Wingo, Ellett & Crump v. Purdy & Co.
Supreme Court of Virginia
Appeal from decree of circuit court of Greensville county, rendered April 22d, 1890, in a chancery suit wherein Charles E. Wingo, John S. Ellett and James D. Crump, partners in business in the name of Wingo, Ellett & Crump, were complainants, and N. Purdy, L. S. Purdy, and B. G. Team, late partners in the name of Purdy & Co., were defendants.
Read the full summary
Appeal from decree of circuit court of Greensville county, rendered April 22d, 1890, in a chancery suit wherein Charles E. Wingo, John S. Ellett and James D. Crump, partners in business in the name of Wingo, Ellett & Crump, were complainants, and N. Purdy, L. S. Purdy, and B. G. Team, late partners in the name of Purdy & Co., were defendants. This suit was by foreign attachment in eijliity, instituted in the county of Greensville, in the State of Virginia, by the appellants, a firm of Richmond city merchants, against the' appellees, a firm of merchants doing business in Camden, South…
1Opinion of the CourtLacy, J.
(after stating the case), delivered the opinion of the court.
The grounds upon which the attachments in this suit were sued out were the alleged belief on the part of the attaching creditors that the defendants intended to make an assignment with intent to hinder, delay and defraud their creditors. Their debts were not due, and they had no right to bring suit except upon that ground, and the circuit court could not, therefore, entertain them at its bar except upon that ground. The first question to be considered, therefore, is whether any such ground existed—that is, whether the defendants…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Dayton Spice-Mills Co. v. SloanNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
- Trebilcock v. Big Missouri Mining Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1896
- Augir v. ForesmanWashington Supreme Court · 1900
- Lancaster v. WilsonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1876
- Lancaster v. WilsonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1876
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.