Floyd v. Bovard
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the District Court of Allegheny county. George Bovard against John Floyd & Company. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff to recover the proceeds of a quantity of pig-iron sold by the defendants as commission merchants.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the District Court of Allegheny county. George Bovard against John Floyd & Company. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff to recover the proceeds of a quantity of pig-iron sold by the defendants as commission merchants. Robert J. M’Gowan, an iron-master in failing circumstances, had assigned a quantity of pig-metal to David M’Junkin, one of his creditors; and had subsequently assigned to Alfred Nesmith whatever should remain of it after satisfaction of M’Junkin’s debt. The plaintiff, who was also a creditor of M’Gowan, applied for iron to pay his debt, but it was…
1Opinion of the Court
*76The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gibson, C. J.
The facts appear to be, that M’Gowan, an iron-master in failing circumstances, had assigned a quantity of pig-metal to M’Junkin, his creditor; and had subsequently assigned to Nesmith whatever should remain of it after satisfaction of M’Junkin’s debt. Bovard, the plaintiff, who was likewise a creditor and M’Gowan’s manager, applied for metal also; but being refused, assisted M’Junkin to take away enough to satisfy his debt, and sent the surplus to the defendant to be sold on his account. Nesmith now intervenes, and claims the proceeds…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- King v. RichardsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
- Ellmaker v. BuckleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1827
3Cited by18 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Phelps v. Court of Oyer & TerminerNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Young v. MontgomeryIndiana Supreme Court · 1903
- Campau v. DeweyMichigan Supreme Court · 1861
- Wells v. American Express Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
- Jackson v. LitchSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.