Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
KELLY v. NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK, 1934 — 71 F.2d 689 · caselaw · US
Bankruptcy
KELLY v. NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK
71 F.2d 689·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1934
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
KELLY v. NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK.
No. 5405.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
June 4, 1934.
See, also (D. C.) 7 P. Supp. 376.
Howard L. Miller, of Camden, N. J., for appellant.
Daniel K. Creato, of Camden, N. J., for appellee.
Before BUFFINGTON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Rehearing denied June 23, 1334.
[MAJORITY — BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.]
BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal by a bankrupt from an order directing him to submit himself to examination before the referee. The proofs show that while he did originally appear before the referee, no examination was then made, no trustee was elected, and the estate was regarded as worthless. The National City Bank was a creditor, but alleged it did not receive notice of the time and place fixed for the first meeting of creditors and the examination of the bankrupt, in accordance with the provisions of section 21a of the Bankruptcy Act (11 USCA § 44(a). Bankrupt bases his right to a reversal in this case upon the ground that the appellee did noi appear at the first meeting of creditors and make use of its opportunity to examine the bankrupt; but the fact that the appellee did not have notice of that meeting renders that contention unsound.
The ease has had the careful attention of the judge below, who, in granting the order, cited authorities justifying his order. On those authorities, and in accord with the spirit of the bankruptcy law to subject a bankrupt to examination, we affirm the order of Judge Avis.