Bamberger v. Terry
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court of the United. States for the District of Connecticut. The parties to this action having stipulated in writing that it should be tried by the court, the following facts were found by it to have been proven: — On or about Aug. 12, 1875, the firm of S. A. Castle & Co., of the city of New York, consisting of Samuel A. Castle, Rufus E. Hitchcock, and Henry S. McGrane, being insolvent, made an assignment of all their goods and effects, for the joint…
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of the United. States for the District of Connecticut. The parties to this action having stipulated in writing that it should be tried by the court, the following facts were found by it to have been proven: — On or about Aug. 12, 1875, the firm of S. A. Castle & Co., of the city of New York, consisting of Samuel A. Castle, Rufus E. Hitchcock, and Henry S. McGrane, being insolvent, made an assignment of all their goods and effects, for the joint .and equal benefit of their creditors, under the statute of New York of April 13’, 1860, to Leopold Bamberger, of that…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Waite
This record shows that on the 25th -of May, 1876, Bamberger, the defendant below, moved that the cause be entered on the jury docket of the court, “pursuant to the statute in such' case provided, and as of right he may demand.” After-wards lie stipulated in. writing that the cause be tried by the court. This was equivalent to a waiver of a jury. The stipulation was duly filed and entered of record. Afterwards the ■ parties appeared and the case'was tried by the court. At the close of the testimony, Terry, the plaintiff below, asked and, against the objection of the defendant, obtained leave…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Bamberger v. TerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1881