47 U.S. 201 (1848), Forgay v. Conrad

Citation47 U.S. 201, 12 L.Ed. 404
Party NameSAMUEL L. FORGAY AND ELIZA ANN FOGARTY, WIFE OF E. W. WELLS, APPELLANTS, v. FRANCIS B. CONRAD, ASSIGNEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF THOMAS BANKS.
Case DateMarch 06, 1848
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Page 201

47 U.S. 201 (1848)

12 L.Ed. 404

SAMUEL L. FORGAY AND ELIZA ANN FOGARTY, WIFE OF E. W. WELLS, APPELLANTS,

v.

FRANCIS B. CONRAD, ASSIGNEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF THOMAS BANKS.

United States Supreme Court.

March 06, 1848

OPINION

THIS was an appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana.

The facts in the case are set forth in the opinion of the court.

Mr. Sergeant moved to dismiss the appeal, because the decree of the court below was not final, and because the appeal was not regularly brought up. On the second point, he said that there were several defendants, one only of whom had appealed. But all the parties must join. 7 Peters, 399. He referred the court, however, upon this point, to Todd v. Daniel, 16 Peters, 521. A case must not come up in fragments. 3 Peters, 307; 3 Dall. 188.

To show that the decree was not final, he referred to The Palmyra, 10 Wheat. 502; Chace v. Vasquez, 11 Wheat. 429; Brown v. Swann, 9 Peters, 1; Young v. Grundy, 6 Cranch, 51; Rutherford v. Fisher, 4 Dall. 22; Leav. Kelly, 1 Peters, 213; Young v. Smith, 12 Peters, 287.

Mr. May, contra.

Against the motion to dismiss, it is submitted,----

1st. There are proper parties to this appeal.

The appellants have separate and distinct interests, and the

Page 202

decree is several. Todd v. Daniel, 16 Peters, 523; McDonough v. Dannery, 3 Dallas, 188, 193, 198.

On order of court. The petition for an appeal by appellants alone is found in the record, p. 198. This was notice to the other defendants below of the appeal.

2d. The decree is final.

It decides the title of all the property in dispute, decrees that it be delivered up to the complainant, and that execution issue, &c. Wilson v. Daniel, 3 Dallas, 404. The whole law of the case, so far as the appellants are concerned, is settled by the decree; nothing is left to be done but the ministerial duty of stating an account, which in this case is in the nature of an execution to carry out the decree; the principles of the account are prescribed. It is like the case of Ray v. Law, 3 Cranch, 179 (explained in 10 Wheaton, 503). Whiting v. Bank of the United States, 13 Peters, 15.

Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court.

A motion has been made to dismiss this appeal, upon the ground, that the decree in the Circuit Court is not a final decree, within the meaning of the acts of Congress of 1789 and 1803.

The bill was filed by the appellee, as the assignee in bankruptcy of a certain Thomas Banks, in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Louisiana, against the appellants, and Banks the bankrupt, and three other defendants. The object of the bill was to set aside sundry deeds made by Banks for lands and slaves, which the complainant charged to be fraudulent, and for an account of the rents and profits of the property so conveyed; and also for an account of sundry sums of money which he alleged had been received by one or more of the defendants, as specifically charged in the bill, which belonged to the bankrupt's estate at the time of his bankruptcy.

The case was proceeded in until it came on for hearing, when the court passed a decree declaring sundry deeds therein mentioned to be fraudulent and void, and directing the lands and slaves therein mentioned to be delivered up to the complainant, and also directing one of the defendants named in the decree to pay him eleven thousand dollars, received from the bankrupt in fraud of his creditors, and 'that the complainant do have execution for the several matters aforesaid, in conformity with law and the practice prescribed by the rules of the Supreme Court of the United States.' The decree then directs that the master take an account of the profits of the lands and slaves ordered to be delivered up, from the time of the filing

Page 203

of the bill until the property was delivered, or to the date of the master's report, and also an account of the money and notes received by one of the defendants (who has not appealed) in fraud of the creditors of the bankrupt, and concludes in the following words:--'And so much of the said bill as contains or relates to matters hereby referred to the master for a report is retained for further decree in the premises; and so much of the said bill as is not now, nor has been heretofore, adjudged and decreed upon, and which is not above retained for the purposes aforesaid, be dismissed without prejudice, and that the said defendants do pay the costs.'

Among the deeds set aside as fraudulent is one from the bankrupt to Ann Fogarty, otherwise called Ann Wells, for two lots in the city of New Orleans and sundry slaves which she afterwards conveyed to Forgay, the other appellant. Both of these deeds are declared null and void, and the lots, with the improvements thereon,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
404 practice notes
  • 474 B.R. 228 (Bkrtcy.N.D.Ala. 2012), 11-05736-TBB, In re Jefferson County, Alabama
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Bankruptcy Courts Eleventh Circuit
    • 19 Enero 2012
    ...to take possession of property has assessed the impact of a receivership on the property interests of parties. In Forgay v. Conrad, 47 U.S. 201, 6 How. 201, 12 L.Ed. 404 (1848), while examining whether an order was final in the context of a bankruptcy case where the bankrupt's property inte......
  • 246 B.R. 47 (D.N.J. 2000), 94-13602, Professional Ins. Management v. Ohio Cas. Group of Ins. Companies
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 3th Circuit United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • 29 Febrero 2000
    ...in and out of the bankruptcy context, certain orders come within the concept of "practical finality." See Forgay v. Conrad, 47 U.S. 201, 6 How. 201, 12 L.Ed. 404 (1848). As the Third Circuit described it, the "practical finality" doctrine "only allows appellate revi......
  • 94 B.R. 734 (M.D.Fla. 1988), 88-61-Civ-Oc-14, In re Warner
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 11th Circuit United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida
    • 15 Noviembre 1988
    ...harm" if appellate review is delayed until conclusion of the case, Martin Brothers, 796 F.2d at 1437, (citing Forgay v. Conrad, 47 U.S. 201, 12 L.Ed. 404 (1847)), or 3) the order even if it is of marginal finality presents a question fundamental to further conduct of the case, Martin B......
  • 795 F.2d 538 (6th Cir. 1986), 84-1735, Ford Motor Co. v. Transport Indem. Co.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 30 Junio 1986
    ...and technical sense," but must be given a "reasonable construction." Forgay v. Conrad, 47 U.S. (6 How.) 200, 203, 12 L.Ed. 404 (1848); see Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 306, 82 S.Ct. 1502, 1513, 8 L.Ed.2d 510 (1962). Thus, a district court judge "does no......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
2 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT