Taylor V Sternberg - Judgment Search Results

Taylor Vs. Sternberg

Court: US Supreme Court

Taylor v. Sternberg - 293 U.S. 470 (1935) U.S. Supreme Court Taylor v. Sternberg, 293 U.S. 470 (1935) Taylor v. Sternberg … Taylor v. Sternberg - 293 U.S. 470 (1935) U.S. Supreme Court Taylor v. Sternberg, 293 U.S. 470 (1935) Taylor v. Sternberg No. 261 Argued December 14, 1934 Decided January 7, 1935 *

Callaghan Vs. Reconstruction Finance Corp.

Court: US Supreme Court

allowances, which the statute permits the prior judge to fix, shall not exceed the limit of reasonableness. Compare Taylor v. Sternberg, 293 U. S. 470 ; Gross v. Irving Trust Co., 289 U. S. 342 ; Hume v. Myers,

Steelman Vs. All Continent Corp.

Court: US Supreme Court

268 U. S. 115 ; Galbraith v. Vallely, 256 U. S. 46 , 256 U. S. 50 ; Taylor v. Sternberg, 293 U. S. 470 , 293 U. S. 473 . Quite as much as any creditor, the trustee

Kalb Vs. Feuerstein

Court: US Supreme Court

234. [ Footnote 10 ] Vallely v. Northern Fire Ins. Co., supra, 254 U. S. 355 ; cf. Taylor v. Sternberg, 293 U. S. 470 , 293 U. S. 473 . [ Footnote 11 ] Hines v. Lowrey, 305

Emil Vs. Hanley

Court: US Supreme Court

S. 342 . While such disbursements were generally subject to the summary power of the bankruptcy court ( Taylor v. Sternberg, 293 U. S. 470 ), an accounting for disbursements made prior to bankruptcy required a plenary suit. Loveless

S.M. Nawab Ariff Vs. Corporation of Calcutta and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1960Cal159,64CWN1

(1884) 28 Law Ed 704; Horace B. Claflin v. Julius Houseman, (1878) 23 Law Ed 833; S. A. Taylor v. Henry Sternberg, (19351 79 Law Ed 599; Heman Marian Sweatt v. Theophilas Shickel Painter, (1950) 94 Law Ed

H.V. Vijayaraghavan and anr. Vs. Malathi Das and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2009(5)KarLJ375; 2009(4)KCCR2313; 2009(4)AIRKarR385(D.B)

prescribes a particular manner for doing a particular act, that act must be done in that manner alone (Taylor v. Taylor (1876) 1 Ch. D. 426).35.2 The above well-settled position is constantly applied by the Indian Courts also

Latika Gorakh Mate Vs. the Secretary, Rural Education Society,

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR2884

(as he then was), para55 thereof makes a reference to a well known judgment in the case of Taylor v. Taylor (1875) 1 Ch D 426, by Jessel M.R. and quoted as under:When a statutory power is conferred

Saindranath S/O Jagannath Jawanjal Vs. Pratibha Shikshan Sanstha, Thro ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(4)ALLMR281; 2007(3)BomCR527; 2007(3)MhLJ753

(as he then was), para-55 thereof makes a reference to a well known judgment in the case of Taylor v. Taylor (1875) 1 Ch D 426, by Jessel M.R. and quoted as under:When a statutory power is conferred

Bapatla Venkata Row Vs. Bapatla Venkoba Row and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1927Mad595

authority relating to tenants in common which may be applied in a case like this, namely Fishar and Taylor v. Prosser, a case heard by Lord Mansfield in 1774; and that principle as also been recognised in Ahmuddin