In re Nelson

S.D. New York

In re Nelson

179 F. 320, 1909 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedOctober 22, 1909

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 179 F. 320 (In re Nelson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.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 Nelson, 179 F. 320, 1909 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30 (S.D.N.Y. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

HAND, District Judge.

The question is simply of the existence of an intent “to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors.” Did the bankrupt have such a specific intent ? He intended to take his property and keep it from his creditors. Is that an intent to defraud them? It is an intent to do those things which will result in their being deprived of what was their own, and to deprive them of their own by secreting it is to defraud them.

Of course, it makes no difference that he thought himself justified. In many crimes you must show 'a specific intent; but no one ever heard that, when the intent was once shown, it made the least difference that the defendant thought he had the right to entertain it. The law forbids his entertaining it, and here the law forbids the bankrupt’s entertaining the intent to do what will in fact defraud his creditors.

Report confirmed, and discharge denied, with costs.

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

HAND, District Judge.

The question is simply of the existence of an intent “to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors.” Did the bankrupt have such a specific intent ? He intended to take his property and keep it from his creditors. Is that an intent to defraud them? It is an intent to do those things which will result in their being deprived of what was their own, and to deprive them of their own by secreting it is to defraud them.

Of course, it makes no difference that he thought himself justified. In many crimes you must show 'a specific intent; but no one ever heard that, when the intent was once shown, it made the least difference that the defendant thought he had the right to entertain it. The law forbids his entertaining it, and here the law forbids the bankrupt’s entertaining the intent to do what will in fact defraud his creditors.

Report confirmed, and discharge denied, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 F. 320, 1909 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-nelson-nysd-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack