In the case of Robert Hudgins et al. v. Wyndham Kemp, Assignee in Bankruptcy of John L. Hudgins, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a debt owed by an insolvent debtor could be collected from his assignee in bankruptcy or if it should be discharged as part of the bankruptcy proceedings. The appellants argued that they had loaned money to John L. Hudgins prior to his filing for bankruptcy and were therefore entitled to repayment from his assignee in bankruptcy, Wyndham Kemp. However, Kemp argued that since he had been appointed as assignee after the debt was incurred and before any payment had been made on it, he should not have to pay out funds which would otherwise go towards paying off other creditors who held claims against John L. Hudgins' estate at the time of his filing for bankruptcy protection . Ultimately, the court sided with Kemp and ruled that debts incurred prior to a person's filing for bankruptcy are subject to discharge under federal law and cannot be collected from their assigned trustee or receiver once they enter into such proceedings; thus affirming its decision in previous cases involving similar issues regarding pre-bankruptcy debts being discharged upon entering into such proceedings..

In the dissenting opinion of Robert Hudgins et al. v. Wyndham Kemp, Assignee in Bankruptcy of John L. Hudgins, Justice McLean argued that the lower court's decision should be reversed and remanded for further proceedings because it was based on a misapplication of law to the facts presented by the case. He believed that there were sufficient grounds for an appeal from a judgment rendered against them without their knowledge or consent and thus they had not waived their right to object to such a ruling as they had been denied due process under state law at trial. Furthermore, he asserted that even if this were not true, then any error committed by the lower court would still have been reversible since it was clear from both parties' pleadings that no issue concerning waiver had ever been raised before or during trial proceedings; therefore, any claim regarding waiver could only be considered after all other issues pertaining to liability had already been decided upon by a jury verdict or otherwise adjudicated in favor of either party prior to final judgement being entered into record.