Obrázky stránek
[ocr errors]

being a merchant or tradesman, he has not, subsequently to the passage of this act, kept proper books of account, or if he, or any person in his behalf, has procured the assent of any creditor to the discharge, or influenced the action of any creditor at any stage of the proceedings by any pecuniary consideration or obligation; or if he has, in contemplation of becoming bankrupt, made any pledge, payment, transfer, assignment or conveyance of any part of his property, directly or indirectly, absolutely or conditionally, for the purpose of preferring any creditor or person having a claim against him, or who is or may be under liability for him, or for the purpose of preventing the property from coming into the hands of the assignee, or of being distributed under this act in satisfaction of his debts; or if he has been convicted of any misdemeanor under this act, or has been guilty of any fraud whatever contrary to the true intent of this act. SEC. 30. .. That no person who shall have been discharged under this act, and shall afterwards become bankrupt, on his own application shall be again entitled to a discharge whose estate is insufficient to pay seventy per centum of the debts proved against it, unless the assent in writing of three-fourths in value of his creditors who have proved their claims is filed at or before the time of application for discharge; but a bankrupt who shall prove to the satisfaction of the court that he has paid all the debts owing by him at the time of any previous bankruptcy, or who has been voluntarily released therefrom by his creditors, shall be entitled to a discharge in the same manner and with the same effect as if he had not previously been bankrupt. SEC. 31. .. That any creditor opposing the discharge of any bankrupt may file a specification in writing of the grounds of his opposition, and the court may in its discretion order any question of fact so presented to be tried at a stated session of the district court.

SEC. 32. That if it shall appear to the court that the bankrupt has in all things conformed to his duty under this act, and that he is entitled, under the provisions thereof, to receive a discharge, the court shall grant him a discharge from all his debts except as hereinafter provided, and shall give him a certificate thereof under the seal of the court [here follows certificate].

SEC. 33. . . . And in all proceedings in bankruptcy no discharge shall be granted to a debtor whose assets do not pay fifty per centum of the claims against his estate, unless the assent in writing of a majority in number and value of his creditors who have proved their claims

is filed in the case at or before the time of application for discharge.]

A certified copy of the order setting aside a discharge, not revoked, is evidence of the jurisdiction of the court, the regularity of the proceedings and of the fact that the order was made. (Sec. 21f.) The creditor opposing a discharge must file a specification of his opposition. (Orders XXXII)

Who may oppose a discharge.-The following may oppose the discharge: Any creditor with a provable debt (In re Murdock, 3 N. B. R. 36; 1 Lowell, 362; Fed. Cas. 9939); a creditor who has proved his debt (In re Sheppard, 1 N. B. R. 115; 17 Amer. Law Reg. (N. S.) 484; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 49; Fed. Cas. 12753); the holder of a negotiable note assigned for value after the filing of the petition (In re Murdock, 3 N. B. R. 36; 1 Lowell, 362; Fed. Cas. 9939); a creditor who recovers a judg ment pending proceedings in bankruptcy (In re Stansfield, 16 N. B. R. 268; 4 Sawy. 334; Fed. Cas. 13294); any person who has a pecuniary interest, including creditors who have not proved their debts, when such pecuniary interest is satisfactorily shown to the court. (In re Boutelle, 2 N. B. R. 51; 15 Pittsb. Leg. J. 616; 1 Chi. Leg. News, 30; Fed. Cas. 1705.) Under the act of 1867 it was held that when, through inadvertence, creditors who have filed notices of opposition to discharge fail to file specifications within ten days after the return day of the order to show cause, they may be permitted to file the same nunc pro tunc. (In re Grefe, 2 N. B. R. 106; Fed. Cas. 5794.) Where the proceedings upon an order to show cause in opposition to discharge are adjourned, any creditor entitled to show cause may do so on the day to which the proceedings were adjourned, and within ten days thereafter may file his specifications. (In re Tallman, 1 N. B. R. 145; 2 Ben. 404; Fed. Cas. 13470.) The district court may, in its discretion, allow a creditor to enter his appearance and file specifications in opposition to a discharge, although the time for entering an appearance in opposition thereto has expired. (In re Levin, 14 N. B. R. 385; 7 Biss. 231; Fed. Cas. 8291.) A creditor who has given his assent to the bankrupt's discharge in writing, no fraud in procuring such assent being shown, and other creditors having assented, each presumptively being influenced by the act of the others, is not entitled, on the date fixed for the hearing, to withdraw his assent. (In re Brent, 8 N. B. R. 444; 2 Dill. 129; Fed. Cas. 1832.) Time may be given to other creditors to appear and oppose a discharge, when specifications have been overruled on grounds which apply to the opposing creditor individually. (In re Antisdel, 18 N. B. R. 289; Fed. Cas. 490.) Who may not oppose a discharge. The following may not oppose a discharge: A creditor who has not proved his claim (In re Burk, 3 N. B. R. 76; Deady, 425; 2 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 45; Fed. Cas. 2156); an attorney in whose power the concluding words are, "and with like power to attend and vote at any other meeting or meetings of creditors,

