Hersey v. Jones

128 Mass. 473, 1880 Mass. LEXIS 120
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMarch 16, 1880
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 128 Mass. 473 (Hersey v. Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hersey v. Jones, 128 Mass. 473, 1880 Mass. LEXIS 120 (Mass. 1880).

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

The bankrupt act of the United States provides that, if no choice of assignee is made by the creditors at the first meeting, the judge, or, if there be no opposing interest, the register, shall appoint one or more assignees, and that “ all elections or appointments of assignees shall be subject to the approval of the judge; ” U. S. Rev. Sts. § 5034; that, as soon as an assignee is appointed and qualified, the judge, or, where there is no opposing interest, the register, shall make an assignment to him of the debtor’s property; § 5044; and that “a copy duly certified by the clerk of the court, under the seal thereof, of the assignment, shall be conclusive evidence of the title of the assignee to take, hold, sue for and recover the property of the bankrupt.” § 5049.

We have not considered whether the facts of this case show a want of such approval of the plaintiff’s election as assignee as [475]*475the bankrupt act requires; because, if an assignment is proved to have been executed and delivered by the register to the assignee, it is conclusive evidence of his right to sue, and any defects or irregularities in the previous proceedings cannot be set up in defence of the action, but can only be availed of by application to the supervisory jurisdiction in equity of the Circuit Court of the United States. U. S. Rev. Sts. § 4986. Whee-lock v. Hastings, 4 Met. 504. And if the original assignment has not been recorded, and has been lost or destroyed, so that it is impossible to produce either the original or a certified copy thereof, secondary evidence of its contents is admissible. Brigham, v. Coburn, 10 Gray, 329. The evidence offered- of the execution, delivery and contents of the assignment was therefore wrongly excluded. New trial ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Hull v. Burr
64 Fla. 83 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1912)
Howes v. Burt
130 Mass. 368 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1881)
Farwell v. Raddin
129 Mass. 7 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
128 Mass. 473, 1880 Mass. LEXIS 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hersey-v-jones-mass-1880.