In re W. J. Schmidt & Co.

Second Circuit

In re W. J. Schmidt & Co.

165 F. 1006, 91 C.C.A. 665, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4828

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided December 15, 1908·No. No. 44·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There is no need to discuss the constitutional questions which have been argued. We are satisfied that the language used by Congress in the sixty-seventh section of the bankrupt act (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 565 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3450]), providing that levies under judgment within the period named “shall be deemed null and void’’ was not intended to deprive state’s officer of his statutory fees, accruing prior to bankruptcy, under proceedings in the state courts, which were in all respects regular and in accordance with the state law and practice. The order is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

There is no need to discuss the constitutional questions which have been argued. We are satisfied that the language used by Congress in the sixty-seventh section of the bankrupt act (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 565 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3450]), providing that levies under judgment within the period named “shall be deemed null and void’’ was not intended to deprive state’s officer of his statutory fees, accruing prior to bankruptcy, under proceedings in the state courts, which were in all respects regular and in accordance with the state law and practice. The order is affirmed.

In re W. J. Schmidt & Co., 165 F. 1006, 91 C.C.A. 665, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4828 (2d Cir. 1908).

Pincite

165 F. 1006 (In re W. J. Schmidt & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related