Legal Opinion · Dissent

Anderson v. Abbott

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 3, 1944No. 3Published

1DissentJustice Jackson

Me. Justice1 Roberts, Me. Justice Reed, Mr. Justice Frankfurter, and I find ourselves unable to join in the judgment of the Court.

The Court accepts concurrent findings of fact by the two lower courts, but reverses their concurrent judgment. It holds that the findings establish liability as matter of law on two very different kinds of stockholdings: (1) holding company stock taken in exchange for double liability stock of the National Bank of Kentucky; and (2) holding company stock bought and fully paid for in cash. We think holders of the latter ai’e not liable on any principle heretofore…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Pepper v. LittonSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  2. Berkey v. Third Avenue Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
  3. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Minneapolis Civic & Commerce Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  4. United States v. Reading Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
  5. Electric Bond & Share Co. v. Securities & Exchange Comm'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1938

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

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

Powered by the Exa API