Armstrong v. Byrne
New York Court of Chancery
Sarah Byrne and Richard B. Fletcher; two of the defendants, were partners in business, under the firm of Byrne & Co. Having become insolvent, they made an assignment of their stock in trade, on the twenty-fifth day of May, 1829, to the defendants, JohnS.
Read the full summary
Sarah Byrne and Richard B. Fletcher; two of the defendants, were partners in business, under the firm of Byrne & Co. Having become insolvent, they made an assignment of their stock in trade, on the twenty-fifth day of May, 1829, to the defendants, JohnS. Mackie and William W. Scrugham, in trust, to be sold and disposed of, and the proceeds (with the outstanding debts, which were also assigned) to be divided pro rata amongst the several creditors mentioned in a schedule annexed to the assignment. The asssignment contained the following clause: “ The said “ creditors or such as agree to receive…
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor.
' The bill in this case seeks to set aside the assignment upon two grounds: 1st. Because it is fraudulent upon the face of it; and 2d, on account of the subsequent conduct of the parties: showing it was fraudulent in fact.
The last ground is not sustained so far as the assignees are concerned. But, the first point presents a much more serious question. The assignment professes to provide for the creditors named in a schedule, by directing the proceeds of the assigned property, to be divided among them in proportion to the amount of their respective debts. If it stopped…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Dearing v. DashAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Hall v. DenisonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Shufeldt v. JenkinsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Virginia · 1884
- Spaulding v. StrangNew York Supreme Court · 1860
- Jenkins v. John Good Cordage & Machine Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.