New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-05-02
THE COURTS.

JURISDICTION OF A COUNT IN ONE DISTRICT OVER
BANKRUPTs IN ANOTHER DIsrluCT-TfK LAW OF
AnJUDrcAT1oNs AND INJUNCTIoNs IN VOLUNTARY
AND IN INVOLUNTARY PROCEEDINGS IN BANK
RUPTCY.
Isaac Ulrich. Nathan Ulrlch and Leopold
Inrich we're adudcated hanlrupts in the United States
District Court on March o. 1869 and April g. 1902 the
creditors unon whose petition such adjudication was had
cnrcsented 90 the Court that the greater part
h,pt,s property consisted Of merchandise in Illinois:
that IT, or a Tart OF IL, in the possession OF
kaufman to whom the bankrupts had made a fraudu-
liant assignment January 1909 that since such assign
rneut was made II. 3. Cabin a. Co.. and Steiner &
Brother Of this city had caused on the ground Of their
claims creditors OF the blnkrups said property 70 be
attached and that suits were pending in Illinois in favor
OF Clafin Co. and Steiner & Brother against the bank
rp's IN connection with the attachment referred to.
The petition prayed for order restraining kaufman
from making any disposition Of any OF the property
under said assignment aud from taking any proceedings
whatever under It. and also enioinne Cshin Co and
Steiner Brother from taking further steps in their
actions in Illinois until the question Of the discharge OF
the bankrupts should be determined on April 2, 1862
the Court made order granting the PRAYER Of the pe
ton.
No assignee in bankruptcy appointed until May O.
1862 On Arril 1862 the Injunction order was served
Michael Steiner, OF the rm Of Steiner Brother'
in this district In October. 1870 attachment proceed
Jugs in the Of United States on beha OF the
assignee In bankruptcy relator, were begun N the
court for that district against Michael steiner 10 punish
him for an alleged contempt in violating the luhcuon
AGAINST Steiner Brother by proceeding after the ser
vice OF the Injunction order with the sale OF the at
taehed ropertv in the suit brought bv them, and he
was aaiudged guilty OF such contempt He then ap-
pied ~ the court behalf Of himself and firm 70 va
cate the Injunction order the ground that it was
irregular and that tie court did not have jurisdiction 70
grant t.
Il was commended nv Roger A Pryor. steiners conn
se that the Court. as Court Of Bankruptcy, had no
Jurisdiction TO enion Steiner Brother the terms OF
the Injunction order, the application Of creditor
Of tha banE-upts made after adjudication, by
patiton 500 the exercise OF the summary Jurisdiction
,ufarrd DIV Section II the Bankruptcy act in the
cy.f-a 0f any power Of granting inuucfons conferred
v scott aud 40 uf the act and tlat the INJUNCTION
coud boz Granted ouIv in q dna suit equity under the
Jurisdiction conferred hv Section OF tne act.
IL tle course OF long decision m TINS case gwen
Yesterday denying the motion 10 vacae, Judge BlAtch-
ford slvs. substance:
apparent the petition Tor the Injunction PRO
ccedld regards steiner Brother. on the idea that
they caul D." euiOned under Section y ~ the e. from
proceeding rtIer with their suit against The b9usrupS
o. collect their debt uu the question OF the
OF le baurupts should have been determined nut the
C0urt, granting the injunction only restrained olelntr
Brother from further proceedings aehu.l !RepIuIi
ery which. the suit against the bankr1pS. they had
att cled .leT property The question Of the Juris-
~ u restrained r. b. Cadin Co. and steiner Brother
was raised u the contempt proceedings which were |
taken against member Of both Of the nTns rtSpeet-
iyev ana uttose proceedings the Court held as 0oWS
r,srr1 OF .c,Soa was offered % M15a g. ias5 The a,taca
e r ss ban r1ptev proeeircs Having aotaortv by virtue
cfil, a ll 20 issue warrant TO ~ messenger 10 axe Posses
o'e ia,lur. estate and Of le property atcsel as tlt prop
crfr luupts and which the frs IT 'he respondents
claim -11i 9' virtue Of ioe dissolved siae1mentS ms
respondents drus from urt against toe attached
hon d. gwen by section Of le act collect and s"se OF
al. t5is,.e al. WI us,e.ssr, to It's jurisdiction.
