Opinion
Submitted October term, 1939.
Decided January 25th, 1940.
1. Confirmation by the chancery court of the receiver's disallowance of appellant's claim for rent which accrued subsequent to the receivership proceeding under the Corporation act and after the receiver had relinquished the premises, affirmed.
2. The action of congress in amending the Bankruptcy act ( U.S.C.A., title 11, § 103) so as to admit proof of rent accruing subsequent to bankruptcy, cannot change an existing rule of law, well established in this state, without any legislative action affecting our Corporation act, even though in some other respects the provisions of the Bankruptcy act have been followed in the administration of the affairs of insolvent corporations.
3. This court will not assume to itself legislative powers where the State Constitution has made no such grant.
On appeal from the court of chancery.
Messrs. Lichtenstein, Schwartz Friedenberg ( Mr. Howard Engel), for the creditor-appellant.
Messrs. Pitney, Hardin Skinner ( William H. Osborne, Jr.), for the receiver-respondent.
The appellant filed a claim for rent to accrue under a written lease made by it with the Foremost Silk Hosiery Mills, Inc., a New Jersey corporation. The rent sought to be recovered accrued subsequent to a receivership proceeding under the Corporation act of this state and after the receiver had relinquished the premises. The receiver's disallowance of the claim was confirmed in the court of chancery and this appeal brings up such ruling.
The action taken in the court below was proper under Stockton v. Mechanics' and Laborers' Savings Bank, 32 N.J. Eq. 163, and Block v. Bell Furniture Co., 111 N.J. Eq. 551. The argument is now made that since congress has changed the bankruptcy law, U.S.C.A. title 11 § 103, so as to admit proof of rent accruing subsequent to brankruptcy that, therefore, our courts should change an existing rule of law well established in this state without any legislative action affecting our Corporation act merely because of the action of congress, and because in some other respects the provisions of the Bankruptcy act have been followed in the administration of the affairs of insolvent corporations.
We are not inclined to assume to ourselves legislative power since under our constitution the people have made us no such grant.
The action taken in the court of chancery is affirmed, with costs.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, PORTER, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, HAGUE, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.