LONGSTRETH
v.
PENNOCK
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A landlord sought to recover unpaid rent from an assignee of a lease through bankruptcy proceedings. The Supreme Court affirmed that under Pennsylvania law, rent due for a period not exceeding one year must be paid first from the proceeds of property seized and sold under execution, and the assignee took possession of the demised premises subject to the rights of other persons including the landlord's claim.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice SWAYNE delivered the opinion of the court.
The assignee acquired his title to the movable proper found on the demised premises, subject to the rights of al other persons.* The rent in question was for a period which terminated when the assignee took possession, and the entire period was within a year of that time. Before the commencement of the proceedings in bankruptcy, the defendants in error might have distrained; and it is agreed that the property upon the premises was more than sufficient to satisfy the demand. The statute of Pennsylvania, of June 16tb, 1886, provides that where property under such circumstances is seized and sold under execution, the rent due for a period not exceeding one year shall be paid first out of the pi cecds of the sale. This case is within the equity of that tute.* The question presented is one belonging to the J law of Pennsylvania. We think it was correctly decided the Circuit Court.
Judgment affirmed.
*
Gibson v. Warden, 14 Wallace, 244.
*
Sedgwick’s Statutory and Constitutional Law, 296.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Henderson in Bankruptcy of Burns v. Mayer, 225 U.S. 631 (U.S. 1912)
-
In re Mount Holly Paper Co. Davies et ux. v. Snyder, 110 F.2d 220 (3d Cir. 1940)…rent actually due must be determined as if the warrant had never been issued. The filing of the petition in bankruptcy was equivalent to the issuance of an execution against the tenant. Longstreth v. Pennock, 20 Wall. 575, 87 U.S. [*225] 575, 576, 22 L.Ed. 451; Bennett’s Estate et al. v. Sproul, supra; Rosenblum v. Uber, 3 Cir., 256 F. 584; and In re W. R. Kuhn Co. (Kuhn v. Fell), 3 Cir., 225 F. 13. With bankruptcy (i. e. execution) occurring, tile Pennsylvania Act of June 16, 1836, P.L. 755, § 83, 68 P…1 / 2
-
In re Caplan (D. Md. 1927)
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence