Riggs v. Murray
New York Court of Chancery
ON the 23d of March, 1798, Robert Murray, for himself, and as attorney (duly authorized) for his partners, George W. Murray, John R. Wheaton, and James V. Murray, made an assignment of all their partnership property in the United States, to John B. Murray and John Innes Clark.
Read the full summary
ON the 23d of March, 1798, Robert Murray, for himself, and as attorney (duly authorized) for his partners, George W. Murray, John R. Wheaton, and James V. Murray, made an assignment of all their partnership property in the United States, to John B. Murray and John Innes Clark. The deed recited, that the copartners had become insolvent, and were unable to pay their debts, and that the assignees had advanced money, and became bound for them in large sums, from motives of pure friendship, and that they considered themselves bound in honor to secure the assignees as far as they were able; and the…
1Opinion of the Court
*The Chancellor.
The material question in the case is, whether the deed of assignment, of the 23d of March, 1798, was not, in judgment of law, fraudulent, as against the creditors at large. That was the only deed that assigned the partnership property; the subsequent deeds, between the same parties, including the one of the 31st of May, 1800, were merely directions to the trustees, founded upon that original deed of assignment. If that deed was void, the succeeding deeds must share its fate, as they were incidental to, and dependent upon it. They were all connected parts of one transaction.
Ther…
2Cited by24 opinions
- Catlin v. Eagle Bank of New-HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1826
- Grubbs v. MorrisIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Goodwin v. McGeheeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- Botsford v. BurrNew York Court of Chancery · 1817
- Thomas v. TrieberCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1852
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.