In re Rainsford
District Court, N.D. New York
' The petitioner in this case is a banking association and a creditor of said bankrupt [D. A. Rainsford], as stated in its petition, verified in this case by its president on the twenty-seventh day of September, eighteen hundred and seventy. Said petitioner has no knowledge of the alleged fraudulent acts of the said bankrupt stated in his petition, till after the granting of his discharge.
1Opinion of the Court
By
J. D. HUSBANDS, Referee:
The history of this case, so far as I deem it pertinent to the issues referred to me, is substantially as follows:
On and before January twenty-seventh, eighteen hundred and fifty-eight, the said bankrupt was the owner of the seventy-six acre farm described or referred to in the petition and answer in this case, together with other property, real and personal. On that day he and Mary Jane Rainsford. his wife, executed to Platt Carpenter, her father, a deed of said farm, subject to a mortgage to one Dibble therein mentioned, on which was then owing the sum of two…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Carpenter v. . RoeNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
- Hamilton v. PeopleNew York Supreme Court · 1870
- Perine v. DunnNew York Court of Chancery · 1818
- Waverly National Bank v. HalseyNew York Supreme Court · 1870
- Wilson v. Ferguson & LamontNew York Supreme Court · 1854