In re Young
162 F. 912, 1908 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 366
Opinion
J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.
Judge Holland has twice decided the question raised by the bankrupt’s motion to dismiss the specifications to his discharge. Following the authority of Re Ginsburg, 130 Fed. 627, 12 Am. Bankr. Rep. 459, and Re Grant (D. C.) 135 Fed. 889, the motion to dismiss is hereby granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In re Young, 162 F. 912, 1908 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 366 (E.D. Pa. 1908).
162 F. 912 (In re Young) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
In Re Desiderio
209 B.R. 342 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1997)
In Re Farhid
171 B.R. 94 (N.D. California, 1994)
Frederick Snare Corp. v. Moran Towing & Transportation Co.
195 F. Supp. 639 (S.D. New York, 1961)