Strobel & Wilken Co. v. Knost

99 F. 409, 11 Ohio F. Dec. 405, 1900 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 346
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio
DecidedJanuary 20, 1900
DocketNo. 2,572
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 99 F. 409 (Strobel & Wilken Co. v. Knost) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Strobel & Wilken Co. v. Knost, 99 F. 409, 11 Ohio F. Dec. 405, 1900 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 346 (S.D. Ohio 1900).

Opinion

TJIOMPBON, District Judge.

This matter is submitted to the court on a petition for the review of the findings and rulings of the referee in disallowing the claims of certain creditors. The able opinion of the referee in support of his rulings presents the true construction of the provisions of the bankrupt act covering the controversy. When insolvency overtakes the debtor, his creditors, as contributors' to the estate in Ms possession, have an equitable right to liave the proceeds of the estate distributed among them equally, in proportion to the amount of their respective claims; and if, pending the insolvency, one of the creditors receives partial payment of liis claim from the debtor, and to the extent of the remainder of his claim is permitted to share equally in the distribution of the balance of the estate, he thereby obtains an inequitable advantage or preference [414]*414over the other creditors. And this is true, although no preference was intended by the debtor in making, or by the creditor in receiving, the partial payment. The construction, therefore, of paragraph “g” of section 57 and of paragraphs “a” and “b” of section 60 of the bankrupt act, which requires the creditor to surrender his preference as a condition precedent to participation in the distribution of the fund in the hands of the trustee, is not unreasonable. It permits the innocent creditor, at his option, to retain or surrender the preference. JBut the creditor- who has reason to believe thai a preference was intended has no such option, and, i.' made within four months before the adjudication in bankruptcy, the trustee may recover the amount of the payment. The findings of the referee are approved.

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

Related

Swarts v. Fourth National Bank
117 F. 1 (Eighth Circuit, 1902)
In re Big Meadows Gas Co.
113 F. 974 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1902)
In re Seckler
106 F. 484 (D. Kansas, 1901)
In re Blair
102 F. 987 (S.D. New York, 1900)
In re Rogers Milling Co.
102 F. 687 (W.D. Arkansas, 1900)
In re Alexander
102 F. 464 (N.D. Georgia, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
99 F. 409, 11 Ohio F. Dec. 405, 1900 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strobel-wilken-co-v-knost-ohsd-1900.