Clement v. Bullens
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Petition in equity, filed November 22,1892, against George S. Bullens and John Brooks, as assignees in insolvency of the estate of the Potter-Lovell Company, an insolvent debtor, alleging that on July 8, 1892, a petition was filed in the Court of Insolvency, by one or both of the respondents as assignees, praying that the petitioner be summoned to appear before that court, and submit to an examination in respect to the matters set forth in the petition; that a summons was…
Read the full summary
Petition in equity, filed November 22,1892, against George S. Bullens and John Brooks, as assignees in insolvency of the estate of the Potter-Lovell Company, an insolvent debtor, alleging that on July 8, 1892, a petition was filed in the Court of Insolvency, by one or both of the respondents as assignees, praying that the petitioner be summoned to appear before that court, and submit to an examination in respect to the matters set forth in the petition; that a summons was issued, and served on the petitioner, commanding him to appear before the Court of Insolvency and submit to an examination…
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
The objections urged to the order of the Court of Insolvency that Clement should appear and answer are as follows.
It is said that the petition on which the order was made purports to be brought by two assignees, but is signed and sworn to by only one person, and by him without official addition, so that, as far as appears, “ the above named George S. Bullens ” mentioned in the affidavit may be some one other than the assignee of that name, and may not be. a “ person interested in the estate," as required by Pub. Sts. c. 157, § 70.
The answer to this is that the person signing the petition by…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hadley v. WatsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
- Binney v. Globe National BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- American Carpet Lining Co. v. ChipmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Jackman v. City of GloucesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Smart v. HoweMichigan Supreme Court · 1855
3Cited by5 opinions
- Meldrum v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1907
- Black v. Minneapolis & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Cook Borden & Co. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
- Ramer v. WrightSupreme Court of Colorado · 1916
- Sargent v. ShepardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1920