Hopkins v. Loeber

If it was understood between Harvey and Loeber not later than the actual transfer of the defaulted bonds to Harvey in exchange for his “B” certificates that Harvey would thereafter exchange certain of the defaulted bonds for the Harvey Hotel bonds held by Loeber, the majority opinion correctly applied a different rule of damages to Loeber than that applied to Fox and Swayne. The finding of the master, approved by the trial court, that Harvey and Loeber made the exchange after Harvey received the defaulted bonds from the trustees, is silent as to when the agreement to exchange was made or when…