Legal Opinion
Marsh v. Garney
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided December 5, 1897PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, C. J.
The turning over of the account by Garney to Rollins, accompanied with authority to collect it and apply the avails to the payment of Rollins’ judgment against Garney, was a sufficient assignment of the account. Brewer v. Franklin Mills, 42 N. H. 292, 294, 295, and cases cited; Pollard v. Pollard, 68 N. H. 356. To the validity of the assignment no notice to Davis or to Marsh was necessary. Wakefield v. Martin, 3 Mass. 558; Thayer v. Daniels, 113 Mass. 129. The only occasion for notice to Davis would be to protect Rollins against a bona fide payment of the debt by Davis to Garney or a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wakefield v. MartinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1799
- Thayer v. DanielsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
3Cited by5 opinions
- Beiser v. Western German BankCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909
- What Cheer Savings Bank v. MowerySupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Glauber Manufacturing Co. v. Voter & Tr.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1901
- New Hampshire Fire Insurance v. ThompsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1921
- Salem Trust Co. v. Manufacturers' Finance Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1922