Swift v. Winchester
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Agreed statement. Judgment for plaintiff. Assumpsit for beef and packing-house products sold and delivered between September, 1891, and October, 1892. The plaintiffs were doing business in Bangor under the style of the Bangor Beef Co. The facts are stated in the opinion. The case at bar falls directly within the principles established by this court in French v. JRobinson, 86 Maine, 142, 41 Am.
Read the full summary
Agreed statement. Judgment for plaintiff. Assumpsit for beef and packing-house products sold and delivered between September, 1891, and October, 1892. The plaintiffs were doing business in Bangor under the style of the Bangor Beef Co. The facts are stated in the opinion. The case at bar falls directly within the principles established by this court in French v. JRobinson, 86 Maine, 142, 41 Am. St. B.ep. 533, and has the support of every reason upon which those principles are based. The plaintiffs were seeking some supposed advantage from their conduct and the concealment of their identity ;…
1Opinion of the CourtSavage, J.
The plaintiffs, who are non-residents, bring this action to recover the price of meats sold to the defendant in Bangor. In defense, the defendant sets up a discharge from his debts under the insolvent laws of this state.
It is a well settled and familiar rule of law, which needs only to be stated, that a discharge in insolvency is void as against non-resident creditors who have not made themselves voluntary and consenting parties to the proceeding, by proving their claims, accepting dividends, or otherwise. Felch v. Bugbee, 48 Maine, 9, 77 Am. Dec. 203; Hills v. Carlton, 74 Maine, 156; Pullen…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Baldwin v. HaleSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Denny v. BennettSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Gilman v. LockwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Murphy v. ManningMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Murray v. RobertsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hornick, More & Porterfield v. Farmers' & Merchants' BankSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929