instrument was such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the board of directors of said corporation, and that he signed his name thereto by like order.

[Official character.]

• Cross-references.- See General Order XXI. Also Form Nos. 20 and 21. Must state that deponent was known to notary or identified. Matter of Saslaw (D. C., Ohio), 47 Am. B. R. 243, 275 Fed. 587.

Form No. 213

OBJECTIONS TO PROOF OF DEBT

(Hagar and Alexander's Bankruptcy Forms [2d Ed.], No. 159.)

I,

Esq., Referee in Bankruptcy.

trustee in this proceeding, [or a creditor

herein] do hereby object to the proof of debt filed on

19.... by

an alleged creditor for $.....

said objection is made on the following grounds:

[Here set forth objections.]

That

I respectfully request that said proof of debt be rejected and disallowed and no dividend declared upon same.

In re Royce Dry Goods Co., 13 Am. B. R. 257, 133 Fed. 100.

In re Linton, 7 Am. B. R. 676.

Trustee.

Orr v. Park (C. C. A., 5th Cir.), 25 Am. B. R. 544, 183 Fed. 683, 106 C. C. A. 33.

Spencer v. Lowe (C. C. A., 8th Cir.), 29 Am. B. R. 876, 198 Fed. 961, 117 C. C. A. 497.

Written objections not necessary.

Embry v. Bennett (C. C. A., 6th Cir.), 20 Am. B. R. 651, 162 Fed. 139, 89 C. C. A. 163.

In re Cannon (D. C., Pa.), 14 Am. B. R. 114, 133 Fed. 837.

See In re Shaw, 6 Am. B. R. 499, 109 Fed. 780.

While they should be specific, need not be under oath.

In re Wooten (D. C., N. Car.), 9 Am. B. R. 247, 118 Fed. 670.

Any creditor may plead Statute of Limitations against allowance of claim.

In re Lafferty and Bro., 10 Am. B. R. 290, 122 Fed. 558.

Duty of trustee to so plead.

In re Wooten, 9 Am. B. R. 247, 118 Fed. 670.

Objection may be made at any time before estate is closed.

In re Canton Iron and Steel Co., 28 Am. B. R. 791, 197 Fed. 767.

But see, In re Globe Laundry, 28 Am. B. R. 831, 198 Fed. 365.

Burden of proof. Upon objector.

Ir re Doty (D. C., N. Y.), 5 Am. B. R. 58.

In re Castle Braid Co. (D. C., N. Y.), 17 Am. B. R. 143, 145 Fed. 224.

In re Carter, 15 Am. B. R. 126, 138 Fed. 846.

In re Sumner, 4 Am. B. R. 123, 101 Fed. 224.

In re Pfaffinger, 18 Am. B. R. 807, 154 Fed. 528.

Sworn proof is prima facie evidence of its allegations, even when it is denied. Whitney v. Dresser (U. S. Sup.), 15 Am. B. R. 326, 200 U. S. 532, 50 L. Ed. 584, affg. 13 Am. B. R. 747, 135 Fed. 495, 68 C. C. A. 207.

In re T. A. McIntyre and Co. (C. C. A., 2d Cir.), 24 Am. B. R. 1, 174 Fed. 627, 98 C. C. A. 381.

In re Montgomery, 25 Am. B. R. 431, 185 Fed. 955.

See, however, In re Hudson Porcelain Co. (D. C., N. J.), 35 Am. B. R. 18, 225 Fed. 325.

But not to be regarded as selfproving unless relied upon.

In re T. A. McIntyre and Co. (supra).

When objections to allowance of claim res adjudicata.

Ayres v. Cone et al. (infra).

An unsecured creditor may object to proof of another creditor.

In re Hatem, 20 Am. B. R. 470, 161 Fed. 895.

Ayres v. Cone (C. C. A., 8th Cir.), 14 Am. B. R. 739, 138 Fed. 778, 71 C. C. A. 144.

See, In re Lewensohn (C. C. A., 2d Cir.), 9 Am. B. R. 368, 121 Fed. 538, 57 C. C. A. 600.

In re Arnold and Co., 13 Am. B. R. 320, 133 Fed. 789.

In re Canton Iron and Steel Co. (supra).

Mere filing of objections should not exclude bona fide claimants from voting. In re Kelly Dry Goods Co., 4 Am. B. R. 528, 102 Fed. 747.

