Mitchell v. McClure
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion
Mr. J ustioe Gray delivered the opinion of the court.
This was an action of replevin in the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania by a trustee in bankruptcy, appointed by that court, a citizen of Pennsylvania, to recover a stock of goods, of the value of $2500, in the possession of the defendants, citizens of Pennsylvania and residents of that district, and alleged to have been conveyed to them by the bankrupt, within four months before the institution of proceedings in bankruptcy, in fraud of the Bankrupt Act of 1898, and of the creditors of the bankrupt. The District Court, on motion of the defendant, held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain such an action, and therefore ordered it to be abated. 91 Fed. Bep. 621. The plaintiff sued out a writ of error from this court, and the District Judge certified that the question of jurisdiction was the sole question in issue.
For the reasons stated in Bardes v. Hawarden Bank, ante, 524, just decided, The.ffiidgmeni is affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 19 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Supreme Court4
- U.S. Courts of Appeals6
- Federal District Courts5
- Historical Federal Courts1
- State Highest Courts2
- State Appellate Courts1
Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.