Cromwell v. Comegys
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the County Court of Sumter. Assumpsit by the defendant in error, as assignee in bankruptcy, against the plaintiffs in error. From a bill of exceptions it appears, that the suit was on an account surrendered by one Slade in bankruptcy.
Read the full summary
Error to the County Court of Sumter. Assumpsit by the defendant in error, as assignee in bankruptcy, against the plaintiffs in error. From a bill of exceptions it appears, that the suit was on an account surrendered by one Slade in bankruptcy. That Slade was a bankrupt under the clause of the late act providing for voluntary bankruptcy — that his debts were $15,000, and the assets surrendered by him $1,000. Under these circumstances, Slade’s deposition was offered, to prove the debt, and admitted by the Court against the objection of the defendants, to which they excepted, and which they now…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
— In England the bankrupt is not a competent witness for the assignee, to increase the funds, by establishing the debt, unless he releases all his interest to the as j signee, in the surplus which may remain after the debts are paid. [Butler v. Cooke, Cowp. 70; Carlisle v. Eddy, 2 C. & P. 234.] It is however urged, that our bankrupt law permitting voluntary bankruptcies, differs from the English law, as in such a case, the presumption must be, that there is no surplus, and that in this particular case, there can be none, as the debts are fifteen thousand dollars, and the effects of the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- King v. RemingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Boyd v. OlveyIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Houston v. PrewittSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846