McAllister v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Lancaster county. This case was previously before the court, and is reported in 4 Casey 480. The facts presented on the second trial of the cause were the same as on the former trial.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Lancaster county. This case was previously before the court, and is reported in 4 Casey 480. The facts presented on the second trial of the cause were the same as on the former trial. The only new features in the case were, an offer on the part of the defendant to prove, by a clerk in the Lancaster Savings Institution, that the money deposited by McAllister was known by him as trust-money, and so treated by him as clerk; also to prove, by the prothonotary, that McAllister had never to his knowledge acted in the capacity of a trustee; which offers were overruled by…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Porter, J.
— There is nothing in the modern management of trusts to justify the relaxation of a solitary rule for their preservation. Most men know — but men whose lives are spent in advising people of their legal rights, know better than others— how generally the cestui que trust is the victim of that spirit of speculation which marks the present age. It was, therefore, strong ground on which this court pitched, when, in Morris v. *538Wallace, 3 Barr 319, they said that an investment in stocks in the trustee’s individual name, was itself a breach of trust;…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Yost's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Chancellor v. ChancellorSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
- Hennies v. KeithlyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1923
- Carr's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Sagone v. MackeyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916