ยง
In the Matter of B

6 Cited authorities

  1. Eckert v. Miller

    111 P.2d 60 (Ariz. 1941)   Cited 15 times
    In Eckert v. Miller, 57 Ariz. 94, 101, 111 P.2d 60, we discussed the nature of fraud and recognized there was in that case sufficient fraud to call into play the trust remedy.

  2. Taylor v. Citizens Bank of Albany

    160 S.W.2d 639 (Ky. Ct. App. 1942)   Cited 9 times

    March 24, 1942. Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. J.S. Sandusky, Judge. Duncan Duncan and Ward R. Case for appellants. J.G. Smith and J.A. Flowers for appellee. OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUDGE CAMMACK Affirming. In January, 1936, W.E. Taylor was appointed administrator of the estate of Alfred Yahnig, a resident of Fentress County, Tennessee. He continued to act in that capacity until his death in September, 1938. There came into the administrator's hands three checks, each of which was made payable

  3. New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Nat'l Newark & Essex Banking Co.

    175 A. 609 (Ch. Div. 1934)   Cited 5 times
    In New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. National Newark Essex Banking Co., 117 N.J. Eq. 264, 175 A. 609, bad faith was not found by the size of the checks, l.c. 618: "No ground is perceived upon which to except from the principles of the common law, * * * a fiduciary's check because of the largeness of the amount, and no adjudication has been brought to our attention indicating that it is a badge of fraud."

  4. Seelig v. First Nat. Bank

    20 F. Supp. 61 (N.D. Ill. 1936)   Cited 2 times

    20 F.Supp. 61 (N.D.Ill. 1936) SEELIG et al. v. FIRST NAT. BANK OF CHICAGO. No. 14431. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois March 25, 1936 Nelson, Miller & Boodell, of Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff. Winston, Strawn & Shaw, of Chicago, Ill., for defendant. SULLIVAN, District Judge. July 12, 1935, amended bill of complaint, entitled as above, was filed by the members of a noteholders' committee, under deposit agreement dated July 10, 1934 (Exhibit B), on their own behalf and on behalf of all notehoders

  5. Balducci v. Strough

    135 Misc. 346 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1929)   Cited 5 times

    December 18, 1929. Stanley Bliss, for the plaintiff. A.G. Waldo, for the defendants. RHODES, J. Plaintiff, a taxpayer of the village of Canastota, brings this action to restrain further proceedings by the village officials under a proposition adopted by the trustees of the village and ratified by the electors providing for a bond issue of $150,006, of which $137,800, or so much thereof as might be necessary, should be issued for the purpose of securing for the village a new water supply. The resolution

  6. People v. Khan

    41 Cal.App. 393 (Cal. Ct. App. 1919)   Cited 13 times
    Interpreting Cal. Penal Code ยง 476a