Morris Steinberg v. J. L. Dorfman and Sol Schoeman

Ninth Circuit

Morris Steinberg v. J. L. Dorfman and Sol Schoeman

356 F.2d 471, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 7287

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 3, 1966·No. 19985·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The order of the district court affirming the referee’s order denying Stein-berg a discharge in bankruptcy is affirmed.

The referee heard the testimony of the bankrupt concerning the inadequacy of his books and his explanation as to the disappearance of money which had been in the bankrupt’s hands. Obviously the referee disbelieved much, or a portion, of the attempted explanation.

We are not persuaded from our review of the record that the referee was mistaken. Thus, we cannot say his determination was clearly erroneous.

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

PER CURIAM:

The order of the district court affirming the referee’s order denying Stein-berg a discharge in bankruptcy is affirmed.

The referee heard the testimony of the bankrupt concerning the inadequacy of his books and his explanation as to the disappearance of money which had been in the bankrupt’s hands. Obviously the referee disbelieved much, or a portion, of the attempted explanation.

We are not persuaded from our review of the record that the referee was mistaken. Thus, we cannot say his determination was clearly erroneous.

Morris Steinberg v. J. L. Dorfman and Sol Schoeman, 356 F.2d 471, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 7287 (9th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

356 F.2d 471 (Morris Steinberg v. J. L. Dorfman and Sol Schoeman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.