or sitting or sittings of the court, which may be holden therein, for any of the purposes aforesaid, or for the declaration of dividends, or for any other purpose in my interest whatever." (Creditors v. Williams, 4 N. B. R. 187; Fed. Cas. 3379.) Where the same persons are members of two firms, one of which has proved a claim against the bankrupt and the other has not, the latter firm has no standing to appear in opposition to the discharge. (In re Palmer, 3 N. B. R. 77; Fed. Cas. 10682.) Creditors will not be allowed to intervene, after the return day, to prosecute specifications filed by a creditor whose claim was stricken out after the filing of the specifications. (In re McDonald, 14 N. B. R. 477; 20 Pittsb. Leg. J. 42; Fed. Cas. 8753.) After the time for the hearing of an application for discharge, a creditor who proves his claim thereafter cannot be heard in opposition to the application, nor can his debt be counted among the claims proved so as to affect the discharge. (In re Borst, 11 N. B. R. 96; Fed. Cas. 1666.)

Examination of the bankrupt pending his discharge.-A bankrupt in attendance at a meeting to show cause against his discharge may be required by the register to submit to an examination upon oath touching his bankruptcy by a creditor. (In re Brandt, 2 N. B. R. 76; Fed. Cas. 1812.) When abundant opportunity has been afforded for an examination, and it is not done, a new examination will not be given upon the filing of amended specifications in opposition to discharge, especially in the absence of a showing by affidavit. (In re Isidor & Blumenthal, 1 N. B. R. 33; 2 Ben. 123; Fed. Cas. 7105.) The time to examine witnesses does not expire by the bankrupt filing his petition for a discharge. The time to file objections can be kept open by adjourning to any day which may be fixed for showing cause, until a reasonable time has elapsed for the examination of witnesses. (In re Seckendorf, 1 N. B. R. 185; 2 Ben. 462; 15 Pittsb. Leg. J. 450; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 122; Fed. Cas. 12600.)

The discharge of a firm or its members.— The question of the jurisdiction of the court to make the adjudication should be raised in opposition to the firm's discharge when application is made to have the adjudication set aside. (In re Penn et al., 3 N. B. R. 145; 4 Ben. 99; Fed. Cas. 10926.) A member of a firm actually existing and having assets cannot be adjudicated a bankrupt and discharged from his liabilities individually and as a member of the firm unless his copartners are joined with him. (In re Winkens, 2 N. B. R. 113; 1 Chi. Leg. News, 163; 2 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 53; Fed. Cas. 17875.) Joint creditors may be admitted to prove under separate commissions for the purpose of assenting to or dissenting from the discharge, but not to receive until after the separate creditors are paid in full. The exceptions are, where the joint creditor is the petitioning creditor under a separate fiat, where there is no joint estate and no solvent partner, and where there are no separate debts. (In re Byrne, 1 N. B. R. 122; 7 Amer. Law Reg. (N. S.)

499; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 122; 15 Pittsb. Leg. J. 315; Fed. Cas. 2270.) One cannot be discharged from his liabilities as a member of a firm unless the debts and assets of the firm are considered and adjudicated by the court. (In re Noonan, 10 N. B. R. 330; 5 Chi. Leg. News, 557; 30 Leg. Int. 425; 21 Pittsb. Leg. J. 73; Fed. Cas. 10292; Corey et al. v. Perry et al., 17 N. B. R. 147.)

Proceedings in opposition to discharge.—It is discretionary with the court, when creditors opposing a discharge file a specification in writing of the grounds of such opposition, to postpone the question of fact, to be tried at a stated session of the court. (Coit v. Robinson et al., 9 N. B. R. 289; 19 Wall. 274.) There is no provision in the Bankrupt Act for a jury trial on the question of discharge. Where a creditor wishes to avoid the discharge on the ground that his claim was not included in the defendant's schedule of indebtedness, he must attack the discharge on the ground of fraud in the court where granted. (Symonds v. Barnes, 6 N. B. R. 377.) Where it is objected that the purchaser at an assignee's sale was the attorney for the assignee. and thereby incapable of purchasing, such objection must be set up in the bankrupt court and not in a collateral action. (Spilman v. Johnson. 16 N. B. R. 145.)

A bankrupt who has not made a full and complete disclosure of his assets cannot require that creditors opposing his discharge specify objections or abide by specifications which they may have filed. (In re Long, 3 N. B. R. 66; 7 Phila. 578; 26 Leg. Int. 349; Fed. Cas. 8477.)

