In re Wetmore

Third Circuit

In re Wetmore

108 F. 991, 46 C.C.A. 688, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 3880

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedApril 29, 1901

DocketNo. 16

StatusPublished

This text of 108 F. 991 (In re Wetmore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Wetmore, 108 F. 991, 46 C.C.A. 688, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 3880 (3d Cir. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

BRADFORD, District Judge.

This is fin appeal from a judgment of the United States district court for the Eastern district of Pennsylvania, granting a discharge in bankruptcy to William B. Wetmore, a voluntary bankrupt. 99 Fed. 703. His discharge was resisted by Annette B. Markoe, the appellant, on the ground that lie had omitted from the schedules attached to his petition and fraudulently concealed a certain supposed interest under the fourth item of the will of his father, Samuel Wetmore. This court having this day, on the petition of G. Plantou Middleton, trustee of Wetmore’s estate in bankruptcy, for revision of a certain order made in the proceeding's in the court below, decided that the bankrupt was not at the time of tlio filing- of the petition in bankruptcy entitled under that clause to any right, interest, or property which could pass to the trustee by virtue of section 70 of tile bankruptcy act, it necessarily follows that this appeal must be dismissed, with costs, and it is accordingly so ordered.

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

BRADFORD, District Judge.

This is fin appeal from a judgment of the United States district court for the Eastern district of Pennsylvania, granting a discharge in bankruptcy to William B. Wetmore, a voluntary bankrupt. 99 Fed. 703. His discharge was resisted by Annette B. Markoe, the appellant, on the ground that lie had omitted from the schedules attached to his petition and fraudulently concealed a certain supposed interest under the fourth item of the will of his father, Samuel Wetmore. This court having this day, on the petition of G. Plantou Middleton, trustee of Wetmore’s estate in bankruptcy, for revision of a certain order made in the proceeding's in the court below, decided that the bankrupt was not at the time of tlio filing- of the petition in bankruptcy entitled under that clause to any right, interest, or property which could pass to the trustee by virtue of section 70 of tile bankruptcy act, it necessarily follows that this appeal must be dismissed, with costs, and it is accordingly so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 F. 991, 46 C.C.A. 688, 1901 U.S. App. LEXIS 3880, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-wetmore-ca3-1901.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack