Foster v. Mix
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action upon a bond, given by the defendants; Caleb Mix and Julius Tuttle, to the plaintiff, as judge of probate for the district, of New-Haven; the suit being brought for the benefit of William Townsend.
Read the full summary
This was an action upon a bond, given by the defendants; Caleb Mix and Julius Tuttle, to the plaintiff, as judge of probate for the district, of New-Haven; the suit being brought for the benefit of William Townsend. From the condition annexed to the bond, it appeared, that Elihu Cooper, an insolvent debtor, had assigned certain property to the defendant, Tuttle, and Edward J. Camp, in trust for the benefit of his creditors, pursuant to the statute in such case provided ; and that Camp had declined to accept the trust; and Mix, the other defendant, had been appointed thereto, by the court of…
1Opinion of the CourtWaite, J.
The jury in this case have found, that the debt due from Elihu Cooper to Cooper & Rockwell, was assigned to Townsend, and notice thereof given to Tuttle, one of the defendants, before the service of the writ of foreign attachment in favour of James T. Mix, was made upon the defend*400ants. The question therefore, is, whether such notice, given to one of two trustees, but not to the other, will be sufficient to protect the property in the hands of the trustees, against subsequent attachments, by the creditors of the insolvent debtor.
To make such an assignment effectual, as against such creditors,…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Katz v. Town of West HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Graham Paper Co. v. PembrokeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. v. PortoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- American Surety Co. of New York v. McMullenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
- Ciezynski v. New Britain Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1936