Legal Opinion

In re Matson

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided June 2, 1903PublishedCited by 8 opinions

No. 310. In Bankruptcy. Sur creditors’ petition. Case stated.

1Opinion of the Court

ARCHBALD, District Judge.

No doubt the respondent, as the owner of a farm and lately engaged in its cultivation, would, in common parlance, be classed as a “farmer.” But while he still owns his farm and resides upon it, he has leased it for the current year on a *744money rent to his son, and had at the time the petition in bankruptcy was filed against him. He is not now, in consequence, engaged' in farming, within the meaning of the act, any more than any one who owns a farm, but has committed its tillage to another, and he is to be judged by his present occupation, and not by his past; nor can…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Tiffany v. La Plume Condensed Milk Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1905
  2. Counts v. Columbus Buggy Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1913
  3. In Re DayDistrict Court, E.D. Illinois · 1935
  4. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Bridgeport v. BeachCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1936
  5. In re InmanDistrict Court, D. Wyoming · 1932

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API