Bholen v. Cleveland
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
Trover [by John Bholen and another against Aaron P. Cleveland and another] for certain cases of merchandise. Plea, not guilty. At the trial, the facts appeared to be these.
Read the full summary
Trover [by John Bholen and another against Aaron P. Cleveland and another] for certain cases of merchandise. Plea, not guilty. At the trial, the facts appeared to be these. The firm of George & Alexander Holdball, of Philadelphia, consigned the goods in question to the defendants at Boston, and after-wards, on the 5th of April 1S25, failed, and assigned their property, including these goods, to the plaintiffs, who were their creditors, for the benefit of their creditors generally. At the time of their failure, they were indebted to John Eyans of Philadelphia; and, on the same day on which the…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
The whole controversy turns upon this single point, whose was the property in these goods at the time when the trustee process was served? It is to be recollected, that this is the case of a general assignment made in Philadelphia, and the plaintiffs, as well as Evans, are citizens of the state of Pennsylvania. Their rights are, therefore, to be judged of by the laws of that state. It is not denied, that general assignments of this nature in favour of creditors, if bona fide, are valid, by the laws of that state, to pass the property contained therein. It is not denied,…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Chafee v. Fourth National BankSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1880
- Bellingham Bay Boom Co. v. BrisboisWashington Supreme Court · 1896
- Meier v. HessOregon Supreme Court · 1893
- Wulff v. Roseville Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
- Wilson v. Matthews, Finley & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1858
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.