Danforth v. Denny
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Foreign Attachment. In answer to the usual interrogatory propounded to the trustee, the trustee disclosed as follows, namely: “ On the sixth day of May, 1850, the defendant turned out and delivered to me all his attachable personal property excepting a portion of the same which he had before that time mortgaged to Alonzo Winkley, and I took possession of the same, as security, in the first place, for a demand which I had against him in full, and after that was paid, for the…
Read the full summary
Foreign Attachment. In answer to the usual interrogatory propounded to the trustee, the trustee disclosed as follows, namely: “ On the sixth day of May, 1850, the defendant turned out and delivered to me all his attachable personal property excepting a portion of the same which he had before that time mortgaged to Alonzo Winkley, and I took possession of the same, as security, in the first place, for a demand which I had against him in full, and after that was paid, for the payment of certain other debts, he, the said Denny, said he was owing to others, a schedule of which and the amount of…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
The property in question was, on the 6th day of May, 1850, delivered to the trustee, as security, in the first place, for a demand which he held against the principal debtor, and after that for the payment of certain other specified debts of said principal debtor, of which a schedule was made, and the amount of which appeared upon the schedule; and it was then agreed between the trustee and the principal debtor that the trustee should pay said debts to the extent of the avails of the property, provided he should be allowed to hold the property for that purpose. Before the service of the writ…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Meredith Manufacturing Co. v. SmithSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1836
- Barker v. HallSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1842
- Low v. WymanSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1837