Hunt v. Miles
This text of 42 Vt. 533 (Hunt v. Miles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The opinion of the court Avas delivered by
Taft, being an accommodation endorser for the defendant, who held the notes in question directly from the makers, and being in no other way connected with said notes, was not a party to the transfer by the defendant to Noyes. In the relation he sustained to the paper and the other parties, this court think that, when the defendant sold and transferred the paper to Noyes, notice of such sale and transfer given by Noyes to Taft stands upon the same reason, and must be held to have the same effect in exempting it in the hands of Noyes and his assigns, from the trustee process brought by a creditor of the defendant, as the notice given in the case of Ayott v. Smith et al., 40 Vt., 532.
On this ground, the judgment as to the right of the First National Bank of St. Albans to hold the notes, and to recover costs, and also discharging the trustees with costs, is affirmed.
[537]*537The judgment allowing the trustees and claimants for travel other than actual is reversed, and it is ordered that in the taxation of costs they be allowed respectively only for actual travel.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
42 Vt. 533, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunt-v-miles-vt-1870.