Vermilyea v. Roberts
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract against S. M.. Roberts. Thomas F. Currier was summoned as trustee. At October term 1868 of the superior court, at which the writ was returnable, the trustee answered that, at the time of the service of the writ upon him, he had no funds of S. M. Roberts in his hands; but, in answer to interrogatories filed by the plaintiffs, he admitted that he had funds of Lydia J. Roberts.
Read the full summary
Contract against S. M.. Roberts. Thomas F. Currier was summoned as trustee. At October term 1868 of the superior court, at which the writ was returnable, the trustee answered that, at the time of the service of the writ upon him, he had no funds of S. M. Roberts in his hands; but, in answer to interrogatories filed by the plaintiffs, he admitted that he had funds of Lydia J. Roberts. At January term following, the writ was amended, on the plaintiff’s motion, so that the action was brought against S. M. Roberts, otherwise called Lydia J. Roberts; due notice was given to Lydia J. Roberts, and…
1Opinion of the CourtChapman, C. J.
By the amendment, the action became one against S. M. Roberts, otherwise called Lydia J. Roberts, and the defendant has submitted to judgment. The trustee admits that he has assets belonging to Lydia J. Roberts, and would be chargeable as trustee of that person. As the judgment is against that person, he must be charged. The judgment will protect him against any claim which she may make against him.
The notice to the trustee of an assignment made since tho service upon him is immaterial. Trustee charged.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Terry v. SissonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- West v. PlattMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Connelly v. Dionne Trucking, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Grant v. WentzellMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1937