The proceeding upon the order to show cause why the discharge should not be granted can be, on the return day of the order, adjourned by reason of the adjournment of the examination of the bankrupt. (In re Mawson, 1 N. B. R. 41; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 46; Fed. Cas. 9320; In re Thompson, 1 N. B. R. 65; 2 Ben. 166; Fed. Cas. 13935.)

The discharge-In general.-A bankrupt is not forbidden to procure the assent of a creditor to his discharge, nor is he forbidden to influence the action of a creditor. Under the act of 1867 it was held that the prohibition is against procuring such assent or influencing such action by any pecuniary consideration or obligation (In re Mawson, 1 N. B. R. 115; 2 Ben. 332; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 122; Fed. Cas. 9318); and this question will not be considered until the filing of specifications in opposition thereto. (In re Mawson, 1 N. B. R. 43; 2 Ben. 122; Fed. Cas. 9317.) Concealment of estate, to furnish grounds for opposing the discharge, must be wilful and coupled with an intent to deceive. (In re Sidle, 2 N. B. R. 77; Fed. Cas. 12844.) The question whether a bankrupt has been guilty of fraud, or committed such act as would prevent his discharge, must be postponed until the hearing of the application therefor. (In re Brisco, 2 N. B. R. 78; 1 Gaz 78; Fed. Cas. 1886.)

A bankrupt must, in a given proceeding, be discharged from all his debts or none. (In re Plumb, 17 N. B. R. 76; 9 Ben. 279; Fed. Cas 11231.)

The bankrupt has an interest in the continuance of proceedings which may result in his final discharge; hence he is entitled to notice of an application for annulling the adjudication in bankruptcy. (In re Bush, 6 N. B. R. 179; 6 West. Jur. 274; Fed. Cas. 2222.)

A suit at law to collect a debt, claim or liability from a bankrupt may be restrained until the application for a discharge has been determined, if made and prosecuted with reasonable diligence; and where the discharge would be a bar to such suit at law the creditor must go into the bankruptcy court and opposé a discharge in the manner prescribed by the bankrupt law. (In re Archenbrown, 11 N. B. R. 149; 7 Chi. Leg. News, 99; Fed. Cas. 504; In re Rosenberg, 2 N. B. R. 81; 3 Ben. 14; 1 Chi. Leg. News, 103; Fed. Cas. 12054.)

It is not requisite to the constitutionality of a bankrupt act that it must provide for the discharge of all persons subject to its provisions. (In re Cal. Pac. R. R. Co., 11 N. B. R. 193; 3 Sawy. 240; 2 Cent. Law J. 79; Fed. Cas. 2315.)

Creditors acquire no right to proceed in an action against a bankrupt, pending determination of the question of discharge, from the fact that they have not proved their claim in bankruptcy. (In re Schwartz, 15 N. B. R. 330; 14 Blatchf. 196; 52 How. Pr. 513; 15 Alb. Law J. 350; Fed. Cas. 12502; sec. 5106, R. S.)

When a discharge will be granted.—Where proper notice has been given to creditors, they are regarded as consenting to a discharge if they make no opposition. (In re Antisdel, 18 N. B. R. 289; Fed. Cas. 480.) The fact that a debt was created by the fraud and embezzlement of the bankrupt, and while acting in a fiduciary capacity, is not valid objection to the discharge, such debts not being thereby discharged. (In re Bashford, 2 N. B. R. 26; Fed. Cas. 1090; In re Rosenfield, 1 N. B. R. 161; 7 Amer. Law Reg. (N. S.) 618; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 81; Fed. Cas. 12058; In re Clarke, 2 N. B. R. 44; Fed. Cas. 2344; In re Elliott, 2 N. B. R. 44; Fed. Cas. 4391; In re Wright, 2 N. B. R. 57; 36 How. Pr. 167; 2′′Ben. 509; Fed. Cas. 18065; In re Doody, 2 N. B. R. 74; Fed. Cas. 3995; In re Stokes, 2 N. B. R. 76; Fed. Cas. 13476; In re Tracy et al., 2 N. B. R. 98; 1 Chi. Leg. News, 123; Fed. Cas. 14124.)

A judgment obtained after the adjudication in bankruptcy creates a new debt that cannot be proved therein, the judgment being a merger, and therefore the judgment creditor cannot oppose the discharge because he has no provable debt, and because the discharge will not bear the judgment. (In re Gallison et al., 5 N. B. R. 353; 2 Lowell, 72; Fed. Cas. 5203.)

A fraudulent conveyance made, or a fraudulent preference given, before the passage of the Bankrupt Act, are neither of them good grounds on which to oppose a discharge (In re Rosenfield, 1 N. B. R. 161; 7 Amer. Law Reg. (N. S.) 618; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 81; Fed. Cas. 12058); but in such case the bankrupt should not conceal, nor attempt to con

« PředchozíPokračovat »