BEAR et al. v. LIBERTY NAT. BANK OF ROANOKE, VA. In re BECKER et al.

BEAR et al. v. LIBERTY NAT. BANK OF ROANOKE, VA. In re BECKER et al. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. December 21, 1922.) No. 2011. Bankruptcy <§=3440 — Rejection of claim of Hen on bankrupt’s property Is not reviewable by petition to revise. ' - The issue of allowing or rejecting a claim of lien on the bankrupt’s property is not reviewable by- a petition to superintend and revise, but only by appeal. On Petition to Superintend and Revise in Matter of Law, Proceedings of the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke, in Bankruptcy; Henry Clay McDowell, Judge. In the matter of the estates of W. L. Becker and another, partners trading as W. L- Becker & Co’, and as the Roanoke Provision Company. On claim by the Liberty National Bank of Roanoke, Va., to establish a lien on the real estate of the individual partners, opposed by James A. Bear, as trustee in bankruptcy. Order allowing the lien claimed, and the trustee petitions to revise. Petition dismissed. See, also, 285 Fed. 703. James A. Bear, of Roanoke, Va., and Harvey B. Apperson, of Salem, Va. (Hall, Wingfield & Apperson, of Roanoke, Va., on the brief), for petitioner. James D. Johnston, of Roanoke, Va., for respondent. Before WOODS and WADDILL, Circuit Judges, and ROSE, trict Judge, [MAJORITY — WOODS, Circuit Judge.] WOODS, Circuit Judge. The issue of allowing or rejecting claim of a lien on the bankrupt’s property is reviewable by appeal, and not by petition to superintend and revise. The petition must therefore be dismissed. Coder v. Arts, 213 U. S. 223, 29 Sup. Ct. 436, 53 L. Ed. 772, 16 Ann. Cas. 1008; Matter of Roving, 224 U. S. 183, 32 Sup. Ct. 446, 56 L. Ed. 725. Dismissed. <gzzjFor other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes