Legal Opinion

Gillaspy v. Peck

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided September 19, 1877PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from the Wapello District Court Action to recover possession of lot 241 in the city of Ottumwa. The action was brought by George Gillaspy, husband of the plaintiff, Eleanor Gillaspy. Afterwards, Geo. Gillaspy having died, the present plaintiffs were substituted. The lot in question was formerly owned by one D. B. Abrahams. The plaintiffs claim title through an execution sale made upon a judgment against him upon a debt due from the firm of Geo.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Wapello District Court Action to recover possession of lot 241 in the city of Ottumwa. The action was brought by George Gillaspy, husband of the plaintiff, Eleanor Gillaspy. Afterwards, Geo. Gillaspy having died, the present plaintiffs were substituted. The lot in question was formerly owned by one D. B. Abrahams. The plaintiffs claim title through an execution sale made upon a judgment against him upon a debt due from the firm of Geo. Gillaspy & Co., of which • firm Abrahams was a member. Mrs. Sue Abrahams, wife of D. B. Abrahams, claims title to the lot through an execution…

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

ship: debts of paitneis. In the distribution of the aséots of insolvent partners the partnership creditors have a preference in respect to the partnership property and the separate ereditors m respect to the separate or private property partner. 3 Kent’s Com., 64. This is the rule applied in equity, and the correctness of it is not questioned by the plaintiffs in this case. They insist, however, that it is applied only in equity in marshalling assets, and such, we think, is the correct view. In Story’s Eq. Jurisprudence, Sec. 675, the author says: “The creditors of the partnership have the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Meech v. . AllenNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
  2. Murrill v. NeillSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
  3. Averill v. LoucksNew York Supreme Court · 1849
  4. Payne v. MatthewsNew York Court of Chancery · 1836

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. L. Fullam & Co. v. Abrahams & EpstineSupreme Court of Kansas · 1883
  2. Simmons v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1933
  3. In re CoddingDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1881

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API