Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

illinois Vs. Campbell

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Dec 23, 1946

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

60 entries 3 linked 57 unlinked
Show
  1. New York Vs. Maclay US Supreme Court · Feb 06, 1933
  2. Emil Vs. Hanley US Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1943
  3. United States Vs. Knott US Supreme Court · May 25, 1936
  4. U.S. 362 (1946) U.S. Supreme Court Illinois v. Campbell
    Search
  5. U.S. 362 (1946) Illinois ex rel. Gordon v. Campbell
    Search
  6. Revenue Code takes priority over a claim of a State for taxes under a state Unemployment Compensation Act. Illinois v. United
    Search
  7. This Court granted certiorari, 327 U.S. 772, and, after hearing argument and disposing of a companion case ( Illinois v. United
    Search
  8. MR. JUSTICE RUTLEDGE delivered the opinion of the Court. This case was companion to Illinois ex rel. Gordon v. United
    Search
  9. U.S. 772. On the same day that Illinois ex rel. Gordon v. United
    Search
  10. represented employees' taxes, see Helvering v. Davis
    Search
  11. Whether it was correct to award this priority is the issue we now have to decide. Illinois ex rel. Gordon v. United
    Search
  12. must be met before the case can be affirmed on the authority of Illinois ex rel. Gordon v. United
    Search
  13. Duparquet Huot & Moneuse Co. v. Evans
    Search
  14. It has Page 329 U. S. 369 not determined the correctness of that view, Emil v. Hanley
    Search
  15. need we do so now. For, though the receiver was appointed at the instance of a secured creditor, as in United States v. Texas
    Search
  16. United States v. Texas
    Search
  17. See also the discussion in Price v. United
    Search
  18. Harv.L.Rev. 251, 267-270. The question, however, has been reserved many times in express terms. See Conard v. Atlantic
    Search
  19. Brent v. Bank
    Search
  20. Spokane County v. United
    Search
  21. U. S. 480 , 314 U. S. 485 -486. United States v. Waddill
    Search
  22. United States v. Oklahoma
    Search
  23. Hence, a state court's characterization of a lien as specific and perfected is not conclusive. United States v. Waddill
    Search
  24. United States v. Knott
    Search
  25. relation to the facts presented by this case, but merely determined that, under the facts of Illinois ex rel. Gordon v. United
    Search
  26. See United States v. Waddill
    Search
  27. of rights to specific property, as is, for example, the enforcement of a judgment by execution and levy. Conard v. Atlantic
    Search
  28. Neither view is correct. Both have been repudiated by repeated decisions of this Court, the latest being United States v. Waddill
    Search
  29. Conard v. Atlantic
    Search
  30. United States v. Waddill
    Search
  31. the identity of the lienor, United States v. Knott
    Search
  32. the amount of the lien, United States v. Waddill
    Search
  33. Co., 323 U. S. 353 , at 323 U. S. 357 -358, and (3) the property to which it attaches, United States v. Waddill
    Search
  34. appointment of the receiver made definite and certain the property, as we have shown. Here, as in United States v. Texas
    Search
  35. As in United States v. Waddill
    Search
  36. Ibid., 323 U. S. 358 . The state has acquired neither title nor possession, Thelusson v. Smith
    Search
  37. part payment of its claim for federal unemployment taxes. 391 Ill. 29, 32, 34, 62 N.E.2d 537. See also United States v. Spencer
    Search
  38. contributions taxes, there are no provisions for federal-state cooperation as there are in Title 9. Compare Helvering v. Davis
    Search
  39. U. S. 619 , with Steward Machine Co. v. Davis
    Search
  40. U. S. 548 . See also Rivard v. Bijou
    Search
  41. Collier on Bankruptcy (14th ed.) 475. But, under the amended statute, the same view has been expressed. Elfast v. Lamb
    Search
  42. Price v. United
    Search
  43. The statement in United States v. Knott
    Search
  44. taken to have been made with reference to the early mortgage lien cases discussed and distinguished in United States v. Texas
    Search
  45. U.S. at 314 U. S. 484 -485, and New York v. Maclay
    Search
  46. The priority of the United States attaches upon appointment of the receiver. United States v. Oklahoma
    Search
  47. U.S. Supreme Court Illinois v. Campbell
    Search
  48. Gordon v. Campbell
    Search
  49. Unemployment Compensation Act. Illinois v. United
    Search
  50. Illinois v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales