Fishman v. Verlin
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
This appeal, arising upon stipulated facts, presents but one question, viz., whether a debtor is barred from a discharge under Section 14, sub. c(5) of the Bankruptcy Act,1 11 U.S.C.A. § 32, sub. c(5), where he was forced into involuntary bankruptcy within six years after entering into an extension arrange*683ment under which only 13% of the debts had been paid. In a comprehensive, well-reasoned opinion, the Referee concluded that an extension arrangement did not fall within the statutory bar and granted the discharge. His action the district judge confirmed.
We too uphold the discharge.…
2Cited by6 opinions
- In the Matter of Donald E. Holmes, Debtor, in Proceedings for a Wage Earner Plan Under Chapter XiiiCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1962
- In the Matter of Warren W. Perry, Debtor. Warren W. Perry v. Commerce Loan CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
- In re AutryDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1962
- Fishman v. VerlinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
- United States v. Isadore Verlinsky, A/K/A Isadore Verlin, and Murray Verlinsky, A/K/A Murray VerlinCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.