In re Weinstein

Good Law
34 F.2d 964·1929 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1540
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 17, 1929No. 11752California292 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henning, J.

The report of the special master was as follows:

This matter is rather perplexing to me. The only question involved is: Has the bankrupt been guilty of any aet which would be-a bar to his discharge in bankruptcy under the provisions of paragraph b(3) § 32, of the Bankruptcy Act (11 USCA) 1 Under, the facts, as here presented, the authorities cited by counsel for both sides are of very little assistance.

A bankruptcy proceeding is in the nature of a proceeding in equity. The sections of the law referred to above were, in my judgment, framed as they are by the Congress from that standpoint. He who comes into a court of equity must come with clean hands. That doctrine is limited in its application, of course, to the condition of petitioner’s hands in the particular matter before the court.

I do not believe that the Congress intended to bar the door to a sinner who has repented. I do not believe that the sins of a lifetime, which are wholly unrelated to a matter before a court, should be regarded by a court, unless it appear that the sinner is unrepentant and still engaged in his evil course.

As I get the facts, the false statement made by the bankrupt in 1923 and 1924 was in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.