Baxter v. Wheeler
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
John S. Russell, one of the supposed trustees, disclosed in his answers an assignment made by Wheeler to RusscL and the other supposed trustees, of property, real and personal, to a large amount, in trust to sell and dispose of the same, and out of the proceeds to pay all Wheeler’s creditors, in ratable proportion to the debt of each, without preference.
Read the full summary
John S. Russell, one of the supposed trustees, disclosed in his answers an assignment made by Wheeler to RusscL and the other supposed trustees, of property, real and personal, to a large amount, in trust to sell and dispose of the same, and out of the proceeds to pay all Wheeler’s creditors, in ratable proportion to the debt of each, without preference. The assignment contained a covenant on the part of the assignees, that Wheeler “ shall be permitted to use and occupy the said property so conveyed, committing no waste thereon, until such time as the same shall be sold or disposed of in the…
1Per curiam
The case is clear in favor of the trustees. The debtor may be suffered to remain in possession of the land assigned and of things necessary for taking care of it, without any fraud. Such possession may be evidence of fraud.1
Trustees discharged
See Russell v. Woodward, 10 Pick. 408; Boyden v. Moore, 11 Pick. 362 Hower v. Geesaman, 17 Serg. & Rawle, 251; Williams v. Lowndes, 1 Hall (N. York,) 579; 2 Kent’s Comm. (3d ed.) 534 to 536; Wheeler v. Train, 3 Pick. (2d ed.) 257, note 1.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hower v. GeesamanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828