Union Indemnity Co. v. A. D. Drumm, Jr., Inc.
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion
Even though this court has held respondent to have no equitable lien upon the retained percentage, arising from the fact that it was a job creditor, it does not necessarily follow that respondent has no equitable lien upon said fund by reason of the fact that the restraining order issued by the trial court caused said fund to be sequestered and placed in custodia legis for the protection of all job creditors. Smith v. Halton, 8 S.W.2d 439; Pennington v. Fourth National Bank of Cincinnati,243 U.S. 269, 61 L.Ed. 713; Kelly v. Bausman (Wash.), 168 P. 181; Bragg v. Gaynor, 85 Wis. 468, 21 L.R.A.…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Henningsen v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- James v. Alderton Dock Yards, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Walker v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Jones Trustee Etc. v. CarpenterSupreme Court of Florida · 1925
- Fourth Street Bank of Philadelphia v. YardleySupreme Court of the United States · 1897
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.