Legro v. Staples
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On the disclosure of trustees. Messrs Chandler & Paine, being summoned as trustees of Joseph Staples, disclosed that before the service of the writ they had collected for him of Jedediah Varney a sum of money, which they had not paid over; but that before tbe service they had accepted an order drawn on them by the defendant in the words following.
Read the full summary
On the disclosure of trustees. Messrs Chandler & Paine, being summoned as trustees of Joseph Staples, disclosed that before the service of the writ they had collected for him of Jedediah Varney a sum of money, which they had not paid over; but that before tbe service they had accepted an order drawn on them by the defendant in the words following. “ Bangor, March 15, 1837. Pay to the order of Jeremiah Staples whatever sum you may collect for me of Jedediah Varney, on demands left with you for collection. Joseph Staples. To Messrs Chandler & Paine, Bangor, Me.” On the face of the order it was…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Shepley J.
The order named in the exceptions cannot be regarded as negotiable, because it was not drawn for any specific amount and it was payable only upon a contingency. It did however operate as an assignment of the amount which might be received. Cutts v. Perkins, 12 Mass. R. 206; Robbins v. Bacon, 3 Greenl. 346. And that would be sufficient to prevent any attachment of it as the property of the defendant, if there were not a suggestion, that it was invalid, and so ineffectual to transfer the property. Such an allegation having been made, the statute…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Conway v. CuttingSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1871
- Woodruff v. HenselColorado Court of Appeals · 1894
- Central National Bank v. SpratlenColorado Court of Appeals · 1896
- Central National Bank v. SpratlenColorado Court of Appeals · 1896
- In re SmithDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1877
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.