The U.S. Supreme Court case Evans, Sole Surviving Receiver of the Citizens & Screven County Bank v. National Bank of Savannah in 1919 revolved around a dispute between two banks over payment obligations related to checks and drafts that were not honored due to insolvency. The National Bank of Savannah had presented several items for payment to the Citizens & Screven County Bank, which was unable to meet its obligations due to financial difficulties and subsequently went into receivership. The receiver refused to pay these claims on behalf of the insolvent bank arguing they were unsecured creditors who should share pro rata in the assets with other general creditors under Georgia law. However, the Supreme Court ruled against this argument stating that under national banking laws, such debts are preferred liabilities and must be paid before any distribution is made among shareholders or general creditors.

In the dissenting opinion for Evans v. National Bank of Savannah, Justice Holmes argued that the majority's decision was based on a misinterpretation of Georgia state law and an overreach into matters better left to state courts. He contended that under Georgia law, when a bank goes into receivership, its assets are not automatically transferred to the receiver but remain in legal limbo until they are specifically assigned by court order. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's assertion that Mr. Evans had become owner of certain bonds simply by virtue of being appointed receiver for Citizens & Screven County Bank. Furthermore, Holmes criticized his colleagues' reliance on federal common law principles rather than deferring to relevant state laws and precedents as is customary in cases involving property rights disputes between private parties.