Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Brown Vs. O'Keefe

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 29, 1937

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

66 entries 15 linked 51 unlinked
Show
  1. Matteson Vs. Dent US Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1900
  2. Sparhawk Vs. Yerkes US Supreme Court · Dec 07, 1891
  3. Sessions Vs. Romadka US Supreme Court · Apr 25, 1892
  4. Dushane Vs. Beall US Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1896
  5. Everett Vs. Judson US Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1913
  6. Wyman Vs. Wallace US Supreme Court · Apr 02, 1906
  7. Christopher Vs. Norvell US Supreme Court · Apr 02, 1906
  8. Bernheimer Vs. Converse US Supreme Court · May 27, 1907
  9. Mcclaine Vs. Rankin US Supreme Court · Mar 06, 1905
  10. Crawford Vs. Burke US Supreme Court · Nov 07, 1904
  11. Tindle Vs. Birkett US Supreme Court · Mar 25, 1907
  12. American File Co. Vs. Garrett US Supreme Court · Jan 28, 1884
  13. Zavelo Vs. Reeves US Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1913
  14. Maynard Vs. Elliott US Supreme Court · Apr 13, 1931
  15. Chisholm Vs. Gilmer US Supreme Court · Nov 09, 1936
  16. U.S. 598 (1937) U.S. Supreme Court Brown v. O'Keefe
    Search
  17. U.S. 598 (1937) Brown v. O'Keefe
    Search
  18. held the defenses insufficient, and gave judgment against the defendant for the amount of the assessment. Slaughter v. Brown
    Search
  19. attendant upon ownership, though his name was left continuously on the stock book of the bank. Cf. Richmond v. Irons
    Search
  20. that the shares were burdensome assets, and was directed by the court to abandon and disclaim them. American File Co. v. Garrett
    Search
  21. First National Bank v. Lasater
    Search
  22. supra, p. 145 U. S. 52 . Cf. Mills Novelty Co. v. Monarch
    Search
  23. Kirstein Holding Co. v. Bangor
    Search
  24. is presumed, but rejection leaves the title by relation as if the gift had not been made. See Albany Hospital v. Albany
    Search
  25. be the same whether title is conceived of as remaining in the bankrupt or as afterwards reverting. Albany Hospital v. Albany
    Search
  26. it is his after disclaimer by the trustee, wherever it may have been while acceptance was uncertain. American File Co. v. Garrett
    Search
  27. unless claims thereon exist in favor of claimants whose identity is determinable at the date of the petition. Zavelo v. Reeves
    Search
  28. the statutory liability may be enforced by a receiver through the medium of a claim in bankruptcy. Cf. Erickson v. Richardson
    Search
  29. to liquidate the amount of the indebtedness effectively and speedily, and give relief accordingly. Cf. Cunningham v. Commissioner
    Search
  30. United States v. Illinois
    Search
  31. in bankruptcy, the amount to be liquidated under the direction of the court by bill in equity or otherwise. Cunningham v. Commissioner
    Search
  32. King v. Pomeroy
    Search
  33. Irons v. Manufacturers'
    Search
  34. F. 591. Cf. Hightower v. American
    Search
  35. is to invest the court with a discretionary power that can be fitted to the needs of varying situations. Maynard v. Elliott
    Search
  36. Foust v. Munson
    Search
  37. of bankruptcy give assurance of a remedy that can be moulded and adapted to the needs of the occasion. Cunningham v. Commissioner
    Search
  38. the claim is not defeated though there was uncertainty as to its amount at the filing of the petition. Maynard v. Elliott
    Search
  39. become obvious to the liquidating agent, and indeed to all concerned. The facts are far removed from those in Miller v. Irving
    Search
  40. origin in the covenants of a lease. For historical causes, such covenants are sui generis ( Manhattan Properties v. Irving
    Search
  41. Gardiner v. Butler
    Search
  42. petitioner describes it. What infusion of contingency will vitiate a claim is, at best, a question of degree ( Maynard v. Elliott
    Search
  43. there is a leaning toward allowance in aid of the purpose of the statute to relieve the honest debtor ( Williams v. U.S
    Search
  44. Central Trust Co. v. Chicago
    Search
  45. True indeed it is that the liability is created by a statute, and not solely by agreement. McClaine v. Rankin
    Search
  46. Even so, the liability, created though it is by statute, is quasi contractual in its origin and basis. Chisholm v. Gilmer
    Search
  47. Shriver v. Woodbine
    Search
  48. Coffin Brothers & Co. v. Bennett
    Search
  49. U. S. 71 , 184 U. S. 74 . Cf. Erickson v. Richardson
    Search
  50. Davis v. Aetna
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial