Carr v. E. & T. Fairbanks & Co.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trustee Process. It ’appeaíéd, from the disclosure of the trustees that, at the time of the service of the writ upon them, they owed the principal defendant $1.45; that the principal defendant and his minor son had subsequently worked for them, and that their work amounted to over $50.00; that a day Or two after being summoned as trustees, they advanced to the principal defendant $24.21 in cash, and had sold him goods from their store, at difdifferent times, to the amount of…
Read the full summary
Trustee Process. It ’appeaíéd, from the disclosure of the trustees that, at the time of the service of the writ upon them, they owed the principal defendant $1.45; that the principal defendant and his minor son had subsequently worked for them, and that their work amounted to over $50.00; that a day Or two after being summoned as trustees, they advanced to the principal defendant $24.21 in cash, and had sold him goods from their store, at difdifferent times, to the amount of $41.66. "On comparing the days when the principal defendant worked with the dates of the charges of the goods to him,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Bennett, J.
The only question in this case concerns the trustees. The statute enacts that “ if the goods, effects and credits, in the hands of the trustee, shall not exceed in value the sum of ten dollars, the trustee shall be discharged, and shall recover his costs.”
*809We learn from the disclosure, that neither at the time this process 'was served, nor at any one time since, up to the time of the disclosure, were the trustees indebted to the principal debtor in a sum exceeding ten dollars.
The effect of the statute is to prevent the trustee process from…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hall v. HartwellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
- Oil Well Supply Co. v. GalbreathSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- McDaniels v. MortonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1861