« AnteriorContinuar »
immediately preceding the filing of the petition transferred, removed, destroyed, or concealed, or permitted to be removed, destroyed, or concealed, any of his property, with intent to hinder, delay or defraud his creditors; or (5) in voluntary proceedings been granted a discharge in bankruptcy, within six years; or (6) in the course of the proceedings in bankruptcy refused to obey any lawful order of or to answer any material question approved by the court. Provided, that a trustee shall not interpose objections to a bankrupt's discharge until he shall be authorized so to do at a meeting of the creditors called for that purpose.5 (c) The confirmation of a composition shall discharge the bankrupt from his debts, other than those agreed to be paid by the terms of the composition and those not affected by a discharge." 6
6 Re Reiff, 205 Fed. 399; Re Hockman, 205 Fed. 330. Neither the judge nor the referee has the power to prescribe conditions of the interposition of objection by a trustee duly authorized, such as that the objections shall not delay settlement of the estate beyond a stated time or cause expense to the estate. Re Churchill, 197 Fed. 111; infra, 8 656. The referee cannot order the trustee to file an objection unless the creditors' meeting has directed that this be done. Re White, 238 Fed. 874; but he may direct that a creditors' meeting be called to consider the question. Re Whitney, 250 Fed. 1005. The court cannot deny the discharge of its own motion. Ibid; Re Walsh, C. C. A., 256 Fed. 653; Re Armstrong, 248 Fed. 292. But see Re Main, 205 Fed. 421. A creditor may oppose the discharge, although he has not proved his claim; Re Frice, 96 Fed. 611; Re Barrager, 191 Fed. 247; even it seems, if his time to prove the same has expired, Re Bimberg, 121 Fed. 942; Re Conroy, 134 Fed. 764, 766; and although his claim is contested. Re Conroy, 134 Fed.
764. So, it has been held, may a creditor whose claim has been barred by the statute of limitations. Re Westbrook, 186 Fed. 414. It has been held that a creditor whose debt would not be discharged may oppose the application; Re Main, 205 Fed. 421; Re Menzin, C. C. A., 238 Fed. 773; Re Armstrong, 248 Fed. 292. Contra, Re Meikleham, 236 Fed. 401; the pendency of a suit in a State court upon the claim will not prevent its holder from such opposition. Re Menzin, C. C. A., 238 Fed. 773. As to matters which do not estop a creditor, see Re Hagy, C. C. A., 220 Fed. 665. After one creditor has declared his intention to abandon objections, another creditor may adopt and prosecute them. Re Guilbert, 154 Fed. 676.
6 30 Stat. at L. 544, 440. $14b, as amended 36 St. at L. 838. See Re Levey, 133 Fed. 572. The court has no discretionary power to refuse a discharge when none of the statutory grounds for refusal has been duly alleged and proved. Re Jacobs, C. C. A., 241 Fed. 620; Re Whitney, 250 Fed. 1005.
“The petition of a bankrupt for a discharge shall state concisely, in accordance with the provisions of the act and the orders of the court, the proceedings in the case and the acts of the bankrupt." 7
"A creditor opposing the application of a bankrupt for his discharge, or for the confirmation of a composition, shall enter his appearance in opposition thereto on the day when the creditors are required to show cause, and shall file a specification in writing of the grounds of his opposition within ten days thereafter, unless the time shall be shortened or enlarged by special order of the judge.” 8 7 General Order XXXI. The sep
creditor is entitled to the whole arate petition by a member of a of the tenth day within which to bankrupt firm for his discharge enter his appearance in opposition. should recite the former proceedings Re Barager, 191 Fed. 247. It has by and against the partnership and been held that a creditor may pray for his separate discharge. Re prosecute his objections in forma Meyers, 97 Fed. 757. It has been pauperis. Re Gilbert, 154 Fed. held: that the petition may be 676; supra, 8 413. Specifications, amended
to include this which are not filed within the time prayer
and to state the adjudication limited by the general order, will of the bankruptcy of the copartner- be dismissed. Re Abrecht, 104 Fed. ship; but that new notice to the 974; Re Clothier, 108 Fed. 199. creditors in the proper form must The judge may extend the time for subsequently be given. Re Meyers, a creditor's entry of appearance in 97 Fed. 757, 759. It has been opposition after the same has exsaid that a petition for a discharge pired. Re Levin, C. C. A., 176 Fed. need not be verified. Re Jemison 177. Where an appearance was duly Mercantile Co., C. C. A., 112 Fed. entered by an objecting creditor it 966; Remington Bankruptcy, was held that the judge might en$ 2430. But see Re Glass, 119 Fed. large his time to file specifications 509; but see Re Taylor, 188 Fed. or allow them to be filed nunc pro 479, holding that the objection had tunc. Re Frice, 96 Fed. 611. Cf. there been waived because not made Re Nathanson, 152 Fed. 585. It until after evidence had been taken. has been said that objections to a The petition should be filed with discharge constitute a new suit or the clerk and not with the referee. action, the hearing of which is in Re Taylor, 188 Fed. 479.
effect a trial in equity. Re Mal8 General Order XXXII
schick, 217 Fed. 492. The objecamended June 4, 1917. In case of tions should be filed with the clerk an enlargement or shortening of the and not with the referee. Re Hocktime, the notice to the creditors
man, 205 Fed. 330; Re C. H. Kenshould advise them thereof. See drick & Co., 226 Fed. 890. The Re Horowitz, C. C. A., 250 Fed. application of a creditor in opposi106; Re Meyers, 97 Fed. 757. A tion to a discharge may be made
These must be clear, specific, circumstantial, and distinctly allege one of the statutory grounds for refusing the discharge. by a member of the bar of the court on behalf of the objecting creditors, without a written power of attorney. Re Baerncopf, 117 Fed. 975. But Re Gasser, C. C. A., 104 Fed. 537. see Re Kretz, 212 Fed. 784. Where The specifications of objections to the creditor is absent, verification the discharge should be verified; Re by his attorney may be permitted. Glass, 119 Fed. 509; Re Gift, 130 Re Baerncopf, 117 Fed. 975; Reml'ed. 230; Re Abramovitz, 253 Fed. ington on Bankruptcy, $ 2596; but 299, Remington on Bankruptcy, the reason why the creditor does not $ 2584. Contra, Re Jamieson, 120 himself swear to the same should Fed. 697. It has been held to be be stated. Re Baerncopf, 117 Fed. sufficient, if the oath is taken “to 975; Re Glass, 119 Fed. 509; Remthe best of affiant's knowledge, in- ington on Bankruptcy, $ 2590, Re formation and belief.'' Re Mil- Randall, 159 Fed. 298. The specifigraum & Ost, 129 Fed. 827. Cf. Re cations should show the facts which Jamieson, 120 Fed. 697.
make the objector a party in interRe Brown, C. C. A., 112 Fed. 49; est. Re Servis, 140 Fed. 222; Re Re Glass, 119 Fed. 509; Re Nathan- Main, 205 Fed. 421; an averment son, 155 Fed. 645; Re White, 222 that the petitioners are “creditors Fed. 688; Re Abramovitz, 253 Fed. of the bankrupt” is insufficient. 299. Such omissions or irregulari- It was held that the bankrupt by ties may be cured by amendment. proceeding to trial upon the objecRe Glass, 119 Fed. 509; Re Gift, tion did not waive the defense that 130 Fed. 230; Re Meuer, 144 Fed. neither the specifications nor the 445; Re Hanna, C. C. A., 158 Fed. proceedings showed that the trustee 238; Re Miller, 192 Fed. 730; and had received authority to object. Re are waived if the bankrupt proceeds White, C. C. A., 248 Fed. 115; without objecting thereto. Re Re Chandler, C. C. A., 138 Fed. 637; Baerncopf, 117 Fed. 975; Re Rob- Re Fackler, 246 Fed. 864. Contra, inson, 123 Fed. 844; Godshalk v. Re Nathanson, 155 Fed. 645. Sterling, C. C. A., 129 Fed. 580. 9 Re Frice, 96 Fed. 611; Re McThat where several creditors join Carthy, 170 Fed. 859, holding that in the same specifications, each of such a defect is not waived by the them, or
in his behalf bankrupt's failure to except thereto. must sign and verify the same. Re It has been said that the specificaGlass, 19 Fed. 509. Where a part- tions of the objecting creditors must nership, which had proved a claim be as specific as a criminal indictagainst a partner's estate, was dis- ment or information. Re Hirsch, solved pending the proceedings 96 Fed. 468. But see Re Kaiser, 99 without a transfer of the claim to Fed. 689; Re White, 222 Fed. 688. any one of the partners; it was When the objection is the commisheld that objections to the discharge sion of an act, which is a crime in which they did not all unite, under the bankruptcy law; 30 St. could not be sustained. Re Hen- at L. 544, 554, $ 29; quoted infra, drick, 143 Fed. 647. The specifica- $ 654, the specifications must state tions should also be signed by or its commission “knowingly and
They must set forth the particular facts on which the opposition is based, 10 must not be vague, nor general, nor contain mere conclusions of law. 11 They must allege the essential facts which constitute the bar to the discharge.12 Allegations in the language of the statute are insufficient, 18 except when the objection is that the bankrupt has failed to keep any books of account or records.14 Several grounds of opposition may be included in the same specifications, but they must be separately stated.15 Where the statute provides that the offenses must have been committed within a specified time before the bankruptcy, the specifications must show their commission within the period of limitation.16 It has been said that a bankrupt may avail himself upon the hearing of the insufficiency of allegations in the specifications, 17 and that objections to the form of specifications cannot be raised for the first time upon appeal.18 The specifications may be once amended by permission of the judge; 19
fraudulently." Re Beebe, 116 Fed. 48 (false oath); Re Patterson, 121 Fed. 921 (fraudulent concealment); Kentucky Nat. Bank v. Carley, C. C. A., 127 Fed. 686 (false oath); Re Levey, 133 Fed. 572 (fraudulent concealment); Re Taplin, 135 Fed. 861 (false oath); Re Cohen, 149 Fed. 908 (false oath); Re Agnew, 225 Fed. 650 (false oath); Re Opava, 235 Fed. 779 (fraudulent concealment). It has been held: that in a charge of the transfer, removal, destruction or concealment of property, or permission that the same be done within four months before the filing of the petition, with intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors, the word “knowingly” may be omitted; Re Gift, 130 Fed. 230. Objections to such omissions are waived by going to trial upon the merits without raising them. Re Osborne, C. C. A., 115 Fed. 1; but see Re Taplin, 135 Fed. 861, and may be cured by amendment. Re Kanszak, 151 Fed. 503.
