Legal Opinion
Barnett v. Jaspan
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided January 7, 1942No. 66PublishedCited by 93 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
The District Court, reversing an order of the referee, declared that an instrument by which Cecelia Barnett, the bankrupt, assigned to her mother, Clara Essenfeld, her testate and intestate interest in her father’s estate, was invalid as to her trustee in bankruptcy. In 1935, her father had made a will, leaving to her 15% of his residuary estate. The following year she assigned to her mother, in consideration of $5,000 paid by her father, all her rights, in intestacy or under any will previously or thereafter made, to her father’s estate. Some four years later, on August…
2Cases cited47 opinions
- Messenger v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. Sunburst Oil & Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Webster v. FallSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Ex Parte PetersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. United States Realty & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by93 opinions
- El Paso Natural Gas Co. v. NeztsosieSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Cover v. SchwartzCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Hoffman v. PalmerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- in All Cases which have been Consolidated into this Proceeding by Order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation v. Union Carbide Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Mary Kicklighter v. Nails by Jannee, Inc., Mary Kicklighter v. Nails by Jannee, Inc., and Third-Party v. Kay-See Dental Manufacturing Co., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
88 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.