Legal Opinion

Picquet v. Swan

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts

Decided October 15, 1827PublishedCited by 14 opinions

This was a foreign attachment, commonly •called a trustee process [brought by Cyrus B. Piequet]. The principal debtor [James Swan] did'not appear, or make any defence in the cause; and it came on to be heard upon the answers made by the trustees, who denied that they had any property pf the debt- or in their hands liable to attachment; and having made a special disclosure of all' the facts, moved the court for their discharge.

Read the full summary

This was a foreign attachment, commonly •called a trustee process [brought by Cyrus B. Piequet]. The principal debtor [James Swan] did'not appear, or make any defence in the cause; and it came on to be heard upon the answers made by the trustees, who denied that they had any property pf the debt- or in their hands liable to attachment; and having made a special disclosure of all' the facts, moved the court for their discharge. The motion was resisted. [The plaintiff had previously failed to obtain judgment in an ■action of assumpsit. Case No. 11,132.]

1Opinion of the Court

STORY, Circuit Justice.

This suit is brought by the plaintiff, an alien and subject of the king of France, against James Swan, a citizen of this state, as principal debtor, and against certain persons who are summoned, as his trustees, viz. Harrison G. Otis, William Sullivan, and Hepzibah C. Howard, to recover the amount of certain bills of exchange belonging to the intestate, and yet -due and unpaid by Swan. The process is familiarly known among us by the appellation of the trustee process, and is more generally known elsewhere by the appellation of foreign attachment. It has its origin in…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Jaques v. Trustees of the Methodist Episcopal ChurchCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1820
  2. Reade v. LivingstonNew York Court of Chancery · 1818
  3. Osgood v. BreedMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
  4. Brooks v. CookMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1811
  5. Joy v. ThompsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1844

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Allison v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1868
  2. J. J. Smith Lumber Co. v. Scott County Garbage Reducing & Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1910
  3. Barnett v. GoingsIndiana Supreme Court · 1846
  4. Stratton v. HamIndiana Supreme Court · 1856
  5. Post v. LoveSupreme Court of Florida · 1883

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API