Maