Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Randolph Vs. Scruggs

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 18, 1903

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

42 entries 4 linked 38 unlinked
Show
  1. Boese Vs. King US Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1883
  2. Bryan Vs. Bernheimer US Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1901
  3. Trustees Vs. Greenough US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1881
  4. Mayer Vs. Hellman US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1875
  5. U.S. 533 (1903) U.S. Supreme Court Randolph v. Scruggs
    Search
  6. U.S. 533 (1903) Randolph v. Scruggs
    Search
  7. so far as it interferes with his administering the property assigned. This could not be denied. West Company v. Lea
    Search
  8. Davis v. Bohle
    Search
  9. It seems to us that it would be a hard and subtle construction to say, as seems to have been thought in Bartlett v. Bramhall
    Search
  10. by state decisions with reference to similar questions raised by creditors or under state insolvent laws. Bigelow v. Baldwin
    Search
  11. White v. Hill
    Search
  12. Clark v. Sawyer
    Search
  13. Wakeman v. Grover
    Search
  14. Paige 23, 43, S.C., 11 Wend. 187, 226. See also Mayer v. Hellman
    Search
  15. properly might have been paid by the assignee they may prove for now. See Central Railroad & Banking Co. of Georgia v. Pettus
    Search
  16. Mason v. Pomeroy
    Search
  17. it does not command our assent. The case would be different if the assignee were party to an actual fraud. Hastings v. Spencer
    Search
  18. Smith v. Wise
    Search
  19. Perry-Mason Shoe Co. v. Sykes
    Search
  20. or benefit of the estate, the mere fiction of relation is not enough to forbid an allowance for them. See Lynch v. Bernal
    Search
  21. assignments, and of the better-considered decisions under Page 190 U. S. 539 the bankrupt laws. Platt v. Archer
    Search
  22. Havemeyer v. Loeb
    Search
  23. Macdonald v. Moore
    Search
  24. Wald v. Wehl
    Search
  25. Hunker v. Bing
    Search
  26. Collumb v. Read
    Search
  27. T. T. Haydock Carriage Co. v. Pier
    Search
  28. Miss. 390. See Williams v. Gibbes
    Search
  29. Thompson v. Phenix
    Search
  30. Woodruff v. New
    Search
  31. from the property which the assignee is required to surrender, and in that way they gain a preference. Platt v. Archer
    Search
  32. extent. No ground appears for allowing the item for services in resisting an adjudication of bankruptcy. See Platt v. Archer
    Search
  33. U.S. Supreme Court Randolph v. Scruggs
    Search
  34. West Company v. Lea
    Search
  35. Bartlett v. Bramhall
    Search
  36. Bigelow v. Baldwin
    Search
  37. See Central Railroad & Banking Co. of Georgia v. Pettus
    Search
  38. Hastings v. Spencer
    Search
  39. See Lynch v. Bernal
    Search
  40. Platt v. Archer
    Search
  41. See Williams v. Gibbes
    Search
  42. See Platt v. Archer
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial