In re Moebius

116 F. 47, 1902 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania·Decided June 6, 1902·No. No. 803·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

The right to amend, and especially in aid of a meritorious claim, is granted by the courts with great liberality, but there is a limit beyond which we cannot go. That limit, I think, has been reached in the case now being considered. If the petitioner’s motion to amend his original proof of claim should be granted, he would in fact be given leave to make proof of a debt in violation of section 57n, Bankr. Act, which provides that “claims shall not be proved against a bankrupt estate subsequent to one year after the adjudication.” Ordinarily it may be true that, where the right to prove exists, a motion to amend would probably be allowed (In re Myrick, Fed. Cas. No. 10,000), but here the right to prove has been lost.

The referee’s order is affirmed.

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

In re Moebius, 116 F. 47, 1902 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128 (E.D. Pa. 1902).

116 F. 47 (In re Moebius) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Stuart's, Inc.
39 F.2d 972 (M.D. Pennsylvania, 1930)
In Re Fant
21 F.2d 182 (W.D. South Carolina, 1927)
In re Edelen
248 F. 580 (W.D. Kentucky, 1918)
In re Breakwater Co.
232 F. 375 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1916)
In re Sanderson
160 F. 278 (D. Vermont, 1908)
Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States v. Perkins
80 N.E. 682 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1907)
In re McCallum & McCallum
127 F. 768 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1904)
In re Muskoka Lumber Co.
127 F. 886 (W.D. New York, 1904)
In re E. O. Thompson's Sons
123 F. 174 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1903)
In re Bimberg
121 F. 942 (S.D. New York, 1903)
In re Towne
122 F. 313 (D. Massachusetts, 1903)