TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Snell

In re Snell, 125 F. 154 (N.D. Cal. 1903)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
District Court, N.D. California · Federal District Courts
Decided
September 29, 1903
Docket
No. 4,294
Judges
Haven
Citations
125 F. 1541903 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81
Headnotes
1. Bankruptcy—Liens—Right to Enforce Valid Attachment. A creditor wbo obtained a valid lien by attachment on property of a bankrupt more than four months prior to the bankruptcy is entitled to prosecute the action to judgment, and a sale of the attached property thereafter. ¶ 1. See Bankruptcy, vol. 6, Cent. Dig. § 331.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Haven

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

DE HAVEN, District Judge.

This is a motion made by Albert Hirschfeld for a modification of the order heretofore made staying proceedings in an action pending in the superior court of the county of Nevada, state of California, entitled “Albert Hirschfeld, Plaintiff, vs. B. F. Snell and J. D. Fleming, Partners under the Firm Name of Snell & Fleming, Defendants.” It appears from the affidavit filed in support of the motion (and the fact is not disputed) that the moving party, who is plaintiff in the action referred to, obtained a valid attachment upon certain property of the bankrupts more than four months prior to the commencement of the bankruptcy proceedings. Upon the authority of Metcalf v. Barker, 187 U. S. 165 , 23 Sup. Ct. 67, 47 L. Ed. 122 , and In re Beaver Coal Co., 113 Fed. 889 , 51 C. C. A. 519 , it must be held that the lien of this attachment, having been obtained more than four months prior thereto, was not affected by the bankruptcy proceedings; and from this it follows the plaintiff in the action referred to should be permitted to prosecute it to judgment, and satisfy the same by an execution sale of the attached property. See, also, in support of this conclusion, Brandenburg on Bankruptcy (3d Ed.) § 1114.

Motion granted.

How later courts describe this case

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

1905: 11907: 11916: 11919: 11926: 11931: 11937: 11938: 219052026peak 1938 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Straton v. New283 U.S. 318 (1931)
  2. In re Jersey Island Packing Co.138 F. 625 (9th Cir. 1905)
  3. Morris W. Haft & Bros. v. Wells93 F.2d 991 (10th Cir. 1937)
  4. In re Cherokee Public Service Co.94 F.2d 536 (8th Cir. 1938)
  5. Hambley v. White133 S.E. 399 (N.C. 1926)
  6. In re Koslowski153 F. 823 (M.D. Penn. 1907)

Most recent

  1. In re Cherokee Public Service Co.94 F.2d 536 (8th Cir. 1938)
  2. Dickinson v. Orr94 F.2d 536 (8th Cir. 1938)
  3. Morris W. Haft & Bros. v. Wells93 F.2d 991 (10th Cir. 1937)
  4. Straton v. New283 U.S. 318 (1931)
  5. Hambley v. White133 S.E. 399 (N.C. 1926)
  6. American Improvement Co. v. Lilienthal184 P. 692 (Cal. Ct. App. 1919)

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 2

DepthCaseCited by
Metcalf v. Barker, 187 U.S. 165 (1902) 316
In re Beaver Coal Co., 113 F. 889 (9th Cir. 1902) 16

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