TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Pariseau

In re Pariseau, 16 F. Supp. 893 (D. Mass. 1936)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
District Court, D. Massachusetts · Federal District Courts
Decided
October 1, 1936
Docket
No. 56799
Judges
Sweeney
Citations
16 F. Supp. 8931936 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1901

Opinion of the Court — Sweeney

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

SWEENEY, District Judge.

In this case the master has found that the bankrupt on January 8, 1935, before a petition in bankruptcy had been filed against him, started with his wife and children to drive to New Orleans by automobile, taking with him $2,500 in cash.

The master has found that he lost $1,-700 gambling at the race tracks in that city; that he started back and arrived at home about the 24th of March, 1935, without funds. On January 18, 1935, an involuntary petition in bankruptcy had been filed against the bankrupt by some of his creditors. However, the bankrupt had no actual notice of the filing of the bankruptcy petition until his return in the latter part of March, 1935.

A creditor has filed objections to the granting of a discharge to this bankrupt, the principal ground being that he transferred, removed, wasted, destroyed, and concealed his assets with an intent to hinder, delay, or defraud his creditors.

While generally the explanation of loss of assets by gambling is looked upon with some suspicion, yet I am bound by the master’s findings in this case that this man’s assets were actually dissipated by gambling. I can find nothing in the law which denies a discharge to a bankrupt because he has gambled. This bankrupt had been put out of active business a month before by a sheriff’s sale. While the more honorable thing for him to have done would have been to distribute to his creditors the $2,500 which he wasted on the New Orleans trip, nevertheless, under the facts as found by the special master, I can find no authority or decisions for refusing a discharge to this bankrupt.

As to the other two grounds set forth by the objecting creditor, the referee has found in substance that the charges were not well founded, and has recommended that the discharge be not denied because of these two grounds. I, therefore, rule that the bankrupt is entitled to a discharge in bankruptcy.

How later courts describe this case

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

1957: 119572026peak 1957 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Angelo Minella, Bankrupt v. H. A. Phillips, Trustee in Bankruptcy245 F.2d 687 (5th Cir. 1957)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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