Smith v. Sipperley
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the district court of the third district, Hon. Charles S. Zane, judge. The opinion states the facts except the following: The appeal was from the judgment, and hence was on the judgment roll alone. The evidence was incorporated in the record, but was not made part thereof by any bill of exceptions or statement upon motion for new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the district court of the third district, Hon. Charles S. Zane, judge. The opinion states the facts except the following: The appeal was from the judgment, and hence was on the judgment roll alone. The evidence was incorporated in the record, but was not made part thereof by any bill of exceptions or statement upon motion for new trial. The findings of the court below were very full, and were in substance as follows: That on January 13, 1892, the assignment was executed to Frank W. Eoss, and stated that Sipperley & Co. were indebted to three creditors, who were…
1Opinion of the Court
Smith, J.:
A. F. Sipperley and H. S. Lee were, prior to January 13, 1892, partners doing business as merchants at Salt Lake City, and on the above date made an assignment for the benefit of their creditors of all of their property to F. W. Ross. The written assignment, which appears in the record, after creating a class of first preferred creditors, which is denominated “Schedule A.” contains the following clause: “And whereas, the said A. F. Sipperley is indebted to Mrs. A. F. Sipperley by note dated the 10th day of March, 1887, for $4,800.00, and to Mrs. E. 3: Walling of South Cambridge, New…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bailey, Collector v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Yernon v. UpsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Cribb v. MorseWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by1 opinion
- Coblentz v. Driver Mercantile Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1894