King v. Gorsline

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

King v. Gorsline

14 F. Cas. 531, 4 D.C. 150, 4 Cranch 150

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedMay 15, 1831

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 14 F. Cas. 531 (King v. Gorsline) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

King v. Gorsline, 14 F. Cas. 531, 4 D.C. 150, 4 Cranch 150 (circtddc 1831).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

(nem. con.) was of opinion that the drafts of the defendant, upon the garnishees, were an equitable assignment of so much of the funds of the debtor, in their hands, and those drafts having exhausted the whole fund, the Court quashed the attachments.

The question submitted to the Court was, whether the F. and M. Bank had a priority, by reason of the drafts of Gorsline, received by the bank, but not notified to the canal company, the drawees, until after the attachments served.

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

The Court

(nem. con.) was of opinion that the drafts of the defendant, upon the garnishees, were an equitable assignment of so much of the funds of the debtor, in their hands, and those drafts having exhausted the whole fund, the Court quashed the attachments.

The question submitted to the Court was, whether the F. and M. Bank had a priority, by reason of the drafts of Gorsline, received by the bank, but not notified to the canal company, the drawees, until after the attachments served.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 F. Cas. 531, 4 D.C. 150, 4 Cranch 150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-gorsline-circtddc-1831.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack