Fisk v. Herrick
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The supposed trustee stated that they owed Herrick, the principal defendant, nothing in his individual capacity at the time of the service of the writ upon them, but that, at that time, they were indebted to the firm of Smith Sf Herrick, of which the said Herrick, the principal, is one, a certain sum payable in cash, and another sum payable in merchandise ; and upon these facts they pray to be discharged, and to be allowed their legal costs.
1Per curiam
We have several times decided that a debt due to a partnership is not necessarily goods, effects, or credits, of either of the partners. Before either partner can rightfully claim to his own use, or for the payment of his own debts, any of the partnership effects, the partnership must be solvent, and he must not be a debtor to it.
To ascertain these facts, a creditor who wishes to apply to the payment of his debt a debt due to the partnership, by this mode of attachment, ought also to summon as a trustee one of [ * 272 ] the partners, as well knowing the state of * the affairs of, the…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Phillips v. BridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Winston v. EwingSupreme Court of Alabama · 1840
- Church v. KnoxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1818
- Lyndon v. GorhamU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1812
- Phillips v. CookNew York Supreme Court · 1840
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.