Summary

Pierce Butler Ginsberg Sons v. Popkin — Opinion of the Court

And section 261 of the Judicial Code strictly governs the granting of the writ in federal courts.
Section 9 (b) provides a substitute for and so excludes the use of the writ against bankrupts. As respondent is not a bankrupt, that subdivision does not authorize his arrest or afford him protection. There is no reason for stricter measures to compel others to submit to examination.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Ginsberg Sons v. Popkin — Opinion of the Court

The petition stated that respondent's testimony would be in aid of creditors, and that, had he been requested so to do, the trustee would have refused to apply for his arrest, and that therefore the petitioner made the application for an ancillary order of examination and arrest in aid of itself and other creditors. It was shown that a judge in the Eastern district authorized petitioner to apply for this order in the Southern district.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature