The Federal Reporter. Volume 4: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit and District Courts of the United States. October-December, 1880. Page: 211
xiv, 928 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this legislative document.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
VOIFLs V. Pkni.
man, bankrupt, as the administrator of an estate, had given
a bond under the law of this state for the faithful performance
of his duties as such administrator. On the twenty-seventh
day of April, 1876, a suit was brought in the state court upon
the bond. Under the law of this state such a bond is given
to the state, and the suit was instituted in its name. A
judgment was recovered in the suit, which seems to have been
for the benefit of the defendant in this case, Andrew J. Par-
ker. Rodman, who executed the bond, became a bankrupt
by a petition filed on the sixth of June, 1876, and an assign-
ment was made under the bankrupt law of his property to
the assignee, which, of course, related back to the time the
petition in bankruptcy was filed. Judgment was not re-
covered in the suit on the bond against the bankrupt until
after the petition in bankruptcy was filed, and the question
in the case is whether the assignee is entitled to the property,
or the parties interested in the bond of the administrator.
It is claimed on the part of the assignee that the assignment
cut off by relation, on the 6th of June, when the petition was
filed, and before judgment on the administration bond was
rendered, the lien which the judgment gave on the property
of the bankrupt. The law of this state declares that in suits
instituted by the state upon bonds given, to the state, that
the liens upon judgments shall relate back to the time of the
institution of the suit; and the judgment which was rendered
in the state court declared that in conformity with the law
the lien should relate back to the twenty-seventh of April,
1876, when the suit was commenced. If the lien operated
from that time upon the property, of course it cut off any
claims which the assignee might have, because a petition in
bankruptcy was not filed until after a suit on the bond was
commenced. That is the controversy between the parties.
I think that I must hold, under the law, that the priority
of right is on the part of the creditors under the adminis-
trator's bond, and not'on the part of the assignee. The
bankrupt law was not intended to destroy any liens created
by the state law. It is tre that it wag quite within the
bounds'of possibility that, although the stit was commenced
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
Boyle, Peyton. The Federal Reporter. Volume 4: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit and District Courts of the United States. October-December, 1880., legislative document, 1881; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc36333/m1/225/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.