Court Opinion

ID: 9449005
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 23:52:33.482194+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:38.981469
License: Public Domain

JONES, Circuit Judge (dissenting).
I do not regard the statements in the Harrell case as dictum as does the majority. The Referee, according to my notion, was correct in believing he was bound by that decision. I believe he correctly construed the opinion in that case. I think Collier read the Harrell case as the Referee read it. 4 Collier on Bankruptcy, 14th Ed. 298, § 67.27 [3] n. 42. I do not think there is such a palpable injustice resulting from following Harrell as requires a departure from it, nor does it seem to me that any impelling public policy demands that we now declare a different rule. If it is to be overruled would it not be better to have it expressly done rather than to leave Harrell standing as a precedent but subject to the distinction of this case, a distinction which appears to me to be an artificial one?