In re Frederic L. Grant Shoe Co.

W.D. New York

In re Frederic L. Grant Shoe Co.

125 F. 576, 1903 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. New York

DecidedSeptember 2, 1903

DocketNo. 1,502

StatusPublished

This text of 125 F. 576 (In re Frederic L. Grant Shoe Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.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 Frederic L. Grant Shoe Co., 125 F. 576, 1903 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102 (W.D.N.Y. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

HAZEL, District Judge.

Motion to dismiss petition in bankruptcy. The question presented on this motion to dismiss the petition in involuntary bankruptcy is whether a creditor having an unliquidated claim may file a petition in bankruptcy against a debtor, and how such a claim may be liquidated in accordance with the provision of section 59b of the bankrupt act (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 561 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3445]). The debt which is unliquidated and disputed by the bankrupt is for damages arising out of a breach of warranty upon the sale of personal property. This precise question has been decided by Judge Brown and by Judge Thomas in Re Manhattan Ice Co. (D. C.) 7 Am. Bankr. R. 408, 114 Fed. 399, affirmed 8 Am. Bankr. R. 569, 116 Fed. 604, 54 C. C. A. 60. It was there held that a creditor having an unliquidated debt may file a petition in bankruptcy to have the debtor adjudged bankrupt, provided the debt is provable. As the petitioning ■ creditor here has a provable debt, though the amount thereof is undetermined, the rule announced by Judge Brown will be followed. As a jury trial has been delnanded, the amount of petitioner’s claim may be established upon the trial in connection with petitioner’s other proof.

Motion to dismiss denied.

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

HAZEL, District Judge.

Motion to dismiss petition in bankruptcy. The question presented on this motion to dismiss the petition in involuntary bankruptcy is whether a creditor having an unliquidated claim may file a petition in bankruptcy against a debtor, and how such a claim may be liquidated in accordance with the provision of section 59b of the bankrupt act (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 561 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3445]). The debt which is unliquidated and disputed by the bankrupt is for damages arising out of a breach of warranty upon the sale of personal property. This precise question has been decided by Judge Brown and by Judge Thomas in Re Manhattan Ice Co. (D. C.) 7 Am. Bankr. R. 408, 114 Fed. 399, affirmed 8 Am. Bankr. R. 569, 116 Fed. 604, 54 C. C. A. 60. It was there held that a creditor having an unliquidated debt may file a petition in bankruptcy to have the debtor adjudged bankrupt, provided the debt is provable. As the petitioning ■ creditor here has a provable debt, though the amount thereof is undetermined, the rule announced by Judge Brown will be followed. As a jury trial has been delnanded, the amount of petitioner’s claim may be established upon the trial in connection with petitioner’s other proof.

Motion to dismiss denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 F. 576, 1903 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-frederic-l-grant-shoe-co-nywd-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack