Longenecker v. Zeigler
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the district court of the city and county of Lancaster. Hays, president. This action for money had and received was brought in the name of Christian Longenecker for the use of Samuel Bossier against Conrad Zeigler, and arose out of these facts.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the district court of the city and county of Lancaster. Hays, president. This action for money had and received was brought in the name of Christian Longenecker for the use of Samuel Bossier against Conrad Zeigler, and arose out of these facts. Longenecker became indebted, and judgments were obtained against him by several persons, and among others by Conrad Zeigler the defendant: his real estate was levied and sold by the sheriff, and of the proceeds of the sale, Zeigler received, in satisfaction of his judgment, 1774 dollars; he had previously received, from the defendant interest…
1Per curiam
The name of Longenecker was used as the legal plaintiff under a supposition that he had the legal title. But in this species of action, which, in substance, is said to be a bill in equity, there is no distinction between legal and equitable title, he being the legal party who is entitled to the money. But Longenecker was not entitled beneficially or even as a trustee for the creditors, for the law is not so unreasonable as to attribute to him the ownership of what it has itself divested him and appropriated to the extinguishment of his debts. Who then was entitled to the money here ? The…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Caskie v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Finnel v. Brew ex rel. MackSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
- Flournoy v. NewtonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1850
- Dallas County, Texas v. Tim Sutton A/K/A Timothy Sutton A/K/A Timothy L. Sutton A/K/A Timothy Lee Sutton, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2024