Rogers v. Vail
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass, for taking certain personal property, which the defendant Vail, who was a deputy sheriff, attached as the property of one Daniel Bartlett. It appeared that said Bartlett made an assignment of all his personal property, except what was exempt from attachment and levy, to James McDaniels and others, in trust, to pay certain specified creditors of said Bartlett, and the surplus to be applied to the payment of all other debts due from Bartlett.
Read the full summary
Trespass, for taking certain personal property, which the defendant Vail, who was a deputy sheriff, attached as the property of one Daniel Bartlett. It appeared that said Bartlett made an assignment of all his personal property, except what was exempt from attachment and levy, to James McDaniels and others, in trust, to pay certain specified creditors of said Bartlett, and the surplus to be applied to the payment of all other debts due from Bartlett. McDaniels took possession of the property assigned, and immediately advertised the same for sale at public auction, and, at the expiration of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Williams, Oh. J.
The sale, under which the plaintiff claims, is inoperative and void, under that rule of law which declares a cbnveyance of personal property, unaccompanied by a change of possession, fraudulent per se ; and there does not appear to be any thing in the case to make it an exception to that rule, but what has already been adjudged not to be any exception.
The plaintiff claimed under an assignment made for the benefit of his creditors. This was considered as making no difference whatever in the case of Hall v. Parsons, 15 Vt. 358. That the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Morris v. HydeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1836
- Batchelder v. CarterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1829
- Hall v. ParsonsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1843
3Cited by2 opinions
- Kerr v. BlaineMontana Supreme Court · 1914
- Ward v. CampSupreme Court of Vermont · 1893