Maxwell v. Clarke

29 N.E. 224, 139 Mass. 112, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 37
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided March 12, 1885·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

The question whether the defendants owe the plaintiff the amount of the notes in suit was not adjudicated against- the plaintiff in the former suits in equity between these parties. In those suits it was admitted or proved that the plaintiff was a creditor of the defendants, and the bills were dismissed upon the ground that, although a creditor, he could not by such a bill in equity, which is in the nature of an equitable attachment, obtain a lien upon property of the debtor acquired after his insolvency, before such creditor had obtained a [115]*115judgment at law upon his debt. The records show that this was the ground for dismissing the bills. The decrees in those suits, therefore, are not a bar to this action. Maxwell v. Cochran, 136 Mass. 73. Exceptions overruled,.

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

Maxwell v. Clarke, 29 N.E. 224, 139 Mass. 112, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 37 (Mass. 1885).

29 N.E. 224 (Maxwell v. Clarke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coyle v. Taunton Safe Deposit & Trust Co.
103 N.E. 288 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1913)
Waterhouse v. Levine
65 N.E. 822 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1903)