Farnsworth v. Doom
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 114 — Action to Recover Land APPEAL FROM NELSON CIRCUIT COURT. Judgment for Plaintiffs and Defendant Appeals. On March 24, 1862, Lewis & Murphy made an assignment as partners and individually for benefit of their ■ creditors, and by their deed conveyed all the title they had in the. land in controversy to A. G. Nall and his successors, first, to pay expenses; second, to pay preferred debts, and, third, ‘ to pay general indebtedness of Lewis & Murphy pro rata.
Read the full summary
Case 114 — Action to Recover Land APPEAL FROM NELSON CIRCUIT COURT. Judgment for Plaintiffs and Defendant Appeals. On March 24, 1862, Lewis & Murphy made an assignment as partners and individually for benefit of their ■ creditors, and by their deed conveyed all the title they had in the. land in controversy to A. G. Nall and his successors, first, to pay expenses; second, to pay preferred debts, and, third, ‘ to pay general indebtedness of Lewis & Murphy pro rata. The liabilities so vastly exceeded the assets that no clause was thought necessary to provide for excess of assets, as is usual.…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion op the coubt by
JUDGE O’REAR
Affirming.
In 1862 Lewis & Mnrpliy, a co-partnership composed' of William F. Lewis and F. G. Murphy, made to A. G. Nall a general deed of assignment of all their property for the benefit of all their -creditors, conditioned (1) for the payment of the expenses of the trust; (2) for such specialties *796as bad legal priority; and (3) the residue to general creditors pro rata. No reversion of surplus is provided for in express terms. Nall accepted the trust, and took possession of the assignors’ estate, including the land in controversy- — a lot of about 26 acres…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ely v. Hair, Nugent & Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1855
- Lyons v. FieldCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1856
- Appeal of RalstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bigstaff's Trustee v. BigstaffCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915