Steele v. Georgia Finance Inc.

186 S.E. 580, 53 Ga. App. 543, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 311
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJune 18, 1936
Docket25422
StatusPublished

This text of 186 S.E. 580 (Steele v. Georgia Finance Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Steele v. Georgia Finance Inc., 186 S.E. 580, 53 Ga. App. 543, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 311 (Ga. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. The forthcoming bond the condition of which is the production of the property at the time and place of sale does not, before a breach of the bond, constitute “a fixed liability as evidenced by a judgment or an instrument in writing absolutely owing,” and the obligation in the bond does not constitute a debt provable in bankruptcy where the petition in bankruptcy of the obligor was filed before the date of the breach of the bond. Bankruptcy act, § 63. The debt, not being provable in bankruptcy, is not dischargeable in bankruptcy. Bankruptcy act, § 17; Collier on Bankruptcy (13th ed.), 1399, 1421; Williams v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 236 U. S. 549 (35 Sup. Ct. 289, 59 L. ed. 713), 11 Ga. App. 635 (75 S. E. 1067) ; Clemmons v. Brinn, 36 Misc. 157 (72 N. Y. Supp. 1066). 11 U. S. C. A., §§ 35, 103.

2. In a suit against the surety on a forthcoming bond, to recover damages for non-production of the property at the time and place of sale, where it does not appear from the evidence that the bond was breached before April 3, 1933, the date of the sale when the property was to be produced as required by the bond, and where it appears that the surety’s petition in bankruptcy was filed afterwards on October 31, 1932, the court did not err in finding against the defendant’s plea for a stay of the proceedings on the ground of his adjudication in bankruptcy. The superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed,.

Jenkins, P. J., and Sul ton, J., concur. Joe Hill Smith, for plaintiff in error. H. L. Luilrell, contra.

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

Related

Williams v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
236 U.S. 549 (Supreme Court, 1915)
Clemmons v. Brinn
36 Misc. 157 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)
Williams & Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
75 S.E. 1067 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
186 S.E. 580, 53 Ga. App. 543, 1936 Ga. App. LEXIS 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steele-v-georgia-finance-inc-gactapp-1936.