TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Quine

In re Quine, 38 F. Supp. 869 (E.D. La. 1941)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Federal District Courts
Decided
January 27, 1941
Docket
No. 840
Judges
Caillouet
Citations
38 F. Supp. 8691941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3353

Opinion of the Court — Caillouet

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

CAILLOUET, District Judge. .

The petition herein seeks no other relief than a desired Court order to have reopened the bankruptcy proceedings which were definitely closed on September 20th, 1934, so as to have alleged unscheduled real estate assets of the then bankrupt now administered upon; the petitioner represents himself to have been (at the time of the filing of the bankrupt’s schedules in bankruptcy in 1934), and to now be, an un-. secured creditor of the then bankrupt.

The petitioner is without interest to so pray for the re-opening of said proceedings ; a petition to reopen a bankrupt’s estate on the ground that it was closed before it was fully administered can only be filed by one who has an interest and will be benefited thereby. In re Meyer, D.C.D. Oregon 1910, 181 F. 904 .

The present petitioner is barred by Section 57, sub. n of the Bankruptcy Act, as amended, 11 U.S.C.A. 93, sub. n, from now filing and presenting his alleged claim, granting that his petition otherwise makes out a case, in the discretion of the Court, for the re-opening of the bankruptcy proceedings.

The statute specifying the time for filing claims in bankruptcy is prohibitive, and gives the Court no discretionary power to extend the time. Bowman et al. v. MacPherson et al, 10 Cir., 1937, 93 F.2d 318 ; In re Silk, 2 Cir., 1932, 55 F.2d 917 ; In re Giera, D.C.S.D.New York 1935, 12 F.Supp. 340 ; In re Meyer, supra.

Even though a creditor had no notice or knowledge of the proceedings during the time allowed by law for the proving of claims, and’the estate is still undistributed, he may not prove his debt after the lapse of such period. In re Muskoka Lumber Company, D.C.W.D.New York 1904, 127 F. 886 .

The petition in the present case does not negative the existence of such knowledge; in fact, petitioner’s pleadings suggest that he was fully advised as to the filing and closing of the bankruptcy proceedings in 1934, when the same occurred.

Ordinarily, a claim in bankruptcy must be filed within 6 months after the first date set for the first meeting of creditors. 11 U.S.C.A. § 93 , sub. n. Six additional months are granted to creditors who are infants or insane persons without guardians, without notice of the bankruptcy proceedings.

The first and only date set for the first meeting of the creditors in this present case was March 6, 1934, and on that date said first and only meeting was convened and held.

Where a creditor fails to prove his claim during the period of time set, he has no standing to apply for the re-opening of the bankrutpcy proceedings on the ground that there was fraudulent concealment of assets by the bankrupt. Chapman v. Whitsett et al., 8 Cir., 1916, 236 F. 873 ; In re Knosco, D.C.N.D.Ohio W.D.1913, 208 F. 201 ; In re Meyer, D.C.D.Oregon 1910, 181 F. 904 ; In re Paine, D.C.W.D.Kentucky 1904, 127 F. 246 .

Here the petitioner does not even charge that the omission of the real estate in question was due to fraudulent intent and that he was misled thereby.

The sought-for order of re-opening is, therefore, denied.

How later courts describe this case

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

1941: 11945: 119412026peak 1941 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Gerber v. Fruchter147 F.2d 120 (2d Cir. 1945)
  2. In re Dunn38 F. Supp. 1017 (W.D. Wash. 1941)

Most recent

  1. Gerber v. Fruchter147 F.2d 120 (2d Cir. 1945)
  2. In re Dunn38 F. Supp. 1017 (W.D. Wash. 1941)

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 8

DepthCaseCited by
In re Meyer, 181 F. 904 (D. Or. 1910) 13
In re Paine, 127 F. 246 (W.D. Ky. 1904) 19
In re Silk, 55 F.2d 917 (2d Cir. 1932) 17
Bowman v. MacPherson, 93 F.2d 318 (10th Cir. 1937) 7
In re Knosco, 208 F. 201 (N.D. Ohio 1913) 7
Chapman v. Whitsett, 236 F. 873 (8th Cir. 1916) 6
In re Muskoka Lumber Co., 127 F. 886 (W.D.N.Y. 1904) 5
In re Giera, 12 F. Supp. 340 (S.D.N.Y. 1935) 3

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