In Re Kardos
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtHough, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). Neither the Bankruptcy Act (Comp. St. §§ 9585-9656) nor the General Orders prescribe in detail how a proof of debt shall be drawn. Section 57 (Comp. St. § 9641) and forms 31 and 32 give outlines, but nothing more. The exact wording of a proof of debt, like a pleading, must always be largely a matter of practice or habit.
It cannot be doubted that a proof can be submitted, making claim against-both a partnership estate and the estates of the individual partners. There is nothing necessarily inconsistent m making such demand. In re Coe (C. C. A.) 183 F. 745,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bowen v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1906
- In re CoeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910
- In re KesslerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1911
- In re McCallum & McCallumDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1904
- In re CoeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1909
3Cited by9 opinions
- In Re G. L. Miller & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
- Tarbell v. Crex Carpet Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1937
- United States v. RothCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- William J. Rochelle, Jr., Trustee v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
- In Re Nucorp Energy, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. California · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.