Holt v. Babcock
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit by trustee process against Henry Babcock, principal defendant and Orvis Willis, trustee, and W. M. Kendall, claimant. Heard upon the report of a commissioner at the December term, 1889, Taft, J., presiding. Judgment that the trustee is chargeable. The claimant excepts. The case appears-in the opinion. The assignment and notice were sufficient.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit by trustee process against Henry Babcock, principal defendant and Orvis Willis, trustee, and W. M. Kendall, claimant. Heard upon the report of a commissioner at the December term, 1889, Taft, J., presiding. Judgment that the trustee is chargeable. The claimant excepts. The case appears-in the opinion. The assignment and notice were sufficient. Peek v. Walton, 25 Yt. 33; Bank v. Drury, 35 Yt. 469; Barron v. Porter, 44 Yt. 587. There was no sufficient notice by the claimant. Mere knowledge on the part of the debtor is not enough. Barron v. Porter, 44 Yt. 587 ; Peak v. Walton, 25 Yt.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
ROSS, Ch. J.
The only contention on the facts reported, is,.whether the plaintiff or claimant is entitled to the funds in the hands of the trustee. The defendant was indebted to the claimant, and had given him a mortgage on his premises to secure *635a portion of the indebtedness. Whether the mortgage was overdue is not stated. The claimant consented to a sale of the grass growing on the mortgaged premises, on condition that he should receive the purchase price. Thereupon the defendant sold the grass to the trustee, directing the trustee to pay the purchase…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Barron v. PorterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1872
3Cited by3 opinions
- Woodward v. LaporteSupreme Court of Vermont · 1898
- Wolcott v. MongeonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1914
- Parker v. ParkerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1899