In re Wilson
District Court, D. Massachusetts
W. P. Wilson was adjudged bankrupt upon the petition of one Harrington, alleging himself a partner with Wilson, and that the firm was insolvent. Wilson denied the partnership, and a jury trial was had, which resulted in a verdict for the petitioner. Wilson now applied for his discharge, but filed no assent of creditors, and had not paid a sufficient dividend to enable him to dispense with the assent, if any is required.
Read the full summary
W. P. Wilson was adjudged bankrupt upon the petition of one Harrington, alleging himself a partner with Wilson, and that the firm was insolvent. Wilson denied the partnership, and a jury trial was had, which resulted in a verdict for the petitioner. Wilson now applied for his discharge, but filed no assent of creditors, and had not paid a sufficient dividend to enable him to dispense with the assent, if any is required. A creditor objected on this ground, and alleged certain frauds besides. E. Avery, for the bankrupt, cited Act 1874, c. 390, § 9 (18 Stat. 180); In re Penn [Case No. 10,927].
1Opinion of the Court
LOWELL, District Judge.
An able argument has been addressed to. me, that section 9 of the new statute absolves the defendant from obtaining the consent of his creditors, *98on the ground that, as to him, the proceedings are compulsory.
It is true that this defendant did not consent to be adjudged bankrupt in connection with one whom he denied to be his copart-ner, and that rule 18 requires, in such cases, notice and other proceedings, including jury trial, if demanded, precisely as if the petition were by creditors; and that the discharge of each partner is separate and distinct from that of any…
2Cited by1 opinion
- In re CarletonDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1902