ENRIQUEZ, ADMR., ETC.,

v.

A. S. WATSON & CO., LIMITED

Citator

Cited By

• Nathanson in Bankruptcy v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 344 U.S. 25 (U.S. 1952)
  …charge the public debts.” See United States v. State Bank, 6 Pet. 29, 35. There is no function here of assuring the public revenue. The beneficiaries of the claims are private persons as was the receiver in American Surety Co. v. Akron Savings Bank, 212 U. S. 557. It is true that Bramwell v. U. S. Fidelity Co., 269 U. S. 483, extended the priority to a claim of the United States for Indian moneys. But that case rests on the status of the Indians as wards of the United States (see Bowling v. United States,…
• Martin v. West, 222 U.S. 191 (U.S. 1911)
• Fla. Bank & Tr. Co. of W. Palm Beach v. Union Indem. Co., 55 F.2d 640 (5th Cir. 1932)
  …United States, and that the appellees, by paying the amount of those deposits, acquired a right to priority in distribution of the assets of the depository, is inconsistent with the decision in the case of American Surety Co. v. Akron Savings Bank, 212 U. S. 557, 29 S. Ct. 686, 53 L. Ed. 651, to the effect that the surety on the bond of the depository of a receiver in bankruptcy whieh ran, as required by law, to the United States, was not entitled to priority in distribution of assets of the depository. [*6…