Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Williams Vs. Heard

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 25, 1891

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

28 entries 3 linked 25 unlinked
Show
  1. Bachman Vs. Lawson US Supreme Court · Jan 04, 1884
  2. United States Vs. Weld US Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1888
    Relied / Followed
  3. Milnor Vs. Metz US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1841
    Relied / Followed
  4. U.S. 529 (1891) U.S. Supreme Court Williams v. Heard
    Search
  5. U.S. 529 (1891) Williams v. Heard
    Search
  6. is property which passes to the assignee of a bankrupt under an assignment made prior to the decision. Comegys v. Vasse
    Search
  7. Pet. 193, again affirmed and applied, and United States v. Weld
    Search
  8. in Maine, and in each instance the decision has been, like the one we are reviewing, against the assignee. See Taft v. Marsily
    Search
  9. Brooks v. Ahrens
    Search
  10. Md. 212, and Kingsbury v. Mattocks
    Search
  11. of the acts of the aforesaid cruisers, and that sum was paid over by Great Britain. It was held in United States v. Weld
    Search
  12. Mass. 554, 555. We have authority in this Court for the position we maintain. In Comegys v. Vasse
    Search
  13. Pet. 26 U. S. 218 -219. The principles of that case were applied in Milnor v. Metz
    Search
  14. to the assignee as part of the bankrupt's estate, and that the doctrine of donation did not apply. In Phelps v. McDonald
    Search
  15. claim passed to the assignee. In the opinion of the Court, delivered by Mr. Justice Swayne, after referring to Comegys v. Vasse
    Search
  16. U.S. 99 U. S. 303 -304. To the same effect are Erwin v. United
    Search
  17. U. S. 659 . Page 140 U. S. 545 There is nothing in United States v. Weld
    Search
  18. error -- that the claim was created by that act. In our opinion, this case falls within the principles of Comegys v. Vasse
    Search
  19. and Phelps v. McDonald
    Search
  20. U.S. Supreme Court Williams v. Heard
    Search
  21. Comegys v. Vasse
    Search
  22. and United States v. Weld
    Search
  23. See Taft v. Marsily
    Search
  24. and Kingsbury v. Mattocks
    Search
  25. In Comegys v. Vasse
    Search
  26. In Phelps v. McDonald
    Search
  27. Erwin v. United
    Search
  28. of Comegys v. Vasse
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial