Schermehorn v. L'Espenasse
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
Bill in equity. This bill stated that on the 31st of December, 1790, the defendants, merchants of Amsterdam, had executed to the complainant (who resided at the same place) a power of attorney to receive to his own use, the interest due on 180,000 dollars of certificates of the United States bearing interest at 6 per cent., from the 1st Jan.. 17S8, to the 31st Dec., 1790, amounting to 32,400 dollars; but that, notwithstanding this assignment the defendants on the 16th June.…
Read the full summary
Bill in equity. This bill stated that on the 31st of December, 1790, the defendants, merchants of Amsterdam, had executed to the complainant (who resided at the same place) a power of attorney to receive to his own use, the interest due on 180,000 dollars of certificates of the United States bearing interest at 6 per cent., from the 1st Jan.. 17S8, to the 31st Dec., 1790, amounting to 32,400 dollars; but that, notwithstanding this assignment the defendants on the 16th June. 1792, received certificates for the 32,400 dollars of interest, and agreeably to the act of congress, funded the amount…
1Opinion of the Court
PETERS, District Judge.
If this were not a case, in which an irreparable injury might be done, by allowing the stock to be placed beyond the jurisdiction of the court, it would, perhaps, be proper to insist upon a more rigid practice than has been pursued. But the dissolution of the injunction would, probably, put the property out of the power of the court; and incapacitate us from doing justice hereafter to the parties, according to.the real merits of their respective pretensions. It is proper, however, to observe, that I do not think an affidavit to the contents of a bill, is the only…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Schermehorn v. L'EspEnassESupreme Court of the United States · 1796