This injunction issued special petition 70 that
effect. presented by the Deutionng creditors after adj
flIicltluu before the appointment the assignee
ANA te Court having jurisdiction OF the had author
% issue Injunction restraining interference with
The question thus disposed OF raised
f.re H9r tbe pTygCr To stav proceedings gwen bv
Section ~ no the act, is limited 20 stay 20 he made on
injunction provided for by section 40 Of the
lct On voluntary cases, Is an injunction when
OF adj IdCluu ana that there ls no other power gwen
rae Court bv the act 20 grant inuncons, except m
u,l o.. .it oC', IA V,-, y, ,, ~ va" Us. md
as section provides only FOR application by the I
bankrupt stay proceedings that be may Dee offered
an opp6rtuuv TO obtain his discharge I'M order 10 he
able 90 plead n par Of AL proceedings 70 collect the
creditor, debit this Court D, without authority III vol
uutary cases. as well as IN involuntary cases.
OF assignee. 70 restrain interference with |
in the custody Of the Court The doctrine go to
extent. Tn involuntary cases and adjudication then.
variant 20 the Marshal 10 take possession Of al OF
tie b8ukrups estate but ID voluntary cases there IS no
warrant of seizure. There may be no one claiming an
adverse interest touching ile pr4Perly or mere is
n
Jaw through tine te foeo dS>ouoh OF que allachuen,
tle moment the assignee Obtains the assignment winch
under section Of the act. against any
person claiming adverse interest touching
least n sol. uiar cases que Court s aeoIuinE lo tAe
doctrine advanced, pOweress between the adjudication
AID tfe uMe the assignee receives MS a-slEAlueh l
restrain any person from -nleitihS WIN 'Ae d'l.ou
property the DauEIuuts ~ It's custody, unless they
can Doe induced 20 apply Tor such nleIieIehct iIs '
mot ie gnI ir ai n lTst Of Sm3seTnP the
I.H Tad f||r ID HfH
thr necessary means OF malhldnlls Jus .u5lOI4& aud
jurisdiction respect OF such property IL has the uI-
qualified power punish Tor contempt those Who inter
IL u. Lav. le subsidiary power Of restraining persons
on injunction ron lhtIit IIIt VII 1u'A anu
Of pumsAug them Tor contempt IL they usODey Inc III
Junction
After citing numerous authorities 10 support Of his
position. Judge BlatchfOrd continues:
There d. DO sound reason whatever gwen for permit
ting Ae assignee after his appointment or the Dankrnpt
after adjudication ana before the appointment OF an
assignee. 10 procure an injunction OF the character
lhlca'I "L-tu -houiu 4AilyC i-l,i"l =. ~. 49,.
grant Injunction, after adjudication ana before
The appointment of assignee, on the application OF
any creditor .huch e's on e PstI.lou 81 aLy
who has tine fact OF Adjudication, debt established
by the record There j. 10 assignee the bankrupt Is
not surpassed 70 be looking siec1 aiteE l.t interest ~
rs creditors, aud he may bee IN COLLISION WIN the cred
proper equitable power Of the Court should De
SET n motion hy the pettoning creditor or even by any
creditor either u voluntary or IN an involuntary case,
the action OF the Court being for the Denent Of the cred
itOrs generally"
OF smith AIT Mason "a Wallace, 49, are opposed
u the Jurisdiction have maintained but do not so
understand That case In the present case the petition
watch the injunction granted prayed for no ad
3udcaou 70 the rights claims Of Steiner Brother,
and the had not arrived when any formal suit
could under Section Of the act De brought because
that Is determined by the Of smith agt Mason is
that District Court sitting ia bankruptcy, in the
eros. OF tee summary jurisdiction conferred 10y Section
II OF the act cannot proceed the petition Of
hgnee 10 bankruptcy 10 determine right Of property
a. between such assignee and person who claims the
ftnd Tho