Gochenauer v. Cooper
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. ON a writ of error to the District Court of Lancaster county, it appeared, that this action was brought by William Cooper and John Kaufman, the defendants in error, assignees Qf Christian Hiestand, an insolvent debtor, against Jo* seph Gochenauer and Abraham Hamaker, trustees under the last will and testament of Jacob Hiestand, deceased, the father of the said Christian Hiestand.
Read the full summary
In Error. ON a writ of error to the District Court of Lancaster county, it appeared, that this action was brought by William Cooper and John Kaufman, the defendants in error, assignees Qf Christian Hiestand, an insolvent debtor, against Jo* seph Gochenauer and Abraham Hamaker, trustees under the last will and testament of Jacob Hiestand, deceased, the father of the said Christian Hiestand. The testator appointed the defendants his executors and trustees, and having ordered that his land should be sold, and the money arising from the sale divided, as set forth in his will, devised as follows:…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.;
This is a.hard demand on the part of the plaintiffs. The defendants have acted innocently and with good faith, and must be considerable losers, if they fail in their defence. This case seems to have been considered by the District Court, as turning on a question of defalcation; but I do not consider it as such. It is an equitable defence, so intimately connected with the plaintiff’s cause of action, as not to be separable from it. The plaintiffs stand in the place of Christian Hiestand, and have no o her rights than he had. So that, if it can be shown, that he could not have…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Steigleman v. JeffriesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1815
- Bank of Niagara v. M'CrackenNew York Supreme Court · 1821
3Cited by1 opinion
- Gochenauer v. FroelichSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839