In re McCarthy

W.D. New York

In re McCarthy

8 F. Supp. 518, 1934 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1429

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. New York

DecidedJuly 31, 1934

DocketNo. 21619

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 8 F. Supp. 518 (In re McCarthy) 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 McCarthy, 8 F. Supp. 518, 1934 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1429 (W.D.N.Y. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

KNIGHT, District Judge.

Judgment was recovered against the bankrupt herein for personal injuries sustained by reason of the negligent operation by the bankrupt of his automobile. A garnishee execution was issued on such judgment and bankrupt now seeks an order restraining the judgment creditor and the sheriff of Erie county from receiving further money under such execution. The judgment creditor objects to the granting of such motion on the ground that the injury was willful and malicious and therefore not dischargeable.

The eomplaint does not allege and the record does not show that the damages were sustained by reason of any willful and malicious act of the bankrupt. This court has held under a parallel state of facts that a judgment such as obtained here is discharge-able. In re Kubiniec (D. C.) 2 F. Supp. 632. This view is sustained by many authorities. Tinker v. Colwell, 193 U. S. 473, 24 S. Ct. 505, 48 L. Ed. 754; Lewis v. Roberts, 267 U. S. 467, 45 S. Ct. 357, 69 L. Ed. 739, 37 A. L. R. 1440; In re Harber (C. C. A.) 9 F.(2d) 551; In re Vena (D. C.) 46 F.(2d) 81; In re Madigan (D. C.) 254 F. 221.

Motion granted.

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

KNIGHT, District Judge.

Judgment was recovered against the bankrupt herein for personal injuries sustained by reason of the negligent operation by the bankrupt of his automobile. A garnishee execution was issued on such judgment and bankrupt now seeks an order restraining the judgment creditor and the sheriff of Erie county from receiving further money under such execution. The judgment creditor objects to the granting of such motion on the ground that the injury was willful and malicious and therefore not dischargeable.

The eomplaint does not allege and the record does not show that the damages were sustained by reason of any willful and malicious act of the bankrupt. This court has held under a parallel state of facts that a judgment such as obtained here is discharge-able. In re Kubiniec (D. C.) 2 F. Supp. 632. This view is sustained by many authorities. Tinker v. Colwell, 193 U. S. 473, 24 S. Ct. 505, 48 L. Ed. 754; Lewis v. Roberts, 267 U. S. 467, 45 S. Ct. 357, 69 L. Ed. 739, 37 A. L. R. 1440; In re Harber (C. C. A.) 9 F.(2d) 551; In re Vena (D. C.) 46 F.(2d) 81; In re Madigan (D. C.) 254 F. 221.

Motion granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 F. Supp. 518, 1934 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-mccarthy-nywd-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack