King v. Fowler
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The parties in these actions agreed that judgment should be entered in both of them upon the default of the defendants respectively, the damages in each to be assessed by the Court, upon the following facts agreed.
Read the full summary
The parties in these actions agreed that judgment should be entered in both of them upon the default of the defendants respectively, the damages in each to be assessed by the Court, upon the following facts agreed. The said King was formerly a deputy sheriff of the county of Hampden, and, at the request of the said Fowler &/■ AL, by virtue of several original writs in their favor against one N. Ives, attached a certain still, as the property of said Ives, and afterwards sold it upon execution. One R. Ives, claiming property in the said still, sued his action against King for so taking and…
1Per curiam
The set-off claimed by Fowler cannot be allowed; for it would be manifestly unjust. The assignment by King to Ives was for a valuable consideration ; and Fowler having had notice that it was about to be made, should have given notice of his counter demand against King, in season to prevent Ives from giving up his remedy upon execution. Instead of which he was silent not only then, but on the day when the assignment was made, having had previous notice for a week. Further, after formal notice that the assignment was actually made, he does not object, but conceals his intention, until a suit is…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Greene v. DarlingU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1828
- Andrews v. BeeckerNew York Supreme Court · 1800
- E. V. Harman & Co. v. William Filene's Sons Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Vallancey v. HuntNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
- Gregory v. PikeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1900
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.