In re Marsh
District Court, D. Connecticut
In Bankruptcy. On question certified from referee. The following memorandum contains the opinion and ruling of John W. Banks, referee: Petitioners invoke the equitable doctrine of the right of the owner of a trust fund to follow it and recover it • from any one, except a bona fide purchaser for value, into whose possession it can be traced.
Read the full summary
In Bankruptcy. On question certified from referee. The following memorandum contains the opinion and ruling of John W. Banks, referee: Petitioners invoke the equitable doctrine of the right of the owner of a trust fund to follow it and recover it • from any one, except a bona fide purchaser for value, into whose possession it can be traced. They claim that various sums of money, aggregating over $7,000, which in equity belonged to them, came into the possession of Charles B. and Edward II. Marsh during the years 1898, 1899, and 1900, and that, Marsh Bros, having subsequently been adjudged…
1Opinion of the Court
PLATT, District Judge.
I have carefully examined the certificate of John W. Banks, referee, in the above case. After setting forth in its earlier paragraphs a history of the business dealings in accordance with which the bankrupts had borrowed large sums of money from the petitioners, and, to secure their notes given-therefor, had assigned to the petitioners a large number of mortgages as collaterals, and had from time to time taken up certain collaterals and substituted other collaterals instead, sometimes with permission of the petitioners and sometimes without such permission, the referee…
2Cited by9 opinions
- In re BennettCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1907
- Crenshaw v. AllenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912
- Dollar v. Lockney Supply Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1914
- Waddell v. WaddellUtah Supreme Court · 1909
- Lucas County v. JamisonU.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Iowa · 1908
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.