In re Young

Decision Date09 August 1899
PartiesIn re YOUNG.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

Baggott & Ryall, for petitioners.

Edward K. Sumerwell, for trustee in bankruptcy.

THOMAS, District Judge.

The motion herein is denied. The fees are an incident of the lien. When the lien fails, the incident fails also. It is not apparent that the estate has been benefited by an expense of $236, made in an attachment proceeding in an action to collect the sum of $392.50. However, the main question passed upon is the nonexistence of a lien. If the petitioners desire to review the question, the trustee will retain a sufficient sum to meet the claim, if the appellate court should consider the demand or any part thereof justly payable.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • In re Bennett
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • March 12, 1907
    ... ... have with modest earnestness contended that the cases ... cited, which sustain preferences given by state statutes, ... are not sound. They cite to support their view Randolph ... v. Scruggs, 190 U.S. 533, 23 Sup.Ct. 710, 47 L.Ed ... 1165, In re Allen (D.C.) 96 F. 512, In re ... Young (D.C.) 96 F. 606, and In re Beaver Coal Co ... (D.C.) 107 F. 98. The claim for a lien for ... professional services denied in Randolph v. Scruggs was for ... services in preparing a deed of general assignment, which, ... having been made within four months of bankruptcy, was ... avoided as ... ...
  • In re Whitley
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Tennessee
    • November 15, 1924
    ...9th Cir.) 7 Am. Bankr. Rep. 542, 113 F. 889, 51 C. C. A. 519, affirming (D. C.) 6 Am. Bankr. Rep. 404, 107 F. 98; In re Young (D. C. N. Y.) 2 Am. Bankr. Rep. 673, 96 F. 606; In re Allen (D. C. Cal.) 3 Am. Bankr. Rep. 38, 96 F. 512; Matter of Moncrief Mfg. Co. (Ref. R. I.) 31 Am. Bankr. Rep.......
  • In re Daniels
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island
    • September 13, 1901
    ...can be allowed priority of payment. In re Beaver Coal Co., 5 Am.Bankr.R. 787, 107 F. 98; In re Allen (D.C.) 96 F. 512; In re Young (D.C.) 96 F. 606,-- seem support this contention. The decision of Judge Lowell in Re Lewis (D.C.) 99 F. 935, however, is to the contrary. In that case prioritie......
  • In re Carolina Cooperage Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • September 14, 1899

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT