The Wheeler v. Greene case in 1929 revolved around the issue of whether a state court had jurisdiction over a federal receiver appointed by a federal court. The plaintiff, Wheeler, sought to recover possession of certain real estate from Greene, who was acting as the receiver for Bankers Joint Stock Land Bank of Milwaukee - an institution under federal control. The Supreme Court ruled that while it is generally true that no action can be taken against a federally-appointed receiver without leave from the appointing court, this rule does not apply when the property in question is not part of or necessary to administration proceedings and where there are no claims against said property by creditors involved in those proceedings. In such cases, state courts do have jurisdiction over these matters even if they involve federally-appointed receivers.

In the dissenting opinion for Wheeler v. Greene, it was argued that the majority's decision to allow a state court to interfere with federal jurisdiction over bankruptcy matters set a dangerous precedent. The dissent emphasized that under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, Congress has exclusive power over bankruptcy laws and their enforcement. By allowing a state court receiver to seize assets from an insolvent debtor who had already filed for federal bankruptcy protection, they believed it undermined this constitutional authority and created confusion about which law should prevail in such cases - federal or state? They also expressed concern that this ruling could lead to unequal treatment of creditors if different states adopted varying approaches towards insolvency proceedings.