Comstock v. Farnum
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The answer of Palmer, the trustee in this case, was, in substance, that he had given to Farnum, the principal defendant, before the service of the summons, for a consideration that was not questioned, two several notes of hand, amounting in the whole to 300 dollars, which were payable in horses at a day certain, after the service of the summons.
Read the full summary
The answer of Palmer, the trustee in this case, was, in substance, that he had given to Farnum, the principal defendant, before the service of the summons, for a consideration that was not questioned, two several notes of hand, amounting in the whole to 300 dollars, which were payable in horses at a day certain, after the service of the summons. The trustee further stated, that he had understood by common report, and that it was spoken of as a matter of general notoriety in the place where both the parties live, that the said notes had been assigned to a third person for a valuable…
1Opinion of the Court
Parsons, C. J.,
said the rule in equity was, that an assignment of a chose in action, not negotiable, imposes no duty on the debtor to the assignee until notice of such assignment is given him.
The question whether a person summoned as trustee of an absconding debtor shall be held or not, is always decided by the facts disclosed in the trustee’s answer. This appears expressly to be the contemplation of the framers of the statute, and collateral evidence has never been admitted. (a)
By the Court.
Palmer must be adjudged the defendant’s trustee, as the horses he had contracted to deliver him at a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. LangtonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1829
- Minchin v. MooreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Stackpole v. NewmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Whitman v. HuntMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
3Cited by20 opinions
- Wood v. PartridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- National Bank of Commerce v. HuntingtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- City of Oakland v. Oakland Water Front Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Sandum v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Hubbard v. LamburnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.