Phoenix National Bank of Providence v. Batcheller
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
This is an action by a Rhode Island national bank, upon a promissory note payable in Massachusetts, and made here by the defendants, citizens of this State. The defence is a discharge in insolvency in this State. It is admitted that the plaintiff did not prove its claim upon the note, and the only question is whether, under these circumstances, the discharge is a bar. It was argued for the defendants, that the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States that discharges in such cases are not generally valid against citizens of other States do not go upon any constitutional ground, but…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Pennoyer v. NeffSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Ogden v. SaundersSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- Cole v. CunninghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Baldwin v. HaleSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Denny v. BennettSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Olivieri v. AtkinsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. NashSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
- Bergner & Engel Brewing Co. v. DreyfusMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Regina Flour Mill Co. v. HolmesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Hammond Beef & Provision Co. v. BestSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1898
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.