Ginther v. Richmond
New York Supreme Court
Appeal by the defendant from an order denying a motion for a new trial, made on the minutes of the judge at the Monroe circuit, after a verdict for the plaintiff. The only questions involved arise from the assignment made to the plaintiffs, for the benefit of creditors, by Ginther and Oakley.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant from an order denying a motion for a new trial, made on the minutes of the judge at the Monroe circuit, after a verdict for the plaintiff. The only questions involved arise from the assignment made to the plaintiffs, for the benefit of creditors, by Ginther and Oakley. The plaintiffs claimed to recover from the defendant, as sheriff, property which came to them in virtue of such assignment, and the acceptance by the plaintiffs of the trusts reposed in them. The assignment was in the following words : GEORGE C. GINTHER and CHARLES J. OAKLEY JACOB GINTHER and ISAAC A.…
1Opinion of the Court
Hardin, J.:
The assignees are given the right “ to compromise or compound any claim by taking a part for the whole, when they shall deem it expedient so to do.” It must be conceded that this clause confers a power and discretion upon the assignees to compromise debts in the discretion of the assignees. Docs this authorize or require in express terms an illegal act to be done ? If it does not it cannot be held to invalidate the assignment. (Benedict v. Huntington, 32 N. Y., 219; Townsend v. Stearns, 32 id., 209.) Certainly the assignees are not “required” to compromise any claim. They are only…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rapalee v. . StewartNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Townsend v. . StearnsNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Benedict v. . HuntingtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1865