Citation network
ingersoll Vs. Coram
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 07, 1908
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
-
U.S. 335 (1908) U.S. Supreme Court Ingersoll v. CoramSearch
-
U.S. 335 (1908) Ingersoll v. CoramSearch
-
another jurisdiction, and a judgment against the one is not res judicata and a bar to a suit by the other. Brown v. Fletcher'sSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
question, however, does not arise, nor any question depending upon it, and the line of cases of which Wabash Railroad v. AdelbertSearch
-
does not apply, nor do the cases cited by respondents, but the case falls within the principles announced in Payne v. HookSearch
-
Wall. 425,, and Byers v. McAuleySearch
-
Page 211 U. S. 360 to the payment of his debts, has been decided in Massachusetts. Ricketson v. MerrillSearch
-
Mass. 76, 19 N.E. 11. The same in principle is Davis v. NewtonSearch
-
administrator passed to his assignee, and that the administrator could not withhold it from the assignee. In Lenz v. PrescottSearch
-
bill in equity to ascertain the validity and construction of an assignment of an interest in an estate. See also Green v. GaskillSearch
-
share, and besides, again, she sues as administratrix, and she is a citizen of a different state from Leyson. Sere v. PitotSearch
-
Coal Co. v. BlatchfordSearch
-
An extended discussion of the question is made unnecessary by the case of Brown v. FletcherSearch
-
held that the decree was not binding upon the Michigan executor or the estate in his possession, citing Vaughan v. NorthupSearch
-
Brodie v. BickleySearch
-
doctrine was enforced in Massachusetts. Low v. BartlettSearch
-
established by the fact that the circuit court of appeals yielded to it, and it is said to be sanctioned by Biddle v. WilkinsSearch
-
Talmage v. ChapelSearch
-
Mass. 71. But, as these cases preceded Brown v. FletcherSearch
-
they must be regarded as consistent with it. Besides, in that case, Johnson v. PowersSearch
-
U. S. 156 , was cited as establishing, on the authority of Aspden v. NixonSearch
-
and Stacy v. ThrasherSearch
-
Low v. BartlettSearch
-
assets of the deceased. That there is a certain amount of artificiality in the doctrine was pointed out in Stacy v. ThrasherSearch
-
That is, as counsel explains, merged in the judgment. We do not think that the doctrine announced in Brown v. FletcherSearch
-
The conclusion of the court is sustained by authority. In Wylie v. CoxeSearch
-
Paschal had a lien on the fund in his hands for disbursement and professional fees. The case was cited in McPherson v. CoxSearch
-
U. S. 404 , 96 U. S. 417 , and the doctrine repeated. See also Central Railroad v. PettusSearch
-
Railroad Company v. WilsonSearch
-
U. S. 501 , 138 U. S. 507 . In Walker v. BrownSearch
-
creates an equitable lien on the property so indicated. This was an application of the doctrine of Fourth Street Bank v. YardleySearch
-
Louis, 101 U. S. 306 . These cases are not opposed by Trist v. ChildSearch
-
Wall. 441, and Wright v. EllisonSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Ingersoll v. CoramSearch
-
Brown v. Fletcher'sSearch
-
Wabash Railroad v. AdelbertSearch
-
and Byers v. McAuleySearch
-
Massachusetts. Ricketson v. MerrillSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial