In the 1913 U.S. Supreme Court case, Walter A. Ledbetter, Receiver, etc., v. Kaufman Mandell, the court examined a dispute over property rights and bankruptcy proceedings. The plaintiff in error was Walter A. Ledbetter who served as receiver for a bankrupt company that had previously sold goods to Kaufman Mandell on credit terms without receiving payment before filing for bankruptcy protection under federal law. The issue at hand was whether or not these unpaid debts could be collected by the receiver from Mr.Mandell after declaring bankruptcy or if they were discharged with other unsecured debt during the process of liquidation. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mr.Mandell stating that he did not have to pay back his debt because it fell into an exception within Bankruptcy Act's provision which states that certain types of debts are non-dischargeable only when they have been obtained through false pretenses or frauds - none of which were proven against him in this case.

In the dissenting opinion for Walter A. Ledbetter v. Kaufman Mandell, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to reverse a lower court ruling that had favored Ledbetter in a dispute over property rights and debt obligations. He argued that the case should have been decided based on established principles of equity rather than technicalities of law, as he believed was done by the majority. Holmes contended that Mandell knowingly took on risk when purchasing property from an insolvent debtor and therefore should bear any losses resulting from it instead of being able to claim against other assets held by Ledbetter as receiver for his creditors' benefit.