E. H. Godshalk Co. v. Sterling

Citations

• 129 F. 580
• 64 C.C.A. 148
• 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4074

Syllabus

<p>1. Bankruptcy — Discharge—Objections—Specifications—Specificness.</p> <p>A specification of objection to bankrupts’ discharge, alleging that the bankrupts, with intent to conceal their financial condition, failed to keep books of account or records from which such condition could be ascertained, was sufficiently specific within Bankr. Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, § 14b, 30 Stat. 550 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3427], as amended by Act Cong. Feb. 5, 1903, c. 487, § 4, 32 Stat. 797 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1903, p. 411], providing that the failure to keep books, with such intent, shall deprive the bankrupt of the right to a discharge, though the specification did not disclose what books of account it was claimed the bankrupt should have kept.</p> <p>2. Same — Destruction op Vouchees.</p> <p>A specification of objection to bankrupts’ discharge, alleging that the bankrupts, with intent to conceal their financial condition, did destroy, through the agency of their regularly authorized bookkeeper, canceled checks drawn by the bankrupts, together with stubs of such checks, from which such condition might be ascertained, was not objectionable for failure to more definitely describe the checks and stubs alleged to have been «destroyed.</p> <p>3. Same — Appeal—Objections.</p> <p>Aa objection to specifications of objections to a bankrupt’s discharge, on the ground that the jurat was insufficient, cannot be made for the first time on a petition for review.</p> <p>4. Same — False Statements.</p> <p>A specification of objection to bankrupts’ discharge, on the ground that they had made a materially false statement on which they had obtained credit, which failed to state the substance of such alleged false statement, was insufficient.</p> <p>f 3. Appeal and review in bankruptcy cases, see note to In re Eggert, 43 C C. A. 9.</p> <p>If 4. See Bankruptcy, vol. 6, Cent. Dig. § 714.</p>