In re Berkowitz

51 F. Supp. 80, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1904
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedSeptember 17, 1942
StatusPublished

This text of 51 F. Supp. 80 (In re Berkowitz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Berkowitz, 51 F. Supp. 80, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1904 (S.D.N.Y. 1942).

Opinion

CONGER, District Judge.

The above named bankrupt moves for an order directing his employer, the Carolyn Laundry, to continue making deductions from his salary pursuant to a garnishee order issued by the City Court of the City of New York, but staying the said employer from turning over the sums thus deducted to any City Marshall or to the judgment creditor, the Overland Trading Co., Inc., until further order of this Court.

The bankrupt had been adjudicated a bankrupt once before in 1934, but in that proceeding he failed to include in his schedules a judgment obtained against him in 1926, which judgment resulted in the issuance of the garnishee order in question. Accordingly, the debt was not discharged in that proceeding and the judgment creditor, who evidently had no knowledge of the prior proceeding, now contends that the failure to obtain such discharge precludes the bankrupt from discharging the debt in the present proceeding.

However, the law seems to be that a debt which is omitted from schedules in bankruptcy, and for that reason is not discharged, may be discharged in a later proceeding provided application for such discharge is made more than six years after the first discharge. Matter of Diereck, 37 Am.Bankr.Rep., N.S., 198; In re Baker, D.C., 275 F. 511; In re Lyons, D.C., 287 F. 602. It Is only where the debt was listed in the earlier proceeding but the bankrupt neglected to apply for a discharge, or for some reason discharge of that debt was refused, that no discharge could have been granted in a later proceeding. In re Summer, 2 Cir., 107 F.2d 396, certiorari denied Summer v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 309 U.S. 680, 60 S. Ct. 718, 84 L.Ed. 1024.

Motion granted. Settle order on notice.

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

Related

In Re Summer
107 F.2d 396 (Second Circuit, 1939)
Summer v. Manufacturers Trust Co.
309 U.S. 680 (Supreme Court, 1940)
Keig v. Lake Shore Athletic Club Members' Committee
309 U.S. 680 (Supreme Court, 1940)
In re Baker
275 F. 511 (S.D. New York, 1920)
In re Lyons
287 F. 602 (E.D. New York, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 F. Supp. 80, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-berkowitz-nysd-1942.