In Effinger v. Kenney, Trustee, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a state court had the authority to appoint a receiver to take possession of a bankrupt's property. The bankrupt in question was a resident of the state of Missouri, and the receiver was appointed by a court in the state of Illinois. The Supreme Court held that the state court in Illinois did not have the authority to appoint a receiver to take possession of the bankrupt's property. The Court reasoned that the power to appoint a receiver was a matter of state law, and that the state of Missouri had not given the state of Illinois the authority to appoint a receiver. The Court also noted that the bankrupt had not consented to the appointment of a receiver, and that the appointment of a receiver was not necessary to protect the interests of the creditors. The Court concluded that the state court in Illinois had exceeded its authority in appointing a receiver to take possession of the bankrupt's property. The Court reversed the decision of the lower court and held that the appointment of a receiver was invalid.

In Effinger v. Kenney, Trustee, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a judgment creditor of an insolvent debtor could recover from the trustee in bankruptcy for money paid by the debtor prior to filing for bankruptcy. The majority opinion held that such recovery was not allowed under existing law and thus denied relief to the judgment creditor. Justice Field dissented on this ruling, arguing that allowing creditors who had already been paid by their debtors before they filed for bankruptcy would be unfair and unjust as it would leave them with no remedy whatsoever against those debtors or their trustees in bankruptcy. He further argued that Congress should have provided some form of relief in cases like these where creditors were left without any recourse after having received payment from their debtors prior to filing for bankruptcy protection.