Case Name: In re CAMPBELL
Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1900-07-07
Citations: 102 F. 686
Docket Number: 
Parties: In re CAMPBELL.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 102
Pages: 686–687

Head Matter:
In re CAMPBELL.
(District Court, E. D. Wisconsin.
July 7, 1900.)
Bankruptcy — Preferred Claims — Wages Due Laborers.
' Tlie claim of a laboring man against an estate in bankruptcy for wages, for services rendered the bankrupt, which is assigned after the filing of the petition in bankruptcy, is entitled to allowance, under Bankr. Act, § 64b, as a preferred claim in the hands of the assignee.
In. Bankruptcy. On question certified by the referee, — whether the claims of four laborers for wages earned within three months before the date of filing the petition in bankruptcy, respectively amounting to $41.47, $26.82, $25, and $29.28, all assigned to the claimant after the commencement of the proceedings in bankruptcy, are entitled to allowance as debts which have priority.
Julius E. Iioehr, for claimant.
Nickerson, Boemer & Aarons, for trustee.

Opinion:
SEAMAN, District Judge.
Section 64b, Bankr. Act, clearly provides that debts of the character stated shall have priority, and the only question is whether they can be so allowred in favor of an as-signee. A provision of like effect under the act of 1867 was construed by Judge Blatchford to authorize such allowance (In re Brown, 4 Ben. 142, Fed. Cas. No. 1,974), and I have, observed no ruling otherwise under that act. Counsel for the trustee relies upon the decision of Judge Locliren in Re Westlund (D. C.) 99 Fed. 399, as ruling contra for tlie purposes of the present ease. That decision is predicated, however, on the fact that the assignment in question was made prior to the filing of the petition, and the wages were not, therefore, due to the workmen at the commencement of the proceedings. Whether such interpretation is correct requires no consideration here, for the reason that the referee certifies (as the undisputed proofs show) that these claims were assigned after (he bankruptcy proceedings were commenced. I am of opinion that the claims are entitled to priority in the hands of the assignee, and should he so allowed.