In re Rado
20 F. Cas. 153, 6 Ben. 230
Opinion
The petitioners, having accepted an unlawful preference in respect of the debt set forth in their petition, cannot maintain the petition, so long as they do not, by the petition, surrender such preference. An opportunity will be allowed them to move, on notice, for leave to amend the petition in that respect If no sueli motion is made, the petition must be dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In re Rado, 20 F. Cas. 153, 6 Ben. 230 (S.D.N.Y. 1872).
20 F. Cas. 153 (In re Rado) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In re Burlington Malting Co.
109 F. 777 (E.D. Wisconsin, 1901)
In re Gillette
104 F. 769 (W.D. New York, 1900)
In re Miller
104 F. 764 (W.D. New York, 1900)