Marsh v. Perkins

The sole point raised by the defendants on this motion to dismiss the complaint is that the rights of defendant Tench under the contract of September 21,1925, are non-assignable and that plaintiffs, as his assignees, are, therefore, without *630standing to maintain this action. The latter concede that the agreement is so personal in character that Tench may not transfer to another his rights and obligations thereunder. They point out, however, that by Exhibit C, attached to and made part of their complaint, Tench assigned to them on the 30th day of November, 1927, “ any and all claims, demands…