268 F. 690 | S.D. Fla. | 1920
This cause comes on for a hearing upon specifications of objection to the bankrupt’s petition to be discharged. The specifications are 11 in number.
The first is that with intent to conceal his financial condition he failed to keep books of account or records from which such condition might be ascertained.
I find nothing in the evidence to sustain this specification. On the contrary, the testimony shows that he had a regularly employed bookkeeper for the purpose, and that two auditing concerns were able, from the books kept in the business, to make balance sheets showing the assets and liabilities of the business.
The second specification is that with intent to conceal his financial condition he destroyed his canceled checks.
The third is that with like intent he destroyed or concealed his bank pass books.
The fourth is that with like intent he destroyed or concealed three day books.
The fifth is that with like intent he concealed or destroyed one of his ledgers.
The ninth is that the bankrupt disobeyed an order to deliver all his books and papers to his trustee.
The proofs do not sustain this specification. A consideration of the testimony convinces me that there was no concealment. The bankrupt lived upon the money collected and paid some individual debts unquestionably, but this does not constitute concealment of assets with intent to hinder or delay creditors.
There seems little doubt that two items in the ledger account of “Rivas Loan Account,” were changed by some one; a $1,400 item being changed to $400, and a $1,000 item to $100. As shown by the testimony this change in the ledger account, the cash book remaining unchanged, could not in any manner affect the status of the business as to its financial condition. The cash book showed the items correctly, a withdrawal of those amounts by the owner of the business. As I said, the change was attempted by some one, was patent from an examination of the items, but it seems to me to tax one’s' credulity to the breaking point to say that whoever made or attempted the change did so with intent to conceal the financial condition of the bankrupt. It was apparent from an examination that some erasure or change had been attempted in an account which had not been used in the business for some considerable time before the bankruptcy proceedings, and which change would have no effect upon the financial condition of the bankrupt. Nor does the proof show such change to have been made by the bankrupt.-
The eighth, tenth, and eleventh specifications are admittedly not sustained, and therefore will not be noticed.
I therefore ‘find the specifications of objection not sustained, and that the bankrupt is entitled to his discharge.