In re Kittler

176 F. 655, 1910 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 403
CourtDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
DecidedFebruary 17, 1910
StatusPublished

This text of 176 F. 655 (In re Kittler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Kittler, 176 F. 655, 1910 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 403 (M.D. Pa. 1910).

Opinion

ARCHIBALD, District Judge.

The bankrupt was adjudicated March 5, 1909, on petition duly filed. And he now, within a few days of the end of the year, asks to amend his schedules so as to bring in an omitted creditor. In my judgment it is altogether too late. While the year is not yet up, it is so nearly at an end that this ought not to be allowed to be done. While it is not too late for the creditor to prove his claim, and while there may be no visible assets upon which to come in, it has been deferred so long that he has been deprived of participation in the administration of the affairs of the estate, which is equally important. Birkett v. Columbia Bank, 195 U. S. 345, 25 Sup. Ct. 38, 49 L. Ed. 231.

Application refused.

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

Related

Birkett v. Columbia Bank
195 U.S. 345 (Supreme Court, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
176 F. 655, 1910 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kittler-pamd-1910.