DISTRICT COURT, N.D. NEW YORK
November 13, 1940
In re AMSTERDAM BREWING CO., Inc.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: MOSCOWITZ
MOSCOWITZ, District Judge.
On Motion for Reargument and on Motion to Dismiss Petition for Reargument.
These are two motions; one, for reargument of a motion heretofore denied (see opinion dated September 10, 1940) and the other, to dismiss the petition for reargument.
Undoubtedly, it is true that, although Section 67, sub. c, of Title 11 of the United States Code Annotated provides that a petition for review may be filed by the party aggrieved within ten days after the entry thereof or within such extened time as the Court may for cause shown allow, the Court may nevertheless extend the time after the ten day period has elapsed. See Thummess v. Von Hoffman, 3 Cir., 109 F.2d 291; In re Madonia, D.C., 32 F.Supp. 165. However, there has been no extension of time and no request for an extension of time even up to the present date.
The petition for review was filed with the Referee after the ten day period. The Referee did not undertake to extend the time for the filing of such petition; he would have no power so to do, he merely certified the petition for review as a matter of course.
The procedure adopted by the Trustee in moving to dismiss the petition for reargument is unauthorized. It was not necessary to make the motion to dismiss the petition for reargument, the Trustee could have accomplished the same result by opposing the motion for reargument.
Motion for reargument will be denied.
Settle order on notice.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.