Burt v. Perkins
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action of contract upon a receipt by which the defendants acknowledged that they had “ received of Charles D. Burt, deputy sheriff, for safe keeping,” certain goods attached by him by virtue of a writ in favor of James E. Cooley against Perkins, Smith & Co., and agreed “safely to keep and redeliver all of said property above mentioned to said Charles D. Burt, on demand, in like good order and condition that the same now is, free from all expense to said Burt, or pay the said…
Read the full summary
Action of contract upon a receipt by which the defendants acknowledged that they had “ received of Charles D. Burt, deputy sheriff, for safe keeping,” certain goods attached by him by virtue of a writ in favor of James E. Cooley against Perkins, Smith & Co., and agreed “safely to keep and redeliver all of said property above mentioned to said Charles D. Burt, on demand, in like good order and condition that the same now is, free from all expense to said Burt, or pay the said Burt the above named sum in cash, on demand, for value received.” Answer, that said goods were the property of John N.…
1Opinion of the CourtMetcalf, J.
It is no legal ground of exception, that tbo judge declined to instruct the jury, that payment by Perkins, Smith & Co., from the proceeds of their property, to Banker, Carpenter & Co., their creditors, was in fraud of the insolvent laws. Such instruction, if given, would have been idle, unless it had been followed by the further instruction that, by reason of such fraud on those laws, the sale of the property to Barbour, from which the proceeds which were paid to Banker, Carpenter & Co. were derived, was void as against Cooley, another creditor, for whom the plaintiff attached the same…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Learned v. BryantMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
- Fuller v. HoldenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Jenkins v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1859