Peters v. Rogers
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
[This was an action of indebitatus assump-sit by John Peters and others against Zebe-diah Rogers and trustee.] The only question was, whether the trustee was, upon his disclosure, answerable. The marginal note in the case of Ray v. Underwood, 3 Pick. 302, is, “A person who has never been an inhabitant or resident within this commonwealth, but who only comes here occasionally in the day time, is not liable to the trastee process.”
Read the full summary
[This was an action of indebitatus assump-sit by John Peters and others against Zebe-diah Rogers and trustee.] The only question was, whether the trustee was, upon his disclosure, answerable. The marginal note in the case of Ray v. Underwood, 3 Pick. 302, is, “A person who has never been an inhabitant or resident within this commonwealth, but who only comes here occasionally in the day time, is not liable to the trastee process.” And such is understood to have been the construction uniformly held by the supreme judicial court; that it is a local statute, and not applicable to foreigners, or…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
In the present case, the plaintiffs are described in the writ as of Boston, and citizens of Massachusetts, and the principal defendant as of Bangor, in Maine, and a citizen of Maine, and the trustee, as “of said Boston, mariner,” without any description of citizenship whatsoever. The trustee in his disclosure avers, that at the time of the service of the plaintiff’s writ upon him, his family resided at Orrington, in the state of Maine, and that said Orrington was the residence of this respondent when at home; that for many years before the service of said writ and since…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Tingley v. BatemanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Jacobs v. MellenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Wilcox v. MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Davis v. MarstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809