Bird v. Hempstead
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut
MOTION for a new trial. The nature of this action, which has twice been be- ... , tore the supreme court of errors, is concisely stated, ante, vol. 2. p. 293. Hempstead, one of the defendants, ha(j died since the commencement of the suit. On the in 1806, the cause was remanded to the sufie-r*or court next thereafter held in Hem-London county, where it was again tried.
Read the full summary
MOTION for a new trial. The nature of this action, which has twice been be- ... , tore the supreme court of errors, is concisely stated, ante, vol. 2. p. 293. Hempstead, one of the defendants, ha(j died since the commencement of the suit. On the in 1806, the cause was remanded to the sufie-r*or court next thereafter held in Hem-London county, where it was again tried. On that trial, the defendant offered to prove, that since the first trial of this cause, Robert Bird, one of the plaintiffs, had become bankrupt, ancj p,a£j assigrned his effects under a commission of bank-0 duly issued in the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court (a)
The first question arising in this case, is, whether the bankruptcy of one of the plaintiffs, and the assignment of his estate, under a commission of bankrupt, devested them of their right of action. By the act establishing a uniform system of bankruptcy, it is provided, “ That the commissioners shall take into their possession all the estate, real and personal, of every nature and description, to which the bankrupt may be entitled; and that they shall assign it to such persons as the creditors shall choose their assignees.” This was aright of action founded on a tort; and did…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Sibley v. NasonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Gillet v. FairchildNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Merwin v. MorrisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Lovell v. Hammond Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
- Crenshaw v. MooreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1851
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.