In re Myers

102 F. 869, 9 Pa. D. 499, 1900 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 227
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
DecidedJune 8, 1900
DocketNo. 227
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 102 F. 869 (In re Myers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.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 Myers, 102 F. 869, 9 Pa. D. 499, 1900 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 227 (E.D. Pa. 1900).

Opinion

McPHERSON, District Judge.

I agree with the learned referee in his disposition of the bankrupt’s claim for exemption, and of the land-< lord’s claim to priority. Nothing need be added to the referee’s opinion, except the citation of In re Ulrich, 6 Pa. Dist. R. 408, in which it was decided by one of the common pleas courts of the state that á license to sell liquor cannot be levied upon and sold by the sheriff; and Moss’ Appeal, 35 Pa. St. 162, and Wickey v. Eyster, 58 Pa. St. 501, in which the supreme court held that the landlord’s claim to be paid out of the proceeds of sale depends upon his power to distrain the goods. A license can no more be distrained than taken in execution.

The disallowance of these claims is accordingly approved.

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

Related

Judge v. Bank (In Re Lorimal, Inc.)
23 B.R. 457 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1982)
Harman Electric Co. v. First Real Estate Investment Co.
55 F.R.D. 195 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1972)
In re Olewine
125 F. 840 (M.D. Pennsylvania, 1903)
In re Mitchell
116 F. 87 (D. Delaware, 1902)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 F. 869, 9 Pa. D. 499, 1900 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-myers-paed-1900.