Dudley's Case
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania
In a former case, Judge Randall decided that the property of a petitioner in bankruptcy, was divested out of him, only from the time of the decree of bankruptcy;1 and accordingly, allowed an execution creditor who had made a levy after the petition had been filed, but before a decree had passed, to proceed with a sale of the property levied on. In a subsequent case the question was again brought before the court.
Read the full summary
In a former case, Judge Randall decided that the property of a petitioner in bankruptcy, was divested out of him, only from the time of the decree of bankruptcy;1 and accordingly, allowed an execution creditor who had made a levy after the petition had been filed, but before a decree had passed, to proceed with a sale of the property levied on. In a subsequent case the question was again brought before the court. Dudley filed a petition on the 29th of August last; but before a decree could by the terms of the act be obtained, several executions had issued against him; and on the 9th of…
1Opinion of the Court
BALDWIN, Circuit Justice.
Two points are involved in the motion pending in the district court, and adjourned for decision here. Both points will therefore be considered. The question which has been presented on the first argument, arises on the last proviso in the second, and the first clause in the third section of the act of 1S41. That proviso is in these words: “Provided also, that nothing in this act contained, shall be construed to annul, destroy, or impair any lawful rights of married women or minors, or any liens, mortgages, or other securities on property real or personal, which may be…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Beardslee v. BeaupreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Clark v. BinningerThe Superior Court of New York City · 1870