Germania Nat. Bank of Milwaukee v. Lachenmaier
This text of 203 F. 32 (Germania Nat. Bank of Milwaukee v. Lachenmaier) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
An objecting creditor appeals from an order granting the bankrupt a discharge. Objection was under section 14b (5) (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 550 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3427J) that within six years the bankrupt had been granted a discharge in voluntary proceedings.
Whether steps in the prior proceedings were taken in fact (apart from the legal effect of the steps) on a voluntary or on an involuntary petition is readily determined by the record.
February 7, 1910, at 10 a. in., three creditors filed their petition in an involuntary proceeding against Lachenmaier, and at the same time placed in the marshal’s hands for service a subpcena and an order to show cause why the prayer of the petition should not be granted. Both were made returnable on February 12th, and were served on the defendant at some unstated time on February 7th. Marshal’s return was filed on February lltli. The record discloses no further steps in said involuntary proceeding.
February 7, 1910, at noon, Lachenmaier filed his voluntary petition, with schedules of debts and of property.
February '7, 1910, at 1:30 p. in., the District Judge entered an order that, “the petition of Fred Lachenmaier that he be adjudged a bankrupt having been heard and duly considered, the said Fred Lachenmaier is hereby declared and adjudged a bankrupt accordingly,” and at the same time entered a further order reciting that “Fred Lachenmaier on February 7, 1910, was duly adjudged a bankrupt upon a petition filed in this court by him on February 7, 1910,” and sending the case to the referee for “such further proceedings therein as are required” by the Bankruptcy Act. And it was upon the court’s confirmation of proceedings before the referee under said order of reference that Lachenmaier’s discharge was obtained.
In the present case, not only did the creditors fail to move to set aside the proceedings on the voluntary petition, but it is apparent that there was no legal or equitable ground on which to bottom such a motion, for, the petitions having been filed on the same, day, the creditors lost no advantage, but, on the contrary, had the benefit of an adjudication without delay or expense and of their debtor’s being unable to get another discharge within six years. And, of course, the voluntary petitioner is equally bound, for he neither moved nor had cause for moving to vacate and dismiss his own proceeding.
The prior proceedings resulting in the discharge of Lachenmaier were therefore had and entered in law as well as in fact upon the voluntary petition.
The order is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings in consonance herewith.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
203 F. 32, 121 C.C.A. 368, 1913 U.S. App. LEXIS 1116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/germania-nat-bank-of-milwaukee-v-lachenmaier-ca7-1913.