In re MacDonald

D. Connecticut

In re MacDonald

138 F. 463, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186

CourtDistrict Court, D. Connecticut

DecidedMay 11, 1905

DocketNo. 1,432

StatusPublished

This text of 138 F. 463 (In re MacDonald) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re MacDonald, 138 F. 463, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186 (D. Conn. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

PLATT, District Judge.

Upon adjudication, the trustee took title to all property which was then vested in the bankrupt, subject to all valid claims, liens, and equities. The title to the property which the petitioners ask to reclaim was, as appears by the evidence and the report of the special master, vested in them, and not in the bankrupt. Such vesting was based upon contract, and full value for the interests vested had been paid.

The case of the Scannell is a clear one, because physical delivery of possession had been added to the actual title. As to fhe other contracts, it would be a queer proceeding for a court, which in such matters as this is understood to invoke and apply the pure principles of equity, to deprive the petitioners of the benefit of deliberate contracts, made with an open eye and for good reason, and in the same breath turn over to the general mass of creditors uncompleted parts of certain things, which the trustee is unable and unwilling to so treat as to give them hereafter a substantial value. The Poconoket Case (D. C.) 67 Fed. 265, is not exactly in point, it [469]*469is true, but that Judge Butler was not much impressed with the possibility of change which the facts of this case present is also quite evident.

It is not apparent that the fact that creditors herein attempted to assert claimed rights adds anything to the force of the reasoning presented by counsel for the trustee and those particular creditors.

The report of the special master is confirmed, and let the properties in question be delivered to the petitioners in accordance therewith, but without costs or disbursements or demurrage in the case of the Scannell, the said properties having come to the possession of the trustee by process of law, and not by effective action on his part.

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

PLATT, District Judge.

Upon adjudication, the trustee took title to all property which was then vested in the bankrupt, subject to all valid claims, liens, and equities. The title to the property which the petitioners ask to reclaim was, as appears by the evidence and the report of the special master, vested in them, and not in the bankrupt. Such vesting was based upon contract, and full value for the interests vested had been paid.

The case of the Scannell is a clear one, because physical delivery of possession had been added to the actual title. As to fhe other contracts, it would be a queer proceeding for a court, which in such matters as this is understood to invoke and apply the pure principles of equity, to deprive the petitioners of the benefit of deliberate contracts, made with an open eye and for good reason, and in the same breath turn over to the general mass of creditors uncompleted parts of certain things, which the trustee is unable and unwilling to so treat as to give them hereafter a substantial value. The Poconoket Case (D. C.) 67 Fed. 265, is not exactly in point, it [469]*469is true, but that Judge Butler was not much impressed with the possibility of change which the facts of this case present is also quite evident.

It is not apparent that the fact that creditors herein attempted to assert claimed rights adds anything to the force of the reasoning presented by counsel for the trustee and those particular creditors.

The report of the special master is confirmed, and let the properties in question be delivered to the petitioners in accordance therewith, but without costs or disbursements or demurrage in the case of the Scannell, the said properties having come to the possession of the trustee by process of law, and not by effective action on his part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 F. 463, 1905 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-macdonald-ctd-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack