In the case of Harrigan, Trustee, etc. v. Bergdoll, also known as Bergson in 1925, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning bankruptcy and property rights. The defendant had previously been declared bankrupt and his trustee was attempting to recover assets that he believed were part of the bankruptcy estate but had been transferred to another party prior to the declaration of bankruptcy. The court held that under Section 70e of the Bankruptcy Act any transfer made by an insolvent within four months before filing a petition in bankruptcy with intent to prefer one creditor over others can be recovered by trustee for benefit of all creditors if recipient has reasonable cause to believe that preference will occur due its acceptance. In this case however it was found there wasn't enough evidence proving such knowledge or intention from either parties involved during transaction hence ruling favored defendant.

In the dissenting opinion for Harrigan v. Bergdoll, Justice Stone disagreed with the majority's decision to deny Charles D. Bergdoll his inheritance due to his evasion of military service during World War I. He argued that while it was clear that Bergdoll had indeed evaded military service and fled to Germany, there was no legal basis in Pennsylvania law (where the will was probated) or federal law for denying him his inheritance on these grounds. Justice Stone pointed out that neither Congress nor Pennsylvania legislature had enacted any statute disqualifying draft dodgers from receiving their inheritances; thus, he believed this punishment exceeded judicial authority and encroached upon legislative power.