Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

142 F. 279

Docket No. 2,065.

In re Hark

Pennsylvania Eastern District Court

Decided December 27, 1905.)

Pennsylvania Eastern District Court · decided 1905-12-27

<p>Bankruptcy — Involuntary Proceedings — Amendment of Petition.</p> <p>A petition, charging as an act of bankruptcy a transfer of property with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud creditors, may properly be permitted to be amended to charge that the transfer was made to prefer certain creditors, where such fact is developed on the hearing.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 6, Cent. Dig. Bankruptcy, § 128.]</p>

2 counsel of record

Relies on In re Hark

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1905-12-27

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 1972

1 district ·

1019051910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Bankruptcy — Involuntary Proceedings — Amendment of Petition.

¶2A petition, charging as an act of bankruptcy a transfer of property with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud creditors, may properly be permitted to be amended to charge that the transfer was made to prefer certain creditors, where such fact is developed on the hearing.

¶3[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 6, Cent. Dig. Bankruptcy, § 128.]

¶4In Bankruptcy. On application for leave to amend petition.

¶5See 135 Fed. 603.

¶6Harry S. Mesirov and J. Howard Reber, for petitioners.

¶7Wessel & Aarons, for alleged bankrupts.

¶8HOLLAND, District Judge.

¶9We think, in the interest of justice in this case, the petition filed on the 28th day of August, 1905, asking permission to amend the original petition in bankruptcy against the above-alleged .bankrupts, in accordance with the requests contained in the amending petition, should be allowed, for the reason that the act of bankruptcy charged in the original petition is a concealment and transfer of property with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud creditors, and the amended petition also alleges a transfer of property, but for a different reason, to wit, with intent to prefer certain creditors. The petitioners were unable to secure this information until they discovered it from the evidence adduced upon the trial of this case on June 13, 1905. A new trial having been granted on August 10, 1905, the petitioners filed their petition for amendment August 28, 1905.

¶10The amendments are allowed.

/142/f1d/279 · .json · Public domain