From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fishman v. Verlin

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
May 13, 1958
255 F.2d 682 (2d Cir. 1958)

Opinion

No. 287, Docket 24791.

Argued April 30, 1958.

Decided May 13, 1958.

Samuel L. Nadler, of Finkel Nadler, New York City, for objecting-creditor-appellant.

Paul H. Riess, of Genzer, Sachs, Marcus Riess, New York City, for bankrupts-appellees.

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and HINCKS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.


This appeal, arising upon stipulated facts, presents but one question, viz., whether a debtor is barred from a discharge under Section 14, sub. c(5) of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 32, sub. c(5), where he was forced into involuntary bankruptcy within six years after entering into an extension arrangement under which only 13% of the debts had been paid. In a comprehensive, well-reasoned opinion, the Referee concluded that an extension arrangement did not fall within the statutory bar and granted the discharge. His action the district judge confirmed.

Section 14(c)(5) states:
"The court shall grant the discharge unless satisfied that the bankrupt * * * (5) * * * within six years prior to the date of the filing of the petition in bankruptcy had been granted a discharge, or had a composition or an arrangement by way of composition or a wage earner's plan by way of composition confirmed under this Act; * * *"

We too uphold the discharge. Especially significant is the distinction between extensions and compositions under § 14, sub. c(5) which is found in the legislative history of the Chandler Act. H.Rep. No. 1409 at p. 29, 75th Cong., 1st Sess.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Fishman v. Verlin

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
May 13, 1958
255 F.2d 682 (2d Cir. 1958)
Case details for

Fishman v. Verlin

Case Details

Full title:Samuel J. FISHMAN, Objecting-Creditor-Appellant, v. Isadore VERLIN, Murray…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: May 13, 1958

Citations

255 F.2d 682 (2d Cir. 1958)

Citing Cases

United States v. Verlinsky

In re Verlin, 148 F. Supp. 660 (E.D.N.Y. 1957). Fishman v. Verlin, 255 F.2d 682 (2d Cir. 1958). This added…

Ropico, Inc. v. City of New York

Indeed, under an extension plan, the wage earner who makes the required payments will have paid his debts in…