Rainwater-Boogher Hat Co. v. Malcolm
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to the United States Court in the Indian Territory. Action commenced by attachment by the Rainwater-Boogher Hat Company against John Malcolm. Paul Waples intervened, claiming the attached goods under a deed of trust from Malcolm. Judgment and verdict for the intervener, and for defendant Malcolm on the issue as to the attachment. Plaintiff brings error. statement by Caldwell.
Read the full summary
In Error to the United States Court in the Indian Territory. Action commenced by attachment by the Rainwater-Boogher Hat Company against John Malcolm. Paul Waples intervened, claiming the attached goods under a deed of trust from Malcolm. Judgment and verdict for the intervener, and for defendant Malcolm on the issue as to the attachment. Plaintiff brings error. statement by Caldwell. Circnil Judge: On the 19th day of January, 1891, John Malcolm made and delivered to Paul Waples, the trustee therein named, the following’ instrument: “Dfbant, Indian Tkbbitoby. “Know all men, that 1, John…
1Opinion of the Court
Caldwell, Circuit Judge,
(after stating the facts.) The case presents
but a single question: Is this instrument a deed of trust in the nature of a mortgage or a deed of assignment for the benefit of creditors? If the former, it is valid; if the latter, it is void for noncompliance with the requirements of the statute in force in the Indian Territory regulating assignments for the benefit of creditors. The statute in question is an Arkansas statute put in force in the Indian Territory by the act of congress of May 2,1890, (26 St. pp. 81, 94, c. 182, § 31,) and the decisions of the supreme court…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cameron, Hull & Co. v. MarvinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
- Hauselt v. HarrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Wood v. WeimarSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Greeley v. ReadingSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- Appolos v. BradyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Frick Co. v. OatsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Grimes Dry Goods Co. v. MalcolmSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Dyson v. St. Paul National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- W. B. Grimes Dry-Goods Co. v. MalcolmCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1893
- Bradley Real Estate Co. v. RobbinsCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1907