Legal Opinion
Seay v. McCaughey
District Court, S.D. Mississippi
Decided December 22, 1934PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOLMES, District Judge.
The referee allowed petitioners’ claim for damages respecting a contract for future rents, but denied priority of payment. The sole question presented by the petition to review is the correctness of this ruling. It involves a construction of clause 7, par. a, § 103,.title 11, USCA, providing what debts may be proved against the estate of a bankrupt; of clause 7, par. b, § 104, title 11, USCA, designating the debts to have priority in advance of payment of dividends to creditors and fixing the order of payment; and of section 2175 of the Mississippi Code of 1930,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Gibson v. WardenSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Longstreth v. PennockSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Rosenblum v. UberCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1919
- In re HooverDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1902
- Bennett's Estate v. SproulCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1930
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Seiden v. Southland Chenilles', Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
- Seiden v. Southland Chenilles', Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952