In re Washburn
District Court, D. Massachusetts
The petitioners asked that the assignees might be required to pay them the rent of certain premises in Causeway street, Boston. The evidence tended to show that the bankrupt had a lease of these rooms, and used them for storage, and for a blacksmith’s shop, in connection with an adjoining lumber mill, which he hired of another person. By leave of court, the assignees had carried on business in the mill.
Read the full summary
The petitioners asked that the assignees might be required to pay them the rent of certain premises in Causeway street, Boston. The evidence tended to show that the bankrupt had a lease of these rooms, and used them for storage, and for a blacksmith’s shop, in connection with an adjoining lumber mill, which he hired of another person. By leave of court, the assignees had carried on business in the mill. They did not know of the lease of the blacksmith’s shop until some two or three months after their appointment, and then, being applied to by the petitioners they denied their liability and…
1Opinion of the Court
LOWELL, District Judge.
I regret to be obliged to deny the petition. The evidence has failed to convince me that the assignees of Washburn accepted the lease, or that they in fact derived any benefit from the premises. The law on this subject is not in a very satisfactory state, and might be regulated to advantage by statute. Assignees in bankruptcy do not by accepting the trust become assignees of a lease or term belonging to the bankrupt. Bourdillon v. Dalton, 1 Esp. 233; Hendricks v. Judah, 2 Caines, 25; Turner v. Richardson, 7 East, 335; Hoyt v. Stoddard, 2 Allen, 442. No one is to be held…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Journeay v. BrackleyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1857
- Hendricks v. JudahNew York Supreme Court · 1804
3Cited by1 opinion
- Rainault v. EvartsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937