In the 1923 case of Meek v. Centre County Banking Company, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over bankruptcy proceedings. The bank had gone into involuntary bankruptcy and its assets were being distributed among creditors. A group of depositors claimed they should be given priority in receiving funds because their deposits constituted a "trust fund" separate from the general assets of the bank. However, this claim was rejected by both lower courts and eventually by the Supreme Court as well. The court held that under federal law, all claims against an insolvent national banking association must be treated equally unless there is clear evidence to establish a trust relationship between depositor and bank beyond mere debtor-creditor relationship.

In the dissenting opinion for Meek v. Centre County Banking Company et al., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling, which allowed a bank in bankruptcy to recover funds from an individual who had received preferential payments prior to its insolvency, was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that this interpretation of the Bankruptcy Act unfairly penalized individuals who were unaware of the bank's financial situation and acted in good faith when receiving their payments. They contended that such transactions should not be considered fraudulent or voidable under bankruptcy law unless there is clear evidence of intent to defraud other creditors or knowledge about impending bankruptcy on part of those receiving payment. This view emphasizes protection for innocent parties involved unknowingly in bankruptcies and promotes fairness by preventing undue punishment based on hindsight judgments about what might have been known at time transactions occurred.