Correro v. Barton

Fifth Circuit

Correro v. Barton

166 F. 1019, 92 C.C.A. 666, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4312

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 23, 1909

DocketNo. 1,687

StatusPublished

This text of 166 F. 1019 (Correro v. Barton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Correro v. Barton, 166 F. 1019, 92 C.C.A. 666, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4312 (5th Cir. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this case a petition by Barton and others, creditors, was filed against the firm of Charles Carrero & Co. asking to have them adjudicated bankrupts. Upon hearing adjudication was denied. Thereafter, on application, a new trial was granted, and thereafter leave was granted to amend the original petition by charging other and further acts of bankruptcy. This appeal questions the right to grant the new trial and allow the amendments. We are of opinion the questions presented were within the discretion of the District Court. See General Order No. 11 (89 Fed. vii, 32 O. C. A. xlv). However this may be, our examination of the record satisfies us that the action of the court was correct. The other assignments of error are not well taken. The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this case a petition by Barton and others, creditors, was filed against the firm of Charles Carrero & Co. asking to have them adjudicated bankrupts. Upon hearing adjudication was denied. Thereafter, on application, a new trial was granted, and thereafter leave was granted to amend the original petition by charging other and further acts of bankruptcy. This appeal questions the right to grant the new trial and allow the amendments. We are of opinion the questions presented were within the discretion of the District Court. See General Order No. 11 (89 Fed. vii, 32 O. C. A. xlv). However this may be, our examination of the record satisfies us that the action of the court was correct. The other assignments of error are not well taken. The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 F. 1019, 92 C.C.A. 666, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/correro-v-barton-ca5-1909.