In re Neff
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. The following is the . opinion of the District Court by Thompson, District Judge: These petitions present the same questions, and will be considered together. The petitioners, as creditors, proved claims against the bankrupt, which were allowed but afterwards were expunged upon the ground that they were not provable.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. The following is the . opinion of the District Court by Thompson, District Judge: These petitions present the same questions, and will be considered together. The petitioners, as creditors, proved claims against the bankrupt, which were allowed but afterwards were expunged upon the ground that they were not provable. They were expunged upon the petitions of the trustee, which were submitted to the referee upon an agreed statement of facts which reads as follows: “We agree that the makers of the promissory…
1Opinion of the Court
BURTON, Circuit Judge.
These three appeals have been heard together, as they involve the provability of a number of claims against the bankrupt of like character. In tenor and substance the contracts are alike. That presented by Emily M. Nichols is an example and is as follows:
“$2,500.00 Bellaire, Ohio, Feb. 7, 1905.
“Two years after date, I, we, or either of us promise to pay to the order of Miss Emily M. Nichols twenty-five hundred and no 100 dollars at the office of the Avery-Caldwell Mfg. Co., upon surrender of certificate No. 38 for 2,500 shares of preferred stock of said company, value…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Roehm v. HorstSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- United States v. BehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Lovell v. St. Louis Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Carr v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Ralston v. TurpinSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Pennsylvania Steel Co. v. New York City Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1912
- Pollack v. PollackTexas Commission of Appeals · 1932
- Retsloff v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- Samuels v. E. F. Drew & Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1923
- In Re Owl Drug Co.District Court, D. Nevada · 1935
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.