*. Professor of Law, School of Law, Texas Tech University

Note 1. Thomas's Appeal, 69 Pa. St. 120 (1871); Loucheim Brothers Appeal, 67 Pa. 49 (1870).

Note 2. Andrews v. Burke, 61 N.J.Eq. 297, 48 Atl. 228 (1901)

Note 3. Bacon v. Van Schoonhoven, 19 Hvn. 158 (1879); aff'd 87 N.Y. 446 (1882); ITT Diversified Credit Corp. v. First City Capital Corp., 737 S.W.2d 803 (Tex. 1987). Duraflex Sales & Serv. v. W.H.E. Mech. Contractors, 110 F.3d 927 (2d Cir. 1997) (citing ITT with approval).

Note 4. Dyson v. Simmons, 48 Md. 207 (1877).

Note 5. Burns v. Burns, 233 Iowa 1092 (1943). Cf. Kennedy, Ten Years of Creditors' Rights in Iowa, 38 Iowa L. Rev. 410, 428 (1953).

Note 6. 14 Ohio St. 488 (1863)

Note 7. 33 N.J.Eq. 552, 562 (1881).

Note 8. Kocourek, A First-Rate Legal Puzzle, 29 Ill. L. Rev. 952 (1935), Cf. In re Hempstead Turnpike Corp., 200 F. Supp. 692 (E.D.N.Y. 1962).

Note 9. Benson, Circuity of Liens, A Problem in Priorities, 19 Minn. L. Rev. 139 (1935)

Note 10. Note, 38 Col. L. Rev. 1267 (1938).

Note 11. Bankruptcy Act of 1898, sec. 67(c)(3).

Note 12. 11 U.S.C. sec. 551. [Further discussion of many of these variations appears in Gilmore, Circular Priority Systems, 71 Yale L. J. 53 (1961).]