Monongahela Nat Bank of Brownsville, Pa v. Jacobus
| Decision Date | 19 November 1883 |
| Citation | 109 U.S. 275,27 L.Ed. 935,3 S.Ct. 219 |
| Parties | MONONGAHELA NAT. BANK OF BROWNSVILLE, PA., v. JACOBUS |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
D. T. Watson, for plaintiff in error.
Thos. C. Lazear and W. W. Douglass, for defendant in error.
The plaintiff in error having recovered a judgment for $9,056.12 against Alfred Patterson, in the circuit court of the United States for the western district of Pennsylvania, caused an execution attachment to be issued against the Fayette County Railroad Company and Samuel H. Jacobus, the defendant in error, attaching as the property of Patterson certain shares of the capital stock of that company which stood in the name of Jacobus. The attachment was duly served upon Patterson, Jacobus, and the railroad company. The controlling issue in the case is whether the stock was the property of Alfred Patterson and liable to be attached in satisfaction of the judgment against him. Jacobus claims that the stock became his property in virtue of an unrecorded assignment and transfer for a valuable consideration by Alfred Patterson prior to the rendition of that judgment; consequently, that it is not liable to the bank's attachment. In the progress of the litigation Patterson died, and his administrator was substituted of record as a party defendant. The contention on the part of the bank is that the assignment was by an insolvent debtor in trust for certain preferred creditors, and that it must have been recorded in order to protect the stock from the attachment of judgment creditors; that of Jacobus is that the assignment was made in consideration of his assumption of certain liabilities of the debtor, and without any intent upon the part of either himself or Patterson to hinder, delay, or defraud the creditors of the latter. At the trial, Jacobus, a witness in his own behalf, was allowed, over the objections of plaintiff, to testify as to what took place between him and Patterson at the time the stock in question was assigned by the latter to the former. The administrator was also permitted, over the objection of the plaintiff, to prove—he being present on the occasion of the assignment—that the assumption by Jacobus of certain debts of Patterson's was in consideration and on the faith of the transfer of this stock. This testimony bore directly upon the controlling issue in the case between the bank and Jacobus.
Whether Jacobus and the administrator of Patterson were competent witnesses depends upon the construction of section 858 of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Price v. Lake Sales Supply R. M., Inc.
-
Loewe v. Savings Bank of Danbury
...that the stock belonged to Jacobus. The original case was decided in 1883 by the Supreme Court of the United States (109 U.S. 275, 3 Sup.Ct. 219, 27 L.Ed. 935) in favor of garnishees. It appears that, at the time the attachment was served, the railroad company had in its hands a dividend of......
-
Morris v. Norton
... ... the First National Bank of Pontiac; that the bank had brought ... suit on them against Morris in ... Ex parte Fisk, 113 U.S. 713, 721, 5 Sup.Ct. 724; ... Monongahela Nat. Bank v. Jacobus, 109 U.S. 275, 3 ... Sup.Ct. 219; Potter v. Bank, ... ...
-
Cush v. Allen
...to the issue, and those who, not being parties, have an interest in the result of that issue." In Monongahela National Bank v. Jacobus, 109 U. S. 275, 2 S. Ct. 219, 27 L. Ed. 935, a creditor obtained judgment against his debtor and thereafter levied on capital stock of a corporation claimed......