Hecht v. Green
This text of 61 Cal. 269 (Hecht v. Green) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The motion for nonsuit was properly granted. The evidence introduced by plaintiffs did not tend to prove anything beyond the fact that the defendants had possession of the property of Boyles & Evans by virtue of an assignment made by them for the benefit of their creditors. Having proved so much, it was incumbent on the plaintiffs to impeach. that assignment, before asking the Court to disregard it. The Court had no right to assume that it was not a valid assignment. We do not think that the provisions of the Civil Code relative to assignments for the benefit of creditors were repealed by the “Act for the Relief of Insolvent Debtors,” approved April 16,1880.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
61 Cal. 269, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hecht-v-green-cal-1882.