The wife of the bankrupt brought suit in a state court against parties who were in possession of a sealed package which she claimed to own. The state court refused to substitute the trustees in bankruptcy for the defendants, and the trustees thereupon brought a suit in the court of bankruptcy to determine the ownership of the package and for an injunction to restrain the wife from proceeding in the state court. The court granted the injunction. Wilkinson et al. v. Barnard et al., 9 Ben. 249; 29 Fed. Cas. 1254.

A creditor's bill had been filed against the bankrupt, and a receiver appointed. The court held that the proceedings in bankruptcy supersede all proceedings for the administration of the assets of the debtor, subject only to priorities which are obtained by any creditors by the use of diligence, which are to be respected, and which should be paid in the order of priority according to whatever rights have been obtained. In re Whipple, 6 Biss. 516; 29 Fed. Cas. 928.

A creditor may prosecute an attachment suit in a state court to juagment and levy, in the absence of objection by the assignee in bankruptcy. Mattocks v. Ferrington, 2 Hask. 331; 16 Fed. Cas. 1147.

One of three partners petitioned to have the copartnership adjudged bankrupt. The two other partners answered that before the filing of the petition a judgment was entered in a state court dissolving a partnership and appointing a receiver. It was held by Judge Blatchford that the state court had acquired jurisdiction of the three copartners and their copartnership property. The court, therefore, refused to adjudicate the two opposing partners as bankrupts. In re Oehninger, 8 Ben. 487; 18 Fed. Cas. 594.

If a bankrupt is restrained of his liberty under process of a state court in violation of the laws of the United States, the United States district court would, under the provisions of the Act February 5, 1867, have power to release him on habeas corpus. In re Seymour, 1 N. B. R. 29; 1 Ben. 348 (1867).

Judge Blodgett held under the Act of 1867 that a state court has jurisdiction of an action by an assignee in bankruptcy to collect assets of the bankrupt. Clark v. Ewing, 3 Fed. Rep. 83.

A court of bankruptcy is not bound by allegations in a complaint, made by a party to the proceedings, in a suit in a state court. In re Williams et al., 6 Biss. 233; 29 Fed. Cas. 1318.

As a general rule, the coure of bankruptcy will not interfere where other courts have assumed full jurisdiction of property upon which liens are claimed to exist. In re Taliafero, 3 Hughes, 422; 23 Fed. Cas. 674. A general creditor's suit in chancery cannot be brought in another court than the court of bankruptcy against the bankrupt after his adjudication. In re Anderson, 2 Hughes, 378; 1 Fed. Cas. 831.

A judgment in a state court is conclusive upon an assignee in bankruptcy when he appears and defends in the action. Winchester v. Heiskell, 199 U. S. 450; 120 id. 273.

It was held that the assignee being made a party had no authority to consent to a decree in a state court in a suit prosecuted in conflict with the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court. In re Anderson, 23 Fed. Rep. 482.

Under section 1 of the Act of 1867, one of the powers conferred upon the court in bankruptcy was the ascertainment and liquidation of liens and other specific claims." This was held to refer only to cases where the claims had not been previously determined by other competent tribunals. The Ironsides, 4 Biss. 518; 13 Fed. Cas. 103.

H. had failed to obey an order of the state court on proceedings supplementary to execution and an order had been issued for him to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt. Subsequently proceedings in involuntary bankruptcy were commenced against him. The court held that it was not a proper case for an injunction against the proceedings for contempt. In re Hill, 2 N. B. R. 140; 12 Fed. Cas. 49.

A court of bankruptcy has no jurisdiction to correct or annul a judgment rendered in a state court. In re Dunn, 2 Hughes, 169; 8 Fed. Cas. 93.

Justice Bradley decided that a receiver in possession of mortgaged property under an order of a state court, before the commencement of proceedings in bankruptcy, can only be dispossessed by the payment and redemption of the mortgage. The court in bankruptcy having ordered such property to be taken from the hands of the receiver and sold, the sale was set aside and the purchase money returned. Davis v. R. R. Co., 1 Woods, 661; 7 Fed. Cas. 164.

A national bank held a second mortgage on certain property of the bankrupt, and the assignee desired to contest the right of the bank to take or hold such security. The court enjoined the mortgagee from foreclosing in a state court. In re Duryea, 17 N. B. R. 495; 8 Fed, Cas. 131.

After a composition had been confirmed, and the money was awaiting distribution, certain parties applied for a receiver of the amounts due three of the creditors, to withhold them pending the result of proceedings in another court. The application was denied. In re Kohlsaat, 18 N. B. R. 570; 14 Fed. Cas, 833.

Upon the sale of certain premises by the assignee in bankruptcy, the bankrupt agreed with the purchaser to vacate them at a certain time, but failed to do so. An application by the purchaser to the court of bankruptcy for the delivery of possession to him was denied on the ground that the laws of the state afforded him an ample remedy as against a tenant holding over. In re Hale, 19 N. B. R. 330; 11 Fed. Cas. 181.

Under the Act of 1841, the district court could issue an injunction against an attachment suit in a state court commenced before the proceedings in bankruptcy. If the attaching creditor does not reside in the district, the injunction can be made against his agents and attorneys. In re Bellows, 3 Story, 428; 3 Fed. Cas. 138 (1814).

Justice Miller expressed the opinion that the Act of 1867 did not give the federal courts exclusive jurisdiction of an action by an assignee in bankruptcy, and added: "If the state courts failed to recognize his legal rights, a presumption not here to be indulged, he can, in the proper mode, bring the case from the highest court of the state to the highest court of the United States." Johnson v. Bishop, Woolw. 324; 13 Fed. Cas. 732.

B. and C. as copartners had been adjudged bankrupts and had appealed to the circuit court. C. had brought suits against B., concerning the joint property and the proceedings in bankruptcy in a state court. The circuit court decided that it had no authority to issue a writ of prohibition to the state court forbidding further proceedings in such suits. In re Bininger et al., 7 Blatchf. 159; 3 Fed. Cas. 407. Later, the court refused to require C. to elect in which court he would proceed. 7 Blatchf. 168; 8 Fed. Cas. 411.

An assignee cannot maintain an action in the district court to recover possession of the property of a bankrupt from a sheriff who holds it by an attachment issued out of a state court before the filing of the petition. Johnson v. Bishop, Woolw. 324; 13 Fed. Cas. 732.

A suit already pending in a state court in which the title to real estate surrendered by the bankrupt is in dispute will not be restrained by the district court; but the district court sitting in bankruptcy may restrain the parties from proceeding in the state court to take the property out of the possession of the assignee in bankruptcy. Hewitt v. Norton, 1 Wood. 68; 12 Fed. Cas. 71.

A court of bankruptcy refused to grant an injunction against the foreclosure of a mortgage in a state court against a bankrupt where his assignee had repeatedly appeared, permitted the action to proceed, and did not object for more than two years, and where it was not certain that the estate would be injured by the foreclosure. Augustine v. McFarland, 13 N. B. R. 7; 2 Fed. Cas. 212.

It was held by Justice Baldwin in an elaborate opinion that a district court of the United States has no power in any case to issue an injunction against the process of a state court. Dudley's Case, 1 Penn. L. J. 302; 7 Fed. Cas. 1150 (1842).

When a mortgagee brings a suit in a state court to foreclose a mortgage against the bankrupt, after adjudication, and the assignee in bankruptcy claims that it is void, the court of bankruptcy may restrain the foreclosure. In re Kerosene Oil Co., 3 Ben. 35; 14 Fed. Cas. 379. Upon appeal to the circuit court, Justice Nelson ordered that the petition of the assignee be amended and filed as a bill in equity, holding that the injunction could only be granted upon a plenary suit in chancery. Ibid., 6 Blatchf. 521; 14 Fed. Cas. 380.

An action was brought in a state court to recover a debt alleged to have been contracted by fraud, and in that action the bankrupt was arrested and gave bail. He applied to the court of bankruptcy for an order discharging him from arrest and releasing his bail. The court affirmed its authority to grant the relief prayed for, provided his ar

rest was founded on a debt from which he would be released by a discharge in bankruptcy. In re Glaser, 8 Ben. 180; 10 Fed. Cas. 464.

While proceedings in bankruptcy were pending, some of the petitioning creditors brought an action in a state court for the arrest of the bankrupts on the ground that they had fraudulently contracted their indebtedness, and had disposed of a large part of their property to defraud their creditors. The court of bankruptcy enjoined proceedings in this action pending the question of the discharge. In re Goldstein et al., 52 How. Pr. 426; 10 Fed. Cas. 569.

A debtor arrested on process from a state court had applied for the benefit of the act for the relief of poor debtors. Before the hearing, he filed his petition in bankruptcy, and was adjudged a bankrupt. Thereupon he filed a petition that he be released from arrest, and that being denied, subsequently filed a petition for an injunction against further proceedings by the creditors in the state court. This petition was also dismissed. On appeal, the circuit court sustained the action of the lower court. Minon v. Van Nostrand et al., Holmes, 251; 17 Fed. Cas. 454; s. c. 1 Low. 458; 17 Fed. Cas. 455.

