5 F. 53 | S.D.N.Y. | 1880
This is án application by a creditor, Holmes, Booth & Haydens, a manufacturing corporation, for payment of a judgment recovered by it before the bankruptcy out of the proceeds of the property sold by the assignee, The property was sold under the order of the court, free from the claim of this creditor, and it is now insisted that at the time of the filing of the petition it had a lien by levy of execution on the property. The material facts are as follows: On tlie ninth day of March, 1878, a creditors’ petition, in which this creditor joined, was presented by the attorney for the petitioning creditors to the clerk of this court. It was by the clerk on the same day laid before the judge, who mado
The first objection made to this claim is that the creditors’ petition had been filed within the meaning of the bankrupt law before the levy, and that, therefore, this creditor acquired no lien thereby. I think this objection is well taken. It is evident from the statute that the commencement of a bankruptcy proceeding, upon which event the property, by relation back, passes to the assignee subsequently appointed, is the filing of the petition. A presentation of a petition to the clerk for the action of the court is, I think, to be considered a filing, whether the clerk then marks it filed, or not- Rev. St. § 5.024, evidently implies that the filing.
I think, also, it is very clear that by joining in the creditors’ petition this creditor waived any lion or security which it may have acquired by the levy, even if the petition should be held not to have been filed till 3 o’clock on the eleventh of March. The creditors who can join in a creditors’ petition aro unsecured creditors only. Creditors whose debts are provable under the act must join to the requisite number and amount. Eev. St. § 5021. Secured creditors may prove their debts in full, in which case they waive or abandon their security, or they may have the security valued and prove for the balance. Eev. St. § 5075. By the petition this creditor represented to the court that its debt was unsecured, that it was provable under the act, and that the aggregate of its debt and those of the other petitioners constituted the requisite number and amount of all the unsecured debts of the alleged bankrupts. On the faith of this averment this creditor and his co-petitioners obtained the adjudication of the bankrupts. This petitioner is obviously bound by this averment, and cannot now be hoard to aver the contrary, especially for the purpose of gaining some advantage in the distribution of the estate over its co-petitioners. It is immaterial if, as suggested on its behalf, there was the requisite number and amount without including this debt. The petitioner took its position then as an unsecured creditor, and
Petition dismissed, with costs.