Perkins v. Fisher
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 3 — EQUITY— APPEAL FROM DAVIESS CIRCUIT COURT. The point of difference is as to the scope and legal effect of the discharge in bankruptcy granted to Carter & Fisher, and the individual members thereof. It is clear that appellee cannot have assets as ¿ member of the firm of Wm. Fisher & Bro., and yet be discharged from the debts of the firm. (67 Mo., 140; 24 Am. Rep., 17; 1 Bank.
Read the full summary
Case 3 — EQUITY— APPEAL FROM DAVIESS CIRCUIT COURT. The point of difference is as to the scope and legal effect of the discharge in bankruptcy granted to Carter & Fisher, and the individual members thereof. It is clear that appellee cannot have assets as ¿ member of the firm of Wm. Fisher & Bro., and yet be discharged from the debts of the firm. (67 Mo., 140; 24 Am. Rep., 17; 1 Bank. Reg., 341; 3 B. R., 172; lb., 48; 7 lb., 399; 15 lb., 417; Ogden v. Reed, 13 Bush, 582; 16 N. B. R., 48; 15 lb., 417; 11 lb., 462.) It has long been a settled question, under the English bankrupt act, that a…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE PRYOR
delivered the opinion of the court.
The record in this case shows that the appellee was a member of two firms — one under the style of Wm. Fisher & Bro. and the other of Carter & Fisher. Carter & Fisher filed their petition in bankruptcy, asking to be relieved from the firm liabilities of Carter & Fisher, and their individual indebtedness
*12They obtained a discharge in the usual form, the firm and individual debts, and after this was done the appellant instituted this action on two bills of exchange, accepted by the firm of Wm. Fisher & Bro'., for several hundred dollars. The appellee…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In re NoonanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin · 1873
3Cited by1 opinion
- Clarke v. StanwoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896