Summary

Portrait of Harlan F. Stone Harlan F. Stone Connell v. Walker — Opinion of the Court

Petitioners argue here, as they did in the state courts, that under section 67f of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 USCA, § 107 (f) , the lien of the attachment upon which the judgment was founded was a nullity because procured when the bankrupt was insolvent and within four months before the filing of the petition in bankruptcy, so that no judgment could be given or enforced against the attached property, and they insist that in any event the state court should have stayed the action until the termination of the bankruptcy proceedings.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Harlan F. Stone Harlan F. Stone Connell v. Walker — Opinion of the Court

It does not appear that there is any creditor other than respondent, or that the trustee had not been advised of the suit, or that the bankrupt could not, by giving notice to the trustee, have afforded the trustee ample opportunity to assert his rights if there were other creditors to protect. On the other hand, if section 11a does not apply, but if it be assumed that the general scheme of the Act implies some duty of the state court to preserve the estate until opportunity is given the bankruptcy court to assert its jurisdiction, see Acme Harvester Co.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Harlan F. Stone Harlan F. Stone Connell v. Walker — Opinion of the Court

In neither does the decision militate against the conclusion which we reach here that the bankrupt alone cannot invoke a judgment which would preclude the exercise of the privilege reserved to the trustee to assert rights under the lien.
Bankruptcy proceedings do not, merely by virtue of their maintenance, terminate an action already pending in a nonbankruptcy court, to which the bankrupt is a party.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature