Averill v. Quittner

Ninth Circuit

Averill v. Quittner

131 F.2d 312, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2798

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedOctober 28, 1942

DocketNo. 10036.

StatusPublished

This text of 131 F.2d 312 (Averill v. Quittner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Averill v. Quittner, 131 F.2d 312, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2798 (9th Cir. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

MATHEWS, Circuit Judge.

On a petition filed June 18, 1940, appellant was adjudged a voluntary bankrupt. The case was referred to a referee, a trustee was appointed and, on February 18, 1941, the trustee and Floyd C. Balding, a creditor of appellant, filed an objection to his discharge. The referee, after hearing the objection, entered an order denying the discharge. From an order affirming the referee’s order this appeal is prosecuted.

Appellant contends (1) that the objection stated no facts warranting a denial of his discharge and (2) that there was no evidence warranting such denial.

The objection stated, in substance, that in June, 1940 — a time subsequent to the first day of the twelve months immediately preceding the filing of his petition in bankruptcy — appellant had concealed certain of his property with intent to defraud his creditors. That was a sufficient ground for denying appellant’s discharge. Bankruptcy Act, § 14, sub. c, 11 U.S.C.A. § 32, sub. c.¹

Upon the hearing of the objection, the objectors (the trustee and Balding) produced evidence which showed to the satisfaction of the court that there were reasonable grounds for believing that in July, 1939 — a time subsequent to the first day of the twelve months immediately preceding the filing of his petition in bankruptcy — appellant had transferred and concealed certain of his property with intent to defraud his creditors. Thus, the burden of proving that he had not done so devolved upon appellant.² The burden was not sustained. Appellant offered no proof whatever.

Order affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MATHEWS, Circuit Judge.

On a petition filed June 18, 1940, appellant was adjudged a voluntary bankrupt. The case was referred to a referee, a trustee was appointed and, on February 18, 1941, the trustee and Floyd C. Balding, a creditor of appellant, filed an objection to his discharge. The referee, after hearing the objection, entered an order denying the discharge. From an order affirming the referee’s order this appeal is prosecuted.

Appellant contends (1) that the objection stated no facts warranting a denial of his discharge and (2) that there was no evidence warranting such denial.

The objection stated, in substance, that in June, 1940 — a time subsequent to the first day of the twelve months immediately preceding the filing of his petition in bankruptcy — appellant had concealed certain of his property with intent to defraud his creditors. That was a sufficient ground for denying appellant’s discharge. Bankruptcy Act, § 14, sub. c, 11 U.S.C.A. § 32, sub. c.¹

Upon the hearing of the objection, the objectors (the trustee and Balding) produced evidence which showed to the satisfaction of the court that there were reasonable grounds for believing that in July, 1939 — a time subsequent to the first day of the twelve months immediately preceding the filing of his petition in bankruptcy — appellant had transferred and concealed certain of his property with intent to defraud his creditors. Thus, the burden of proving that he had not done so devolved upon appellant.² The burden was not sustained. Appellant offered no proof whatever.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 F.2d 312, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/averill-v-quittner-ca9-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack