Huston v. Goudy

37 A. 881, 90 Me. 128, 1897 Me. LEXIS 51

Opinion

Walton, J.

Appeal from the court of insolvency.

The question is whether the insolvent debtor is entitled to a discharge. We are forced to the conclusion that he is not. A jury has found that he was guilty of a fraudulent preference, and a careful examination of the evidence fails to satisfy us that the verdict was wrong. This alone is sufficient to defeat his right to a discharge.

But there is another ground equally fatal to his right to a discharge. There is no doubt that he was a trader within the meaning of the law. He bought and sold lumber; he bought clay and made and sold bricks; and he received'and sold mowing machines for a commission. And yet he kept no proper books of account. ■ We can not doubt that the decree in the court below refusing his discharge was ■ correct, and must be affirmed. Groves v. Kilgore, 72 Maine, 489 ; In re Tolman, 83 Maine, 553; In re Patten, 85 Maine, 154,

Decree in court below affirmed,