In re Aspinwall
District Court, S.D. New York
In Bankruptcy. Motion to expunge proof of debt. The adjudication was made in this case January 27, 1873, on the bankrupt’s own petition. He was a merchant in New York, and failed on the fifth of December, 1872. Prior to that time he had been accustomed to purchase goods from Maclean, Maris & Co., of London, who, upon their various shipments, were entitled to draw on Brown, Shipley & Co. within certain limits of credit.
Read the full summary
In Bankruptcy. Motion to expunge proof of debt. The adjudication was made in this case January 27, 1873, on the bankrupt’s own petition. He was a merchant in New York, and failed on the fifth of December, 1872. Prior to that time he had been accustomed to purchase goods from Maclean, Maris & Co., of London, who, upon their various shipments, were entitled to draw on Brown, Shipley & Co. within certain limits of credit. The last invoice of goods was dated October 31, 1872, and the goods arrived in New York prior to the.first of December and were stored by Mr. Aspinwall. On December 10, 1872,…
1Opinion of the Court
Brown, D. J.
It seems to me impossible to hold that the goods returned in this case'were a preference “on account of the same debt or claim” that has been proved, within the meaning of section 23 of the act of 1867, now section 5084 of the Devised Statutes. Different shipments are presumptively independent debts; the evidence shows the right to draw upon them independently. The goods returned were the identical goods shipped in the last invoice, and were obviously intended as a rescission pro tanto of that particular purchase. Had they been sold or transferred by the bankrupt to Maclean, Maris…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In re HollandDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1873
- In re LeeDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1876
3Cited by2 opinions
- In re Rogers Milling Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1900
- In re Wolf & LevyDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1903