Sutton v. Hanford
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Lenawee Circuit. Sutton brought action against defendants in error for certain property covered by a general assignment made to him by the firm of J. C. Satterthwaite & Co., for the benefit of their creditors. Defendants. held the property under executions against the assignors, and they claimed the assignment to be fraudulent, for the reason, among others, that it allowed a sale of the assigned property on credit.
Read the full summary
Error to Lenawee Circuit. Sutton brought action against defendants in error for certain property covered by a general assignment made to him by the firm of J. C. Satterthwaite & Co., for the benefit of their creditors. Defendants. held the property under executions against the assignors, and they claimed the assignment to be fraudulent, for the reason, among others, that it allowed a sale of the assigned property on credit. The clause for this purpose was as follows: “And the said party of the second part is hereby authorized * * * to sell any of the aforesaid property on reasonable short…
1Opinion of the Court
Manning J.:
The first objection to the validity of the assignment is, that it authorizes the assignee to sell the assigned property on ciedit. We think this objection is well taken.
*519Assignments by insolvent debtors for the benefit of creditors, are binding on the latter, when made by the debtor for the purpose of converting his property into money to pay his creditors. When the assignee goes farther than this, and stipulates for, or authorizes, the assignee to do some act for his ■ personal gain, or unnecessarily postpones the payment of his creditors without their assent, the assignment can…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Cutler v. MeekerNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
- Ryerson v. EldredMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
- Ives v. WilliamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Palmer v. MasonMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Richardson v. Rogers ex rel. HitchcockMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.