Zimmer v. Schleehauf

115 Mass. 52, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 145
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided March 23, 1874·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

The bankrupt act of 1867, c. 176, § 19, declares, that no debts, other than those therein specified, shall be proved against the bankrupt’s estate. The plaintiff’s claim does not come within either of the specified classes. It is conceded that it was not “ a debt existing at the time of the adjudication of bankruptcy,” because a claim for damages in an action of tort [53]*53does not become a debt by verdict before judgment. It was not a demand for or on account of goods taken or withheld, nor a liability upon any contract. The only “ contingent debts and contingent liabilities ” allowed to be proved are those “ contracted by the bankrupt.” The plaintiff’s cause of action did not arise out of any contract, or any injury to property, but out of a personal tort. It was therefore not provable under the bankrupt act, and the provision of § 21 for a stay of proceedings has no application. Exceptions overruled.

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

Zimmer v. Schleehauf, 115 Mass. 52, 1874 Mass. LEXIS 145 (Mass. 1874).

115 Mass. 52 (Zimmer v. Schleehauf) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Miller
113 B.R. 98 (D. Massachusetts, 1990)
Jewell v. Nuhn
173 Iowa 112 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1915)
Cohen v. Toy Gun Manufacturing Co.
172 Ill. App. 330 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1912)
Henriques v. Vinhaca
20 Haw. 702 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1911)
Sperry v. Cook
120 S.W. 654 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1909)
In re Van Orden
96 F. 86 (D. New Jersey, 1899)
Rider v. Fritchey
49 Ohio St. (N.S.) 285 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1892)
Powell v. Oregonian Ry. Co.
36 F. 726 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon, 1888)
In re Boston & Fairhaven Iron-Works
29 F. 783 (D. Massachusetts, 1884)
Child v. Boston & Fairhaven Iron Works
137 Mass. 516 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1884)
In re Lachemeyer
14 F. Cas. 914 (S.D. New York, 1878)