Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Coder Vs. Arts

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 05, 1909

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

41 entries 5 linked 36 unlinked
Show
  1. Security Warehousing Co. Vs. Hand US Supreme Court · May 27, 1907
  2. Huntley Vs. Kingman US Supreme Court · Apr 02, 1894
  3. Whitney Vs. Wenman US Supreme Court · May 29, 1905
  4. Hutchinson Vs. Otis US Supreme Court · Jun 01, 1903
  5. Chapman Vs. Bowen US Supreme Court · Nov 11, 1907
  6. U.S. 223 (1909) U.S. Supreme Court Coder v. Arts
    Search
  7. U.S. 223 (1909) Coder v. Arts
    Search
  8. except with the consent of the defendant. This was the subject of full consideration and determination in Bardes v. The
    Search
  9. courts jurisdiction over controversies concerning the property in possession of the bankruptcy courts. Whitney v. Wenman
    Search
  10. Murphy v. John
    Search
  11. A reference to the adjudications in this Court may assist in clearing the matter. Hewitt v. Berlin
    Search
  12. Act of March 3, 1891. Nor is the decision in the Berlin Machine Works case inconsistent with First National Bank v. Chicago
    Search
  13. this fact appeared, the district court had no longer jurisdiction of the case, under the doctrine laid down in Bardes v. Bank
    Search
  14. and upon which he was entitled to priority in the distribution of the assets. He did not, as was the case in Hewitt v. Berlin
    Search
  15. York Manufacturing Company v. Cassell
    Search
  16. upon the property in the hands of the bankrupt's trustee. This method of procedure was recognized in Hutchinson v. Otis
    Search
  17. was incident to the claim, Cunningham v. German
    Search
  18. N.B.R. 479, 483. If the question should be held to come up as incident to the appeal on the proof, Cunningham v. German
    Search
  19. of the Revised Statutes. Rector v. City
    Search
  20. St. Louis & Iron Mountain R. Co. v. Taylor
    Search
  21. U. S. 281 , 210 U. S. 293 . It is contended that a contrary ruling was made in Chapman v. Bowen
    Search
  22. trustee's bare denial of the claim could not be relied on under that statute. Jersey City & Bergen Railroad Company v. Morgan
    Search
  23. preference. In construing the Bankruptcy Act, this distinction must be kept constantly in mind. As was said in Githens v. Shiffler
    Search
  24. but it was uniformly recognized that, acting in good faith, a debtor might thus prefer one or more creditors. Stewart v. Dunham
    Search
  25. have been held to be only those which are actually fraudulent. It was so held in Lansing Boiler & Engine Works v. Ryerson
    Search
  26. should have the same construction and effect as have for a long period of time been attributed to those words. Githens v. Shiffler
    Search
  27. of the act. In Githens v. Shiffler
    Search
  28. Cadogan v. Kennett
    Search
  29. Lansing Boiler & Engine Works v. Ryerson
    Search
  30. In dealing with this question this Court said, in Thompson v. Fairbanks
    Search
  31. U.S. Supreme Court Coder v. Arts
    Search
  32. Bardes v. The
    Search
  33. Hewitt v. Berlin
    Search
  34. First National Bank v. Chicago
    Search
  35. Bardes v. Bank
    Search
  36. Cunningham v. German
    Search
  37. Jersey City & Bergen Railroad Company v. Morgan
    Search
  38. Githens v. Shiffler
    Search
  39. Stewart v. Dunham
    Search
  40. In Githens v. Shiffler
    Search
  41. Thompson v. Fairbanks
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial