In re Floyd & Hayes

Citations

• 225 F. 262
• 1915 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1247

Syllabus

<p>1. Courts <@=>365—United States Courts—Following State Decisions.</p> <p>Federal courts are hound to assume that, when a question arose in a state court, it was thoroughly considered by that tribunal, and that the decision rendered by it embodied its deliberate judgment.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. §§ 950, 952, 955, 969-971; Dec. Dig. <@=>365.]</p> <p>2. Courts <@=>366—'United States Courts—Following State Decisions.</p> <p>Unless some federal question is involved, the interpretation placed upon a state statute by the highest appellate tribunal of the state is binding and conclusive upon all federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. §§ 954-957, 960-968 ; Dec. Dig. <@=>366.]</p> <p>3. Courts <@=368—Unite® States Courts—Following State Decisions.</p> <p>It is the duty of a federal court to follow the latest decision of the state court, though it may differ from prior decisions of that court, and though the federal court may have previously come to a different conclusion.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. § 951; Dec. Dig. <@=>368.]</p> <p>4. Assignments <@=>98—Validity—Necessity oe Recording.</p> <p>Under the recording act of South Carolina (Civ. Code 1912, § 3542), as interpreted by the Supreme Court of that state, assignments of notes, mortgages, and open accounts as collateral security for a debt were not required to be recorded, to be valid as against subsequent creditors or purchasers.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Assignments, Cent. Dig. § 176; Dec. Dig. <@=>98.]</p> <p>a-'Tfnr other eases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes</p>