Zeperink v. Card
District Court, E.D. Missouri
Suit in an Account against Factors. The answer sets up a discharge in bankruptcy, and alleges, among other things, that the plaintiffs proved up their claims in bankruptcy, received dividends, and did not object to defendants receiving their discharge. It also denies fraud. Demurrer to answer. The other material facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
McCrary, C. J.,
[orally.) This is a suit upon an account. The defendants set up as their defence a discharge in bankruptcy. The plaintiffs demur to this answer, and the question is whether the discharge is good as against the indebtedness which is the foundation of the suit. The answer admits that said indebtedness was contracted in the course of defendants’ dealings with the plaintiffs. They (defendants) were acting as plaintiffs’ factors in the capacity of commission merchants. It does not appear from the answer that the debt grew out of a single transaction, but it does appear that it is a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Cronan v. CottingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Lemcke v. BoothSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- In re KimballU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1869
- Jones v. RussellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1871
- Treadwell v. HollowayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re BaschDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1899