A court of bankruptcy will not stay proceedings in a state court to recover a debt incurred by fraud, which would not be affected by a discharge in bankruptcy. In re Leibenstein et al., 4 Chi. Leg. News, 309; 15 Fed. Cas. 250.

Parties may be enjoined by a court of bankruptcy from proceeding to judgment and execution in a state court during the pendency of proceedings. Penny v. Taylor, 10 N. B. R. 200; 19 Fed. Cas. 194.

Congress cannot impose duties on state courts, nor require them to entertain suits to carry out the objects of the Bankrupt Act. Mitchell v. Great Works M. & M. Co., 2 Story, 648; 17 Fed. Cas. 496 (1843).

Under the Act of 1841 a state court had no jurisdiction of a suit by an assignee in bankruptcy to avoid a lien on the property of a bankrupt on the ground of fraud. McLean v. LaFayette Bank et al., 3 McLean, 185; 16 Fed. Cas. 253 (1843).

When a suit in a state court to enforce a lien will tend to draw to it the administration of the Bankrupt Act, a circuit court of the United States will restrain it by injunction. Ibid.

An injunctional order was issued in bankruptcy proceedings restraining a judgment creditor and all other persons from selling the property of the bankrupt on a judgment entered in a state court. Held, that the sheriff and judgment creditor were informed by the service of the order as to what they were forbidden to do, and the fact that they were not named would make no difference. In re Lady Bryan Min. Co., 6 N. B. R. 252; 14 Fed. Cas. 928.

Congress has no power to vest in state courts jurisdiction to carry into effect a bankrupt law. McLean v. LaFayette Bank et al., 3 McLean, 185: 16 Fed. Cas. 253 (1843).

A court of bankruptcy may enjoin the sale of property under an execution issued from a state court before the filing of the petition in bankruptcy. In re Lady Bryan Min. Co., 6 N. B. R. 252; 14 Fed. Cas. 928.

A decision by a court of bankruptcy that a transaction was a violation of the bankrupt law is binding upon the state courts, and a party feeling himself aggrieved is bound to come into the court of bankruptcy for relief. In re Miller, 6 Biss. 30; 17 Fed. Cas. 293.

The state court does not necessarily lose its jurisdiction of a commonlaw or equity suit simply because the plaintiff is an assignee in bankruptcy. Mitchell v. Great Works M. & M. Co., 2 Story, 648; 17 Fed. Cas. 496 (1843).

Where a court of bankruptcy has ordered the sale of mortgaged premises, a state court is ousted of jurisdiction of proceedings in foreclosure. In re Devore, 16 N. B. R. 56; 7 Fed. Cas. 570.

One of three members of a dissolved firm commenced proceedings in a state court for a settlement of partnership affairs, and was himself appointed receiver of the partnership property in that action. Two months later, the other members of the firm filed a petition that the firm be adjudged bankrupt. It was held that the court of bankruptcy had jurisdiction over the partnership property, and that the third partner should be restrained from disposing of the assets pending adjudication. In re Hathorn et al., 2 Woods, 73; 11 Fed. Cas. 822.

A bankrupt in arrest under process from a state court in a civil action ex delicto cannot be released by the United States district court upon a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. In re Devoe, 1 Low. 251; 7 Fed. Cas. 565.

When congress adopts substantially an insolvent law of one of the states as a Bankrupt Act, the federal courts are not bound by the decisions of the courts of that state in construing it. In re Knight, 2 Biss. 518; 14 Fed. Cas. 752.

The district court is bound to see that the assignee in bankruptcy is not forcibly dispossessed of the property belonging to the bankrupt that had come into his hands. So held in a case where property was taken from the possession of the assignee under a writ of replevin issued by a state court in a proceeding in which the assignee was not a party, and his title was not in controversy. In re Clark, 9 Blatchf. 379; 5 Fed. Cas. 844.

The rights of creditors will be determined by the Bankrupt Act, and not by a state law, when an adjudication has been had in bankruptcy, and the assignee under the state law has surrendered the property. In re Bonsfield & Poole M. Co., 17 N. B. R. 153; 3 Fed. Cas. 1016. The circuit court, affirming the district court, decided that where one member of the firm had died, and his share in the partnership had gone into the hands of an administrator by virtue of proceedings in the probate court, and a petition had been filed against the firm, the court of bankruptcy would not take the estate out of the hands of the administrator. In re Daggett, 8 N. B. R. 287, 433; 6 Fed. Cas. 1107, 1108. After adjudication, a bankrupt was taken into custody by the sheriff on a judgment against him for costs in an action in a state court. The