In re Cooper

Second Circuit

In re Cooper

230 F. 991, 145 C.C.A. 185, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1519

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedFebruary 15, 1916

DocketNo. 154

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 230 F. 991 (In re Cooper) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Cooper, 230 F. 991, 145 C.C.A. 185, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1519 (2d Cir. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There were two specifications of objection to discharge :

1. That bankrupt concealed from his trustee property consisting of two lots at Massapequa, Long Island, valued at $500.

2. That he made a false oath in omitting these two lots from his schedules.

[1,2] The bankrupt admitted that he bought the lots seven or eight years before, for $500, payable in installments, and that he still owned them in August, 1912, when he filed a financial statement with R. G. Dun & Co. It was for him to show that he has disposed of them before bankruptcy. His story is that, needing some money for expenses in connection with his family and not wishing or not being able to draw it from the business, he sold the two lots for $200 in October,. 1912. To this alleged sale there is no witness except himself, and he introduced not a particle of corroborative evidence. We concur with Judge Hand in the conclusion that sale of the lots is not shown by satisfactory proof and that the objections above stated should be sustained.

Order affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

There were two specifications of objection to discharge :

1. That bankrupt concealed from his trustee property consisting of two lots at Massapequa, Long Island, valued at $500.

2. That he made a false oath in omitting these two lots from his schedules.

[1,2] The bankrupt admitted that he bought the lots seven or eight years before, for $500, payable in installments, and that he still owned them in August, 1912, when he filed a financial statement with R. G. Dun & Co. It was for him to show that he has disposed of them before bankruptcy. His story is that, needing some money for expenses in connection with his family and not wishing or not being able to draw it from the business, he sold the two lots for $200 in October,. 1912. To this alleged sale there is no witness except himself, and he introduced not a particle of corroborative evidence. We concur with Judge Hand in the conclusion that sale of the lots is not shown by satisfactory proof and that the objections above stated should be sustained.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 F. 991, 145 C.C.A. 185, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-cooper-ca2-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack