Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Maggio Vs. Zeitz

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Feb 09, 1948

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

64 entries 3 linked 61 unlinked
Show
  1. Cooper Vs. Dasher US Supreme Court · Nov 06, 1933
  2. Oriel Vs. Russell US Supreme Court · Jan 14, 1929
  3. Gerdes Vs. Lustgarten US Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1924
  4. U.S. 56 (1948) U.S. Supreme Court Maggio v. Zeitz
    Search
  5. U.S. 56 (1948) Maggio v. Zeitz
    Search
  6. property has been abstracted from the bankrupt estate and is in the possession of the party proceeded against. Oriel v. Russell
    Search
  7. by the Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, without opinion other than citation of its own prior cases. Zeitz v. Maggio
    Search
  8. Danish v. Sofranski
    Search
  9. Seligson v. Goldsmith
    Search
  10. Rosenblum v. Marinello
    Search
  11. Robbins v. Gotthetter
    Search
  12. Cohen v. Jeskowitz
    Search
  13. Zeitz v. Maggio
    Search
  14. the turnover order has been sustained as an appropriate and necessary step in enforcing the Bankruptcy Act. Oriel v. Russell
    Search
  15. U. S. 106 . See also Farmers' & Mechanics' National Bank v. Wilkinson
    Search
  16. involved in an accident, for no apparent purpose except to get it beyond the reach of a tort creditor, see Rosenblum v. Marinello
    Search
  17. Penfield Co. v. Securities
    Search
  18. U. S. 585 . We thus have before us now a civil contempt of the same kind that was before the Court in Oriel v. Russell
    Search
  19. res judicata, and not subject to collateral attack in the contempt proceedings. This we long ago settled in Oriel v. Russell
    Search
  20. be justified by retrying the issues as to whether the order should have issued in the first place. United States v. United
    Search
  21. of the property by him subsequent to the turnover proceedings. We do not believe these views are required by Oriel v. Russell
    Search
  22. the principles laid down in this Court's opinion. Manufacturers' Page 333 U. S. 78 Finance Company v. McKey
    Search
  23. C.C.A.8th in Marin v. Ellis
    Search
  24. C.C.A.4th in Brune v. Fraidin
    Search
  25. U. S. 278 U.S. 358, 278 U. S. 366 , quoting from In re Epstein (cited as Epstein v. Steinfeld
    Search
  26. and cited Toplitz v. Walser
    Search
  27. Epstein v. Steinfeld
    Search
  28. Schmid v. Rosenthal
    Search
  29. F. 818, a turnover case, citing Epstein v. Steinfeld
    Search
  30. Frederick v. Silverman
    Search
  31. Reardon v. Pensoneau
    Search
  32. Paleais v. Moore
    Search
  33. Drakeford v. Adams
    Search
  34. commitment order should not issue. Other decisions are to the same effect. See, for example, American Trust Co. v. Wallis
    Search
  35. Samel et al. v. Dodd
    Search
  36. Dittmar v. Michelson
    Search
  37. Freed v. Central
    Search
  38. Johnson et al. v. Goldstein
    Search
  39. Clark v. Milens
    Search
  40. Berkhower v. Mielzner
    Search
  41. Smiley v. Smiley
    Search
  42. Barton v. Barton
    Search
  43. Hurd v. Hurd
    Search
  44. Heflebower v. Heflebower
    Search
  45. Ohio St. 674, 133 N.E. 455, and Fowler v. Fowler
    Search
  46. See note 6 supra. Of course, cases such as Gompers v. United
    Search
  47. Michaelson v. United
    Search
  48. States, 266 U. S. 42 , Pendergast v. United
    Search
  49. States, 317 U. S. 412 , and Cooke v. United
    Search
  50. U.S. Supreme Court Maggio v. Zeitz
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial