In re Post

N.D. Ohio

In re Post

256 F. 236, 1919 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 873

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio

DecidedMarch 21, 1919

DocketNo. 6824

StatusPublished

This text of 256 F. 236 (In re Post) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Post, 256 F. 236, 1919 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 873 (N.D. Ohio 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

WESTENHAVER, District Judge.

The referee’s order, requiring bankrupt to sign his testimony given before the referee on bankrupt’s general examination, is affirmed, for the reasons and on the grounds stated in the referee’s opinion.

Supporting this conclusion is the fact that a referee is not an officer before whom depositions generally may be taken under sections 863, 864, 863, 866, Revised Statutes (Comp. St. §§ 1472-1474, 1477). Nor is he a person authorized to administer oaths, except in bankruptcy proceedings pending before him. The word “deposition,” as used in General Order 22 (89 Fed. x, 32 C. C. A. x), can only apply to hearings in bankruptcy matters pending before the referee, and must of necessity include all hearings in which the bankrupt or other witnesses are examined.

The referee’s order is affirmed. An exception may be noted on behalf of petitioner.

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

WESTENHAVER, District Judge.

The referee’s order, requiring bankrupt to sign his testimony given before the referee on bankrupt’s general examination, is affirmed, for the reasons and on the grounds stated in the referee’s opinion.

Supporting this conclusion is the fact that a referee is not an officer before whom depositions generally may be taken under sections 863, 864, 863, 866, Revised Statutes (Comp. St. §§ 1472-1474, 1477). Nor is he a person authorized to administer oaths, except in bankruptcy proceedings pending before him. The word “deposition,” as used in General Order 22 (89 Fed. x, 32 C. C. A. x), can only apply to hearings in bankruptcy matters pending before the referee, and must of necessity include all hearings in which the bankrupt or other witnesses are examined.

The referee’s order is affirmed. An exception may be noted on behalf of petitioner.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 F. 236, 1919 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-post-ohnd-1919.