Wilensky v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 2831.
Citation | 67 F.2d 389 |
Decision Date | 10 November 1933 |
Docket Number | No. 2831.,2831. |
Parties | WILENSKY v. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO., Inc., et al. |
Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit) |
Ralph Cohn, of Boston, Mass. (Bernard A. Riemer, of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for appellant.
Louis B. King, of Boston, Mass. (Friedman, Atherton, King & Turner, of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for appellees.
Before WILSON, MORTON, and HALE, Circuit Judges.
This case is before us on appeal by the bankrupt, James Wilensky, from the decree of the United States District Court, refusing him a discharge in bankruptcy. On objections to discharge the referee found that
After a hearing upon this report, the District Court decreed that the discharge be refused.
The assignments of error do not set out "separately and particularly, each error assigned and intended to be urged," as required by rule 11 of this court. It is apparent, however, that the appellant seeks to raise two questions, first, that although the referee found that the statement of the bankrupt relating to his credit was false, he did not find that it was intentionally false; and so did not bring the case within section 14b (3) of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 USCA § 32 (b) (3): and, second, that the referee did not find that the bankrupt himself issued a statement "respecting his financial condition."
The bankrupt has not met the burden of furnishing the court with a record of the testimony in this case. By the amendment of 1926 (11 USCA § 32 (b) (7), it is provided that if on hearing of objections to a discharge the objector shall show to the satisfaction of the court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the bankrupt has committed any of the acts which under this paragraph would prevent his discharge in bankruptcy, then the burden of proving that he has not committed any such acts shall be upon the bankrupt. Brown's Guide. Appendix p. 16.
1. Section 14b (3) of the Bankruptcy Act (11 USCA § 32 (b) (3) provides that the court must discharge the applicant unless he has "obtained money or property on credit, or obtained an extension or renewal of credit, by making or publishing, or causing to be made or published, in any manner whatsoever, a materially false statement in writing respecting his financial condition." The courts have held that before refusing a discharge the court must be satisfied that the bankrupt's statement was knowingly and intentionally untrue.
In Gilpin v. Merchants' National Bank, 165 F. 607, 611, 20 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1023, speaking for the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Judge Gray said:
In the case before us, the District Court based its action upon report of the referee who found that the bankrupt had obtained credit for his own benefit by a materially false statement in writing, "made for the purpose." It seems clear to us that this...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Monastero
...or fraud...." This definition has been adopted in Lanier v. State, Alaska, 448 P.2d 587, 593 (1968); and Wilensky v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 1st Cir., 67 F.2d 389, 390 (1933). Commonwealth v. Kraatz, 2 Mass.App. 196, 310 N.E.2d 368, 372 (1974), not only adopts this definition, but makes......
-
Nimmo v. State
...fraud. . . . " This definition has been adopted in Lanier v. State, Alaska, 448 P.2d 587, 593 (1968); and Wilensky v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 1st Cir., 67 F.2d 389, 390 (1933). Commonwealth v. Kraatz, 2 Mass.App. 196, 310 N.E.2d 368, 372 (1974), not only adopts this definition, but make......
-
Com. v. Kraatz
...implicit in the concept of falsity itself. Gilpin v. Merchants' Nat. Bank, 165 F. 607, 611 (3d Cir. 1908); Wilensky v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 67 F.2d 389, 390 (1st Cir. 1933). The term 'false' has generally been interpreted as connoting intentional untruth. Lanier v. State, 448 P.2d 58......
-
In re Butler, 18257.
...v. Leichter, 344 U.S. 914, 73 S.Ct. 336, 97 L.Ed. 705 (1953); In re Bernstein, 197 F.2d 378 (7 Cir. 1952); Wilensky v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 67 F.2d 389 (1 Cir. 1933); Royal Indemnity Co. v. Cooper, 26 F.2d 585 (4 Cir. In 1960 Congress amended § 14 (c) (3) by adding the language here ......