10 Re Hixon, 93 Fed. 440.
11 Re Holman, 92 Fed. 512. An objection that the bankrupt has fraudulently concealed or transferred property should specify the property and the date of the transfer with some reasonable degree of certainty. Re Carrier, 47 Fed. 438; Re Hixon, 93 Fed. 440; Re Hirsch, 96 Fed. 468; Re Taplin, 135 Fed. 861; Re White, 222 Fed. 688; Re Agnew, 225 Fed. 650. The same
rule applies to an objection that the bankrupt obtained property credit by a false statement in writing; Re Epstein, 248 Fed. 191; Re Troutman & Jesse, 251 Fed. 930. Such an objection must also set forth the false statement and show wherein it was false. Re Levy, 133 Fed. 572; Re Main, 205 Fed. 421; Re Epstein, 248 Fed. 191. And also the name of the person alleged to have been defrauded. Re Levy, 133 Fed. 572. A charge of a false oath must show its materiality, Re White, 222 Fed. 688; set forth the false statement and negative its truth, Re Nathanson, 155 Fed. 645; Re Greer, 248 Fed. 131, 133; supra, $ 506r. In these cases, the proper remedy is a motion to make the specifications more definite and certain, Re Mintzer, 197 Fed. 647; and if that is delayed until after evidence has been taken, a motion to amend them to conform to the proof will usually be granted. Ibid. It was held that such an objection for insufficient precision of the specifications when not made until after the witnesses were called, was properly denied with leave to renew after the testimony had been taken. Ibid. Cf. Re Wakefield, 207 Fed. 180.
12 Re Kaiser, 99 Fed. 689.
13 McNeil v. U. S., C. C. A., 150 Fed. 82, 18 Am. B. R. 21; Reming. ton on Bankruptcy, $ 2608. Re Mintzer, 197 Fed. 647.
14 Re Patterson, 121 Fed. 921; Godshalk v. Sterling, C. C. A., 129 Fed. 580; Re Ginsburg,' 130 Fed. 627; Re Randall, 159 Fed. 298. The objection should state that the failure was with intent to conceal the financial condition of the bankrupt. Re Epstein, 248 Ked. 191. See Re Lewis, 163 Fed. 137. But where the allegation was that he failed to keep such books of account or records as would enable his financial condition to be ascertained, it was held that the particulars in which the failure consisted should be pleaded. Re Peck, 120 Fed. 972. Evidence should not be pleaded, Re Troeder, C. C. A., 150 Fed. 710. Allegations that he did not keep
necessary books, and that the books kept were insufficient to show the course or condition of his business, did not justify the objection that some particular transactions were not entered. Re Smith, 16 Fed. 465. It was held under the Act of 1867, that a specification of a failure to keep proper books of account could not sustain a finding that the books were kept upon an incorrect theory. Re Graves, 24 Fed. 550.
16 Re Wetmore, 102 Fed. 290. In such a case, the discharge will be denied if any one of them is sus
tained. Hudson v. Mercantile Nat. Bank, C. C. A., 119 Fed. 346.
16 Re Steed & Curtis, 107 Fed. 682.
17 Re Crist, 116 Fed. 1007. Contra, Re Osborne, C. C. A., 115 Fed. 1; Re Baldwin, 119 Fed. 796. But see Re Servis, 140 Fed. 222; Troeder v. Lorsch, C. C. A., 150 Fed. 710. But see cases cited supra.
18 Re Osborne, C. C. A., 115 Fed. 1. Re Singer, C. C. A., 251 Fed. 51.
19 Re Holman, 92 Fed. 512; Re Carley, C. C. A., 117 Fed. 130; Re Gift, 139 Fed. 230; Re Hendrick, 138 Fed. 473. See Re Mudd, 105 Fed. 348. Amendments have been allowed after the expiration of the time for filing specifications. Re Morgan, 101 Fed. 982; Re Osborne, C. C. A., 115 Fed. 1; Re Nathanson, 152 Fed. 585. An amendment may be allowed after a reference; Re Hendrick, 138 Fed. 473, but not, it has been held, after the proofs are closed. Re Smith, 16 Fed. 465. But see Re Pierce, 103 Fed. 64.
An amendment was refused where the specifications merely alleged the words of the statute. Re Peck, 120 Fed. 972. Cf. Re Gift, 130 Fed. 230. But see Re Glass, 119 Fed. 509. New objections to the discharge cannot be added by: