In re Paddock
District Court, E.D. Michigan
[This case was formerly heard upon the question of payment to certain creditors of witness fees. Case No. 10,658.) The issues arise upon the three several petitions of Theodore C. Etheredge, assignee of the estate of the said bankrupt [S. Paddock], to reject the debts of certain creditors which have been proven before the register, viz: of Dyer & Wilder, of Toledo, Ohio, for one hundred and ninety dollars; of Markscheffel Brothers, of the same place, for three hundred and…
Read the full summary
[This case was formerly heard upon the question of payment to certain creditors of witness fees. Case No. 10,658.) The issues arise upon the three several petitions of Theodore C. Etheredge, assignee of the estate of the said bankrupt [S. Paddock], to reject the debts of certain creditors which have been proven before the register, viz: of Dyer & Wilder, of Toledo, Ohio, for one hundred and ninety dollars; of Markscheffel Brothers, of the same place, for three hundred and fourteen dollars and seventy-nine-cents, and of Marshall Brothers & Co., of the same place, for one hundred and forty-nine…
1Opinion of the Court
LONGYEAR, District Judge.
A preliminary objection was made on behalf of the creditors to the jurisdiction of the court, “for the reason that they are entitled to have the validity of their said claims adjudicated, and determined in a court of law, and by a jury.” I do not consider this objection tenable in the present form of proceeding, for two reasons: First, because the creditors stand before the court in the attitude of plaintiffs, themselves invoking the jurisdiction to which they object; and, second, because by general order in bankruptcy. num*974ber twenty-six, ample provision is made for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Alderton v. BuchozMichigan Supreme Court · 1854
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re PeaseDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1887