition did not necessarily make the question res adjudicata, and for this reason the court reopened the matter at the subsequent hearing in opposition to the discharge and heard additional testimony.
But at the second hearing no further or more satisfactory explanation has been afforded respecting the character of the bankrupt's books. It is true that for a number of years past the bankrupt appears to have kept books in this same manner. It is further true that there is no ironclad rule under the Bankruptcy Act requiring the keeping of any books; that is to say, a business may be so small that the total absence of them may be justified....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Markman
...failure to keep same must prevent discharge. Further support may be found in Re Northridge, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 53 F.2d 858; and in Re Weiner, D.C.Maryland, 28 F.2d 881. I have examined the cases cited by the bankrupt and find that they are not in In view of the above I can find no evidence in th......
-
In re Schechter, 40424.
...His books should indicate an honest effort to reflect his entire business. See Matter of Underhill, 2 Cir., 82 F.2d 258; Matter of Weiner, D.C., 28 F.2d 881. The bankrupt has failed to meet these requirements. Motion to review the decision and order of the Referee denying the bankrupt's dis......
- United States v. BETHLEHEM SHIP-BUILDING CORPORATION