Should be heard promptly.

Whitney v. Dresser (U. S. Sup.) (supra).

Where referee has disallowed proof of debt, judgment of District Court on

review.

Moore v. Crandall (C. C. A., 9th Cir.), 30 Am. B. R. 517, 205 Fed. 689, 124 C. C. A. 11.

In re John H. Livingston Co. (C. C. A., 2d Cir.), 16 Am. B. R. 385, 144 Fed. 971, 75 C. C. A. 282.

Allowance of claims.

Claims of relatives rigidly scrutinized.

Ohio Valley Bank Co. v. Mack (C. C. A., 6th Cir.), 20 Am. B. R. 40, 163 Fed. 155, 89 C. C. A. 605, affg. 20 Am. B. R. 919.

In re Rider (D. C., N. Y.), 3 Am. B. R. 192, 96 Fed. 811.

In re Wooten, 9 Am. B. R 247, 118 Fed. 670.

In re Brewster (D. C., N. Y.), 7 Am. B. R. 486.

Baumhauer v. Austin (C. C. A., 5th Cir.), 26 Am. B. R. 385, 186 Fed. 260, 108 C. C. A. 306, revg. In re Baumhauer, 24 Am. B. R. 750, 179 Fed. 966. When claim of wife disallowed. In re Gervin, 20 Am. B. R. 490, 160 Fed. 197.

In re Kaufman (N. Y.), 5 Am. B. R. 104, 104 Fed. 768.

In re Tucker (D. C., Mass.), 17 Am. B. R. 247, 148 Fed. 928.

In re Winkels (D. C., Wis.), 12 Am. B. R. 696, 132 Fed. 590.

See In re Foss, 17 Am. B. R. 439, 147 Fed. 790.

Claim of wife's estate rescognized and allowed in Vermont under certain conditions.

In re Hill (D. C., Vt.), 27 Am. B. R. 146, 190 Fed. 390.

But allowed in Pennsylvania.

In re Domenig (D. C.), 11 Am. B. R. 552, 128 Fed. 146.

Loan from separate estate.

Jams v. Gray (Mass.) (C. C. A., 1st Cir.), 12 Am. B. R. 573, 131 Fed. 401, 65 C. C. A. 385.

Liability for unpaid subscription to stock cannot be set off against debt due from corporation as not being mutual debts.

In re Howe Mfg. Co. (D. C., Ky.), 27 Am. B. R. 477, 193 Fed. 524.

Form No. 214

PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND REJECTION OF CLAIM

In the District Court of the United States,

herein on the

day of ..

day of

19.... and, on the 19..., duly allowed.

That the same should not have been allowed for the following reasons:21

That the attorney of said claimant is

...

Esq., of

That no previous application has been made to this or any other court for the order hereinafter asked.

Wherefore, your petitioner prays that the said proof of debt may be reconsidered and rejected.

[Add verification as in Form No. 122.]

Petitioner.

Cross-references.- Consult, generally, § 57 and General Order XXI (6); and see Forms Nos. 38, 39, and 216.

A creditor may make this petition; if so, he should show the allowance of his claim.

Averments. Neither the bankrupt act nor the general orders require the petitioner to aver facts which, if proved, would defeat the claim. It is only necessary to aver facts which, if true, are a sufficient cause for the re-examination of the claim. In re Watkinson & Co. (D. C., Pa.), 12 Am. B. R. 370,

130 Fed. 218.

This form can be adapted to a case where the application is to reduce but not reject in toto.

Sufficiency of petition to re-examine.-[See § 57, ante.]

Need not allege facts sufficient to defeat claim. Only necessary to allege facts which if true, are sufficient cause of reconsideration.

In re George Watkinson and Co., 12 Am. B. R. 370, 130 Fed. 218.

In re Ankeny, 4 Am. B. R. 72, 100 Fed. 614, 2 N. B. N. Rep. 249.

Trustee only one authorized to institute proceedings.

In re Sully & Co. (D. C., N. Y.), 15 Am. B. R. 304, 142 Fed. 895, modified 18 Am. B. R. 124, 152 Fed. 619.

In re Lewensohn (C. C. A., 2d Cir.), 9 Am. B. R. 368, 121 Fed. 538, 57 C. C. A. 600.

Trustee only one authorized to appeal from order allowing claim.

