Citation network
Maynard Vs. Elliott
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 13, 1931
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
- Distinguished
-
U.S. 273 (1931) U.S. Supreme Court Maynard v. ElliottSearch
-
U.S. 273 (1931) Maynard v. ElliottSearch
-
because contingent, and gave judgment accordingly, 40 F.2d 17, following its earlier decision in First National Bank v. ElliottSearch
-
U.S. 822, to resolve the conflict between the decision below and those of other circuit courts of appeals, in Moch v. MarketSearch
-
Colman Co. v. WithoftSearch
-
proved under subdivision (a)(4) of that section, although not absolutely owing when the petition is filed. Williams v. U.SSearch
-
Central Trust Co. v. ChicagoSearch
-
Within three years after the enactment of the Bankruptcy Act, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in Moch v. MarketSearch
-
Glass Co., supra, and appears to have been accepted by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Colman Co. v. WithoftSearch
-
Heyman v. ThirdSearch
-
In re Amdur Shoe Co., 13 F.2d 147. See also Germania Savings Bank v. LoebSearch
-
F. 285, 289, Courtney v. TrustSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
until the decision, twenty-six years later, of the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in First National Bank v. ElliottSearch
-
supra. In Dunbar v. DunbarSearch
-
In re Hutcheraft, 247 F. 187. But this contention was rejected by the decision in Williams v. U.SSearch
-
Central Trust Co. v. ChicagoSearch
-
Auditorium, supra, pp. 240 U. S. 592 -593, and is not supported, as respondent contends, by Zavelo v. ReevesSearch
-
Williams v. U.SSearch
-
a claim could not be proved under the Act of 1841, although in terms permitting proof of contingent claims. Riggin v. MagwireSearch
-
amount annually so long as she should remain unmarried, proof of which was for that reason rejected in Dunbar v. DunbarSearch
-
Atkins v. WilcoxSearch
-
of liquidation are concerned, upon the same footing as the contract of indemnity which was held provable in Williams v. U.SSearch
-
at the time of the bankruptcy to satisfy the liability for which the indemnity was given. See also Central Trust Co. v. ChicagoSearch
-
secure his discharge, the claimant need not give notice of dishonor in order to share in the estate. See Colman Co. v. WithoftSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Maynard v. ElliottSearch
-
First National Bank v. ElliottSearch
-
Moch v. MarketSearch
-
Colman Co. v. WithoftSearch
-
the Ninth Circuit, Colman Co. v. WithoftSearch
-
Germania Savings Bank v. LoebSearch
-
Courtney v. TrustSearch
-
In Dunbar v. DunbarSearch
-
Atkins v. WilcoxSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial