Judgment Claims in Receivership Proceedings, 30 Yale Law Journal 674 (1921)
In view of the importance of the subject it is unfortunate that so few of the reported cases on equitable receiverships of corporations have dealt in any comprehensive way with the principles underlying the administrating of the fund for the benefit of creditors. The result is that controversy has outstripped authoritative decision, and the subject is unsettled. To this generalization an exception must be noted in respect of the special topic of the application of current railway income to current expenses, before the payment of mortgage indebtedness. On another disputed topic, the provability of immature claims, the law, or at least the right principle of decision, has been settled, by the notable opinion of Judge Noyes in Pennsylvania Steel Company v. New York City Railway Company, followed and reinforced by that of Mr. Justice Holmes in William Filene's Sons Company v. Weed. Notwithstanding these important exceptions, the dearth of authority on the general subject is such that Judge Noyes refers to a case cited in his opinion as "almost the only case in which rules have "'been formulated with respect to the provability of claims against "insolvent corporations.'"
Date of Authorship for this Version
Beach, John K., "Judgment Claims in Receivership Proceedings" (1921). Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 3975.