Chatfield et al. v. O'Dwyer et al. (C. C. A., 8th Cir.), 4 Am. B. R. 313, 101 Fed. 797, 42 C. C. A. 30.

Foreman v. Burleigh et al. (C. C. A., 1st Cir.), 6 Am. B. R. 230, 109 Fed. 313, 48 C. C. A. 376.

21. As, for instance, because technically imperfect, or not in accordance with the general orders, or secured, or the claimant preferred and his preference not surrendered or want of

consideration, or many other reasons. The reasons should be set forth as in a pleading, so that the claimant may have proper notice of the issue he

must meet.

Notice should be sent by referee to claimant.

In re Stoever, 5 Am. B. R. 250, 105 Fed. 355.

Trustee may be compelled to take action to reconsider claim or to permit objecting creditors to act in his name.

In re Stern (C. C. A., 8th Cir.), 16 Am. B. R. 510, 144 Fed. 956, 76 C. C. A. 10. In re Lewensohn (supra).

In re Levy, 7 Am. B. R. 56.

In re Mexico Hardware Co., 28 Am. B. R. 736, 197 Fed. 650.

Creditor moving for re-examination of claim not bound to indemnify claimant under General Order X.

In re Elk Valley Coal Mining Co., 31 Compare In re Geo. Watkinson & Co. Fed. 218.

Am. B. R. 545, 210 Fed. 386.

(D. C., Pa.), 12 Am. B. R. 370, 130

Right of creditor to expunge not higher than that of the bankrupt.
In re E. J. Arnold & Co., 13 Am. B. R. 320, 133 Fed. 789.

Where there is no trustee, bankrupt may move to reconsider.

In re Ankeny, 4 Am. B. R. 72, 100 Fed. 614, 2 N. B. N. Rep 249.
Stockholders whose claims have been expunged may not.

In re Pittsburg Lead and Zinc Co. (Cons.), 28 Am. B. R. 880, 198 Fed. 316, revd. Rosenbaum v. Dutton (C. C. A., 8th Cir.), 30 Am. B. R. 155, 203 Fed. 838, 122 C. C. A. 156.

Trustee may institute a joint proceeding against several creditors.

In re Lyon, 7 Am. B. R. 61.

But better practice is to make separate proceeding of each claim under objection.

Burden of proof.—

On petitioner.

In re Doty, 5 Am. B. R. 58.

No rule making sworn objections to a claim prima facie evidence of their truth (dict.). In re Goble Boat Co. (D. C., N. Y.), 27 Am. B. R. 48, 190 Fed. 92. Effect of failure of claimant to file answer.

In re Lewis, Eck & Co. (D. C., Pa.), 18 Am. B. R. 657, 153 Fed. 495.
In re Goble Boat Co. (supra).

Compare In re Docker-Foster Co. (D. C., Pa.), 10 Am. B. R. 584, 123 Fed. 190.
When denied for laches or want of good faith.

In re Sully & Co. (supra).

In re Hamilton Furniture Co., 8 Am. B. R. 588, 116 Fed. 115.

In re Hinckel Brewing Co. (D. C., N. Y.), 10 Am. B. R. 484, 123 Fed. 942.
In re Globe Laundry (D. C., Tenn.), 28 Am. B. R. 831, 198 Fed. 365.
No collateral attack on claim upon creditors' petition to remove trustee.
In re Roanoke Furnace Co. (D. C., Pa.), 18 Am. B. R. 661, 152 Fed. 846.
Defense of usury available to trustee.

In re Stern (C. C. A., 8th Cir.), 16 Am. B. R. 510, 144 Fed. 956, 76 C. C. A. 10. In re Kellogg (C. C. A., 2d Cir.), 10 Am. B. R. 7, 121 Fed. 332, 57 C. C. A. 547, affg. 113 Fed. 120.

See, Gray v. Grand Forks Mercantile Co. (C. C. A., 8th Cir.), 14 Am. B. R. 780, 138 Fed. 344, 70 C. C. A. 634.

So also as to Statute of Limitations.

In re Wooten, 9 Am. B. R. 247, 118 Fed. 670.

In re Kuffler (D. C., N. Y.), 18 Am. B. R. 587, 153 Fed. 667.

In re Ceorge Zorn & Co. (D. C., Pa.), 27 Am. B. R. 433, 193 Fed. 299.