Case ID: f-cas_11/html/0463-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BLATCHFORD, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Case No. 6,039.
    In re HANSEN.
    [2 N. B. R. 211 (Quarto, 75).] 
    
    District Court, S. D. New York.
    1869.
    Bankruptcy — Discharge—Specifications op Fraud.
    Vague and general specifications reciting fraud, &c., will not be allowed in opposition to discharge.
    John T. Wilson, Alexander Simpson and James W. Emery, trading under the firm name of John T. Wilson & Company, of 73 Fulton street in the city and county of New York and state of New York, creditors, having proved their debt against the estate of said Hans J. Hansen a bankrupt, and having received notice of his petition for a discharge from his debts, do hereby oppose the granting of said discharge, and for the grounds of such opposition do file the following specification: First. That said bankrupt has wil-fully sworn falsely in his affidavit annexed to his petition, schedule and inventory in relation to a material fact concerning his estate, in swearing that said schedule contains a true statement of the property owned by him, and that he has no property not mentioned in said schedule; the fact being that said bankrupt has real estate not mentioned in said schedule, which is owned in trust for ■him and liable for his debts, and to be sold for the benefit of his creditors. Second. That he has concealed a part of his estate, namely, said real estate. Third. He has been guilty of fraud in delivery of his property to his assignee. Fourth. That he has made fraudulent preferences.
    
      
       [Reprinted by permission.]
    
   BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

The specifications filed in opposition to a discharge are too vague and general to be triable. A discharge is granted.