168 F.1d 1021 - In re Kuffler — 168 F. 1021

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently January 1958

8 federal appellate · 3 district ·

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.

¶1Petition to Review Order of, and Appeal from, the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York.

¶2For opinion below, see 155 Fed. 1018.

¶3Max J. Kohler and Saul S. Myers, for appellant.

¶4Page, Crawford & Tuska (Benjamin Tuska and Abraham Tulin, of counsel), for respondent.

¶5Before LACOMBB, COXE, and WARD, Circuit Judges.

¶6PER CURIAM.

¶7The order of the bankruptcy court (Eastern district of New York) now sought to be reviewed is in the precise form which this court approved upon the former appeal. In re Kuffler, 151 Fed. 12, 80 C. C. A. 508. It is “limited to a stay of any application for a discharge from the debts scheduled in the former proceeding.” Wo see no reason to modify our former decision. The debts due to Hinsdale, Smith & Co. and to Joseph Mayer’s Sons were included in the former schedule, and did not become new and different debts because judgment has been entered upon them in the interim. Boynton v. Ball, 121 U. S. 465, 7 Sup. Ct. 981, 30 L. Ed. 985. The order of the District Court is affirmed.