Pupke v. Churchill
Missouri Court of Appeals
Error to the St. Louis Circuit Court, Barclay, J. A composition to be effectual as a discharge, must be carried out.— Clark v. White, 12 Pet. 191; Denny v. Merrifleld, 128 Mass. 229 ; In re Leipziger, 18 N. B. R. 267 ; In re Nigby, 20 Fed.
Read the full summary
Error to the St. Louis Circuit Court, Barclay, J. A composition to be effectual as a discharge, must be carried out.— Clark v. White, 12 Pet. 191; Denny v. Merrifleld, 128 Mass. 229 ; In re Leipziger, 18 N. B. R. 267 ; In re Nigby, 20 Fed. Rep. 499; Robinson v. Clement, 73 Ind. 33; 8. P. Nationa, Bank v. Porter, 122 Mass. 308 ; Pierce v. Gilkey, 124 Mass. 300; Home Bank v. Carpenter, 129 Mass. 1. The composition is not effected as a discharge unless the amount agreed upon is actually paid.— In re Hurst, 3 Cent. L. J. 78 ; In re Reiman, 13 N. B. R. 133. Where there has been unreasonable delay…
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
In 1877 the defendant filed his voluntary petition in *336bankruptcy, under the terms of section 17 of the amendatory bankruptcy act, of June 22, 1874, compounded with his creditors on the basis of twenty-five cents on the dollar of his indebtedness, payable in three equal instalments, in three, five, and seven jmars, giving his notes without interest for each payment, to be secured by certain life insurance policies in the aggregate amount of $50,000, of which the first two annual premiums were to be paid to render them non-forfeiting. The plaintiffs in this action did not assent to this…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Clarke v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- National Mount Wollaston Bank v. PorterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Home National Bank v. CarpenterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Pierce v. GilkeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- In re HurstU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1876
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mullin v. MartinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Pupke v. ChurchillSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886