243 F.1d 930 - Atherton v. Beaman — 243 F. 930

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 1952

1 district · 1 state decisions

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.

¶1Bankruptcy <@=>293(1)—Trustees—Plenary Action.

¶2 Trustees in bankruptcy may resort to a plenary action in the District Court to protect their right to the possession of personal property belonging to the bankrupt.

¶3In Equity.- Bill by Percy A. Atherton and others, trustees in bankruptcy, against Nathaniel P. Beaman. On motion to dismiss.

¶4Motion overruled.

¶5Swift, Friedman & Atherton, of Boston, Mass., for plaintiffs.

¶6Foster & Turner, Reginald Foster, Wm. D. Turner, and George Hoague, all of Boston, Mass., for defendant.

¶7MORTON, District Judge.

¶8If trustees in bankruptcy may resort to a plenary action in this court to protect their right to the possession of personal property belonging to the bankrupt, the present bill of complaint concededly states a case. In Whitney v. Wenman, 198 U. S. 539, at page 553, 25 Sup. Ct. 778, 49 L. Ed. 1157, a plenary suit instituted by trustees in bankruptcy to regain possession of property alleged to belong to the estate was expressly approved by the Supreme Court.

¶9The question raised by the motion to dismiss is concluded by that decision, and the motion must be overruled.