In re Foreman
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
This review is sought to ascertain whether the action of the court below in extending bankrupt’s time was or was not within our ruling in Re MacLauchlan (C. C. A.) 9 F.(2d) 534. On that point we express no opinion, feeling obliged to dismiss the petition for technical reasons, something we are the less unwilling to do because it was admitted at bar (though not in the record) that the creditor, Dudley, is not aggrieved by the bankrupt’s procuring a discharge, inasmuch as that creditor was so erroneously scheduled as to be unaffected by the bankruptcy.
We dismiss the petition, however, because…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In re MitchellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- National Park Bank v. LanahanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1883
- In re MacLauchlanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- Steger v. StegerIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
- Welsh v. PennieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cook v. Du Pont Cellophane Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
- In re California Lumber Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 1959
- In re Gilbert's Hotel, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969