Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Gardner Vs. New Jersey

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 20, 1947

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

73 entries 9 linked 64 unlinked
Show
  1. Missouri Vs. Fiske US Supreme Court · Nov 06, 1933
  2. Straton Vs. New US Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1931
  3. New York Vs. Jersawit US Supreme Court · Jan 07, 1924
  4. Arkansas Corporation Commission Vs. Thompson US Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1941
  5. Whitney Vs. Dresser US Supreme Court · Feb 19, 1906
  6. Whitney Vs. Wenman US Supreme Court · May 29, 1905
  7. New York Vs. Maclay US Supreme Court · Feb 06, 1933
  8. Van Huffel Vs. Harkelrode US Supreme Court · Dec 07, 1931
  9. Boteler Vs. Ingels US Supreme Court · Nov 06, 1939
  10. Gardner v. New
    Search
  11. Jersey - 329 U.S. 565 (1947) U.S. Supreme Court Gardner v. New
    Search
  12. Jersey, 329 U.S. 565 (1947) Gardner v. New
    Search
  13. is constitutional. New York v. Irvin
    Search
  14. the railroad's property underlying the assessments or the validity of the assessments. Arkansas Corporation Commission v. Thompson
    Search
  15. of the 1941 and 1942 acts. The result was a holding that the acts violated the New Jersey constitution. Wilentz v. Hendrickson
    Search
  16. to a paramount lien on all the lands, tangible property, and franchises of the debtor. Shortly after Wilentz v. Hendrickson
    Search
  17. validity and amount of the tax claims and their lien, subject to the limitations of Arkansas Corporation Commission v. Thompson
    Search
  18. of Appeals treated the appeal as if all of the questions presented were covered by Arkansas Corporation Commission v. Thompson
    Search
  19. method of collecting a debt. A proof of claim is, of course, prima facie evidence of its validity. Whitney v. Dresser
    Search
  20. court by offering a proof of claim and demanding its allowance must abide the consequences of that procedure. Wiswall v. Campbell
    Search
  21. the fund, it waives any immunity which it otherwise might have had respecting the adjudication of the claim. See Clark v. Barnard
    Search
  22. Gunter v. Atlantic
    Search
  23. The extent of the constitutional authority of the bankruptcy court in this respect was passed upon in New York v. Irving
    Search
  24. of New Jersey law made by a federal judge of the New Jersey District Court is entitled to special weight. Steele v. General
    Search
  25. so vigorously asserts. For it appears that the time for filing claims has expired, and, under the rule of New York v. Irving
    Search
  26. the bankruptcy court to ascertain their validity and extent and to determine the method of their liquidation. Whitney v. Wenman
    Search
  27. Isaacs v. Hobbs
    Search
  28. U. S. 318 , 283 U. S. 321 . Moreover, both in receivership cases, New York v. Maclay
    Search
  29. United States v. Texas
    Search
  30. U. S. 480 , and in bankruptcy cases, Van Huffel v. Harkelrode
    Search
  31. New York v. Irving
    Search
  32. cases, the task of resolving disputes as to liens is a common one for the court. See Institutional Investors v. Chicago
    Search
  33. affect the power of the Interstate Commerce Commission and the court to promulgate a reorganization plan. See Ecker v. Western
    Search
  34. Smith v. Hoboken
    Search
  35. Thompson v. Texas
    Search
  36. safeguards the interests of the various claimants, but is also compatible with the public interest. Continental Bank v. Chicago
    Search
  37. of Congress to grant the bankruptcy court power to deal with the lien of a State has been settled. In Van Huffel v. Harkelrode
    Search
  38. Third. We held in Arkansas Corporation Commission v. Thompson
    Search
  39. for any year, are the state agencies and courts, and, under special circumstances, the federal courts. Hillsborough v. Cromwell
    Search
  40. the valuations which underlie assessments. 152 F.2d pp. 411-414. By the standards of Arkansas Corporation Commission v. Thompson
    Search
  41. the reorganization proceedings would not be appropriate. Fourth. The rule of Arkansas Corporation Commission v. Thompson
    Search
  42. it was sufficiently perfected prior to the petition for reorganization as to be good against other liens, cf. New York v. Maclay
    Search
  43. whether, if it were inchoate at that time, it could be perfected subsequent to the petition, Lyford v. New
    Search
  44. U. S. 580 to administration expenses or other claims under wither the general bankruptcy rule, City of New York v. Hall
    Search
  45. See Warren v. Palmer
    Search
  46. realty or covers personal property or revenues as well -- are also questions for the reorganization court. See Ecker v. Western
    Search
  47. amount of a tax claim secured by a lien without crossing the forbidden line marked by Arkansas Corporation Commission v. Thompson
    Search
  48. U. S. 493 , and what are not, Meilink v. Unemployment
    Search
  49. the liability of the estate for penalties incurred by the trustee in the operation of the business, Boteler v. Ingels
    Search
  50. what interest, if any, accrues after the petition for reorganization has been filed, Vanston Committee v. Green
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial