In re Knoepfel
District Court, S.D. New York
[In the matter of William H. Knoepfel, a bankrupt]
1Opinion of the Court
BLATCHFORD, District Judge.
In this case, at the first meeting of creditors, Mr. G. A. Seixas claimed to act as the “duly constituted attorney” of Loeschigk, Wesendonck & Co., (a copartnership creditor of the bankrupt, which had proved its debt), in the choice of an assignee. Mr. Seixas presented a letter of attorney, drawn according to form No. 14 of the forms specified in the schedules annexed to the “general orders in bankruptcy,” executed and acknowledged before a register by Gustavus Kutter, as attorney for the co-partnership; but the attorneyship of Kutter was not proved by the oath of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- In re BlankfeinDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1899
- In re Capitol Trading Co.District Court, N.D. New York · 1916