TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Joseph Francis Barbiere, Bankrupt. Joseph Francis Barbiere

In the Matter of Joseph Francis BARBIERE, Bankrupt. Joseph Francis Barbiere, Appellant

In re Joseph Francis Barbiere, Bankrupt. Joseph Francis Barbiere, 192 F.2d 1018 (3d Cir. 1951)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 26, 1951
Docket
No. 10505
Judges
Biggs, Maris, Goodrich
Citations
192 F.2d 10181951 U.S. App. LEXIS 3501

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

The appeal at bar is from an order of the court below vacating an order of the referee, to whom the matter stood referred, granting the bankrupt, Barbiere, a discharge. The bankrupt gave a materially false statement to a creditor for the purpose of inducing the creditor to extend credit to him. The bankrupt insists that his motives were honest and his intent innocent, but, as the District Judge found, all the testimony in the case is “ * * * consistent only with an intent [on the part of Barbiere] to obtain credit on the basis of a statement clearly incorrect.” [ 97 F.Supp. 86, 89 .]

*1019 Referring to Section 14, sub. c. of the Bankruptcy Act, as amended, 11 U.S.C.A. § 32 sub. c(3), and Collier on Bankruptcy, 14th Ed., Vol. 1, § 14.43, p. 1377, the court below pointed out that while the burden of proof is on the objecting creditor to establish the cause which he claims bars a discharge, yet when the creditor shows that a materially false statement was made by the bankrupt and that credit was obtained thereby, the burden is on the bankrupt to disprove an intent to deceive. The court below correctly concluded that the bankrupt had not met this burden. See also Id., § 14.12, pp. 1291-1294, § 14.40, p. 1370 et seq. See also In re Monsch, D.C.Ky., 18 F.Supp. 913 , and In re Stine, D.C.Mo., 60 F.Supp. 703 . The District Judge correctly found that the finding of the referee that there was no intent on the part of the bankrupt to deceive was not supported by the evidence.

Consequently the order appealed from will be affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1958: 119582026peak 1958 · 1

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
In re Monsch, 18 F. Supp. 913 (E.D. Ky. 1937) 19
In re Stine, 60 F. Supp. 703 (E.D. Mo. 1945) 7
In re Barbiere, 97 F. Supp. 86 (E.D. Pa. 1951) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list