From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. Bay

U.S.
Nov 2, 1931
284 U.S. 4 (1931)

Summary

holding the rights of a trustee in bankruptcy by subrogation are to be enforced for benefit of estate

Summary of this case from Vieira v. Inman (In re Salyers)

Opinion

CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT.

No. 27.

Argued October 22, 1931. Decided November 2, 1931.

1. The provisions of the Bankruptcy Act concerning liens are superior to state laws. P. 5. 2. In the administration of an estate in bankruptcy, a chattel mortgage which, under the state law, is bad as against creditors who were such at the date of the mortgage, or who became such between the date of the mortgage and the date on which it was recorded, should not be given priority over those who gave the bankrupt credit at a later date, after the mortgage was on record. Bankruptcy Act, §§ 70, 67, and 65. Id. 45 F.2d 449, reversed.

CERTIORARI, 283 U.S. 814, to review an affirmance of an order of the District Court holding a chattel mortgage to be valid as to creditors whose claims came into existence subsequently to its recordation.

Mr. Thomas S. Tobin, with whom Messrs. Charles F. Hutchins, Frank C. Weller, and James P. Keleher were on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Max Isaac also appeared for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.


The bankrupt executed a mortgage of automobiles, furniture, show room and shop equipment that is admitted to be bad as against creditors who were such at the date of the mortgage and those who became such between the date of the mortgage and that on which it was recorded, there having been a failure to observe the requirements of the Civil Code of California, § 3440. The question raised is whether the mortgage is void also as against those who gave the bankrupt credit at a later date, after the mortgage was on record. The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an order of the District Judge giving the mortgage priority over the last creditors. Whether the Court was right must be decided by the Bankruptcy Act since it is superior to all state laws upon the subject. Globe Bank v. Martin, 236 U.S. 288, 298.

The trustee in bankruptcy gets the title to all property which has been transferred by the bankrupt in fraud of creditors, or which prior to the petition he could by any means have transferred, or which might have been levied upon and sold under judicial process against him. Act of July 1, 1898, c. 541, § 70; U.S. Code, Title 11, § 110. By § 67, Code, Title 11, § 107(a), claims which for want of record or for other reasons would not have been valid liens as against the claims of the creditors of the bankrupt shall not be liens against his estate. The rights of the trustee by subrogation are to be enforced for the benefit of the estate. The Circuit Courts of Appeals seem generally to agree, as the language of the Bankruptcy Act appears to us to imply very plainly, that what thus is recovered for the benefit of the estate is to be distributed in "dividends of an equal percentum on all allowed claims, except such as have priority or are secured." Bankruptcy Act, § 65, Code, Title 11, § 105. In re Kohler, 159 F. 871. Mullen v. Warner, 11 F.2d 62. Campbell v. Dalbey, 23 F.2d 229. Cohen v. Schultz, 43 F.2d 340. Globe Bank v. Martin, 236 U.S. 288, 305.

Decree reversed.


Summaries of

Moore v. Bay

U.S.
Nov 2, 1931
284 U.S. 4 (1931)

holding the rights of a trustee in bankruptcy by subrogation are to be enforced for benefit of estate

Summary of this case from Vieira v. Inman (In re Salyers)

holding the rights of a trustee in bankruptcy by subrogation are to be enforced for benefit of estate

Summary of this case from Vieira v. Inman (In re Salyers)

holding the trustee may recover the entire value of the transfer, even if the creditor the trustee is using to establish standing is only owed a small portion of the value of the total transfer

Summary of this case from Schaefer v. Schaefer

finding a trustee's authority to set aside a fraudulent conveyance broader than an individual creditor's

Summary of this case from Scholes v. African Enterprise, Inc.

reversing In re Sassard Kimball, 9 Cir., 45 F.2d 449

Summary of this case from Miller v. Sulmeyer

recognizing that the trustee is not limited to recovering a specific amount of debt of one creditor

Summary of this case from Schaefer v. Schaefer

In Moore, the "bankrupt executed a mortgage of automobiles, furniture, show room and shop equipment" and later recorded the mortgage.

Summary of this case from Decker v. Tramiel

observing that what is recovered for benefit of bankrupt's estate is to be distributed in equal parts among allowed unsecured claims that lack priority

Summary of this case from In re PWS Holding Corp.

In Bay, the Court interpreted the precursor to Section 544(b) to allow the trustee to recover the full value of an avoided transfer for the benefit of the estate, even if the claim being asserted was for significantly less.

Summary of this case from Crescent Res. Litig. Trust v. Duke Energy Corp.

allowing trustee to stand in shoes of creditor to recover entire fraudulent-conveyance amount for benefit of all creditors even though creditor who could have avoided it subsequently owed only fraction of original amount

Summary of this case from MC Asset Recovery, LLC v. Commerzbank AG

In Moore v. Bay, 284 U.S. 4 (1931), the Supreme Court held that a trustee may avoid a transfer for the benefit of all creditors without regard to the size of the claim of the creditor that provides the trustee with standing.

Summary of this case from In re Consolidated Industries Corp.

In Moore v. Bay, 284 U.S. 4, 5 (1931), the Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy trustee's right under the Bankruptcy Act to avoid a mortgage that was invalid under state law was "to be enforced for the benefit of the estate."

Summary of this case from O'Connor v. DL-DW Holdings (In re Extended Stay, Inc.)

observing that what is recovered for benefit of bankrupt's estate is to be distributed in equal parts among allowed unsecured claims that lack priority

Summary of this case from Guttman v. Fabian (In re Fabian)

observing that what is recovered for benefit of bankrupt's estate is to be distributed in equal parts among allowed unsecured claims that lack priority

Summary of this case from In re Fabian

observing that what is recovered for benefit of bankrupt's estate is to be distributed in equal parts among allowed unsecured claims that lack priority

Summary of this case from In re Fabian

In Moore, the case presented to the Supreme Court involved the administration of cars, parts and equipment that were subject to a chattel mortgage.

Summary of this case from In re Monzon

excepting from this inclusive statement priority and secured claims

Summary of this case from In re Himmelstein
Case details for

Moore v. Bay

Case Details

Full title:MOORE, TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY FOR THE ESTATE OF SASSARD KIMBALL, INC.…

Court:U.S.

Date published: Nov 2, 1931

Citations

284 U.S. 4 (1931)
52 S. Ct. 3

Citing Cases

Decker v. Tramiel

The Supreme Court and this court have interpreted claims under § 544 and § 550 of the Bankruptcy Code to…

In re Valley City Furniture Company

Defendant contends that this question must be determined by Michigan law, while plaintiff contends that it is…