Spalding v. Dixon
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit, to recover the interest due upon several promissory notes, bearing date June 6, 1842. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and also his certificate of discharge in bankruptcy under the act of Congress of 1841. The plaintiff replied, that the notes were not provable under the commission in bankruptcy, and so were not barred. Trial by the court, November Adjourned Term, 1847. —Bennett, J., presiding. On trial the facts were proved as follows.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, to recover the interest due upon several promissory notes, bearing date June 6, 1842. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and also his certificate of discharge in bankruptcy under the act of Congress of 1841. The plaintiff replied, that the notes were not provable under the commission in bankruptcy, and so were not barred. Trial by the court, November Adjourned Term, 1847. —Bennett, J., presiding. On trial the facts were proved as follows. The defendant filed his petition in bankruptcy in the district court of the United States for Vermont on the twenty sixth day of April,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Kellogg, J.
The only question raised in this case is, whether the notes in suit are barred by the defendant’s certificate of discharge in bankruptcy.
It is urged by the plaintiff) that the certificate relates back to the time of filing the petition in bankruptcy, and is only a bar to such debts, as then existed against the bankrupt. If this proposition be admitted, it would necessarily follow, that the certificate would not be a bar to the recovery of the notes in suit; for there is no pretence, that they had any existence anterior to the sixth of June,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Downer v. RowellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
- Fernald v. ClarkSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1892
- Stockwell v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1879