Merillat v. Hensey
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing on an appeal by the complainant from a decree of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia dismissing a bill in equity to set aside an alleged fraudulent assignment.
Read the full summary
Hearing on an appeal by the complainant from a decree of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia dismissing a bill in equity to set aside an alleged fraudulent assignment. The Court in the opinion stated the facts as follows: This cause originated in a bill filed by appellants, Charles H. Merillat and Mason N. Richardson, trustees, as complainants below, against Melville D. Hensey, Mercantile Trust Company, Frederick A. Mertens, and Park Agnew, appellees here, to avoid an assignment by Hensey to Mertens and Agnew, on the ground that said assignment was made with intent to hinder, delay,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bobb
We have examined the record with care, and are convinced that Hensey, at the time he made the assignment in question, was indebted to Mertens and Agnew as they contend. While their transactions with him, and the methods of bookkeeping employed, were a little unusual, we are not prepared, in the absence of proof, to question their testimony. They appear to be reputable business men, and, aside from the careless manner in which they dealt with Hensey, there is no reason to question the bona tides of their claim against him.
A bona fide debt existing, Hensey had a perfect right to prefer Mertens…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Leitch v. . HollisterNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
- Huntley v. KingmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Muchmore v. BuddSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1891
3Cited by2 opinions
- Snider v. KellyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
- Bank of California v. Virtue & Scheck, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1983