Court Opinion

ID: 8634884
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-24 19:43:35.432186+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:55:53.775446
License: Public Domain

HELD BY THE COURT:
That the leave granted by Judge Hall gives no authority to repeat the motion on the same facts, and the additional papers do not touch the merits of the controversy, or tend to impeach the integrity or validity of the sale to Delaplaine or to strengthen the legal or equitable right set up by the petitioners in their original motion. That it is doubtful whether the peti-' tioners are competent to prosecute any motion or proceedings in equity without having proved debts in their favor, under the bankrupt law [of 1841 (5 Stat. 440)], or whether they show any matter triable in this court under that law, whieh provides that no suit at law or in equity shall, in any case, be maintained by or against the assignee, unless the same shall be brought within two years after the declaration and decree of bankruptcy, or after the cause of action shall have first accrued. That the interests of the bankrupts under the Hopper will was not maintained in their schedules, nor indicated to the assignee by any of their creditors. No duty was imposed upon him by law to institute a search, or even an inquiry, in respect to an object so occult. When the matter was first brought to his notice by the counsel for the petitioners, it was asserted that it was of no value, and its transfer was asked, therefore, on a nominal consideration. Instead of enforcing a specific performance, the court would have held it a high dereliction of duty on the part of the assignee if he had so transferred it, having learned that it was of value to the United States. That the proceedings out of which the sale arose were conducted according to law, although the sale was not conducted with so vigilant an inquiry into the salable value of the interest as the court was entitled to expect from the assignee. That the petitioners establish no right to the interference of the court to cause a transfér of the property to them; but it appearing that there is color in the case for a more authoritative decision upon points of law of a gen*903eral character, affecting the limitations of the bankrupt act and rights of parties under it, the case may, on motion, within ten days, be adjourned to the circuit court for adjudication upon such points, at the expense of the petitioners; otherwise the motion is denied, with costs.
.,. [NOTE. The conveyance was set aside in the circuit court, and an order entered for resale at public auction. Case No. 9,878. Subsequently the administrators of Delaplaine petitioned to have the amount paid by him refunded to them. Id. 9.879. At the public sale of this interest, it was purchased by James M. Smith. Jr. A petition was filed to set aside this last sale. Petition dismissed. 6 Fed. 685.]