In re Sheehan
District Court, E.D. Michigan
[In'the matter of Daniel Sheehan, a bankrupt] On motion to dismiss the petition for adjudication of bankruptcy, and all the proceedings had thereunder. The petitioning -creditor’s debt is alleged in the petition to be founded on a judgment of the circuit court of the county of Wayne, state of Michigan, for six thousand fire hundred dollars in her favor and against the alleged bankrupt, for damages for a breach of promise to marry.
Read the full summary
[In'the matter of Daniel Sheehan, a bankrupt] On motion to dismiss the petition for adjudication of bankruptcy, and all the proceedings had thereunder. The petitioning -creditor’s debt is alleged in the petition to be founded on a judgment of the circuit court of the county of Wayne, state of Michigan, for six thousand fire hundred dollars in her favor and against the alleged bankrupt, for damages for a breach of promise to marry. The judgment was entered March 7th, 1873. A writ of error was issued on the 8th, and notice of it to plaintiff’s attorney served on the 10th of the same month. The…
1Opinion of the Court
LONGYEAR, District Judge.
First, as to the effect of the writ of error and stay of execution upon the judgment, as a provable debt in bankruptcy. But for these proceedings the judgment is, no doubt, a provable debt. See, also, In re Sidle [Case No. 12,844). This is not questioned by the learned counsel for respondent, unless the issue and levy of execution deprived it of that quality, which will be considered in its order. If, however, the writ of error and stay of execution deprived the judgment of its provable character within the meaning of the bankrupt act, then, of course, the petition…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Allen, Ball & Co. v. Mayor of SavannahSupreme Court of Georgia · 1851
- People ex rel. Ætna Live Stock Fire & Tornado Insurance v. Judge of the Wayne Circuit CourtMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
- O'Flynn v. EagleMichigan Supreme Court · 1859
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re HassenbuschCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1901