In re McKibben
District Court, E.D. Michigan
These were motions (1) to vacate the order to show cause why [James A.] McKibben should not be adjudicated a bankrupt, for the reason that, at the time of granting the order, sufficient grounds did not exist, and no proper and lawful showing was made therefor.
Read the full summary
These were motions (1) to vacate the order to show cause why [James A.] McKibben should not be adjudicated a bankrupt, for the reason that, at the time of granting the order, sufficient grounds did not exist, and no proper and lawful showing was made therefor. (2) vacate the provisional warrant of arrest, on the ground that it did not appear that there was probable cause for believing that Mc-Kibben was about to leave the district, or to remove or conceal bis property, or to make any fraudulent disposition thereof.
1Opinion of the Court
BROWN, District Judge.
The motion to vacate the order to show cause is a very general one, and does not distinctly apprise the petitioning creditors what defects in the proceedings are. relied upon; but, as no objection was taken to it upon this ground, I shall proceed to dispose of the case as made upon the argument.
First. Principal objection to the petition is that it does not appear upon its face that the requisite number of creditors hare joined in it. The 39th section of the bankrupt act, as amended January 22, 1S74 [18 Stat. 17S], provides that any person who has committed an act of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Starbuck v. MurrayNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Dyckman v. . the Mayor, C. of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
- Wright v. DouglassNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Jackson ex dem. M'Fail v. CrawfordsNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Hall v. BrazletonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1867
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.