Legal Opinion

Maybury v. Spinney-Maybury Co.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided April 13, 1923PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMorrill, J.

The issues here presented to us relate solely to the amount for which United Shoe Machinery Company, hereinafter sometimes called the claimant, may prove itsN claim against the defendant and share in the distribution of its assets.

Upon a bill filed May 12, 1917, a Receiver of the defendant corporation was appointed on May 19, 1917. The United Shoe Machinery Company had delivered to the defendant, for the equipment of its factory, some fifty-eight machines designed for use in the manufacture of boots and shoes; said machines were in the factory of defendant at Warren when the Receiver was…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Steel Co. v. New York City Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1912
  2. William Filene's Sons Co. v. WeedSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  3. Loudon v. Taxing DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  4. In Re the General Assignment of HevenorNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
  5. Smith v. GoodmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1893

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United Cable Television of Baltimore Ltd. Partnership v. BurchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
  2. Interstate Industrial Uniform Rental Service, Inc. v. Couri Pontiac, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1976
  3. Wade & Dunton, Inc. v. GordonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1949
  4. United Cable Television of Baltimore Ltd. Partnership v. BurchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API