The Supreme Court case In re Haberman Manufacturing Company, 1892, revolved around the issue of bankruptcy and the rights of creditors. The Haberman Manufacturing Company had filed for bankruptcy and its assets were being distributed among its creditors. However, one creditor claimed that they should receive a larger share because their debt was secured by a chattel mortgage - a loan arrangement in which an item of movable personal property acts as security for a loan. The court ruled against this claimant stating that under the Bankruptcy Act of 1867 all debts are to be treated equally regardless if they are secured or unsecured. This ruling reinforced the principle that in cases of bankruptcy, all creditors have equal rights to payment from whatever assets remain after liquidation.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Haberman Manufacturing Company argued that the court majority erred in its interpretation and application of bankruptcy law. The dissent believed that the debtor's property, which was transferred to a third party before filing for bankruptcy, should not be included as part of the bankrupt estate because it was no longer under control or possession of the debtor at time of filing. They contended that such an inclusion would unfairly penalize innocent third parties who had legitimate claims on those assets prior to bankruptcy proceedings. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority’s view about fraudulent conveyance laws being applicable here since there wasn't sufficient evidence proving fraudulence in asset transfer by Haberman Manufacturing Company. Thus, they felt this ruling set a dangerous precedent potentially infringing upon rights and protections afforded to creditors under existing law.