From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Collins v. Scheeline

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1877
52 Cal. 450 (Cal. 1877)

Opinion

         Appeal from the District Court, Third Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco.

         February 1st, 1869, the defendants gave the plaintiffs two promissory notes due four months after date. On the 31st day of October, 1869, one M. H. Myers, a creditor of the defendants, petitioned the District Court of the United States for the District of California to have the defendants declared bankrupt. On the 9th day of November following, the Court adjudged the defendants to be bankrupt, and on the 17th day of December, 1869, Henry C. Hyde was appointed assignee. On the 22nd day of September, 1872, the plaintiffs proved their claim before the Commissioner in Bankruptcy.

         On the 13th day of January, 1875, the plaintiffs brought this action to recover judgment on the notes. Up to the time of the commencement of the action, no further proceedings had been taken in the bankruptcy proceedings. The Court rendered judgment for the plaintiffs, and the defendants appealed.

         COUNSEL:

         Howe & Rosenbaum, for the Appellants.

         S. M. Wilson, for the Respondents.


         OPINION

         By the Court:

         This action was prematurely brought. It does not appear that the proceedings in bankruptcy have been determined. The action could have been commenced only on obtaining permission of the Court of Bankruptcy. (Rev. Stats. U.S. sec. 5105; Bump on Bankruptcy, p. 685; Dingee v. Becker, 9 Bank. Reg. 508; S.C. Leg. Int. 156.)

         Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.


Summaries of

Collins v. Scheeline

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1877
52 Cal. 450 (Cal. 1877)
Case details for

Collins v. Scheeline

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES COLLINS et al. v. N. SCHEELINE et al.

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Oct 1, 1877

Citations

52 Cal. 450 (Cal. 1877)

Citing Cases

Hoff v. Funkenstein

S.] 220; 13 Bank. Reg. 392-3; Smith v. Dispatch Co. 35 N. J. 60; Sampson v. Burton, 4 Bank. Reg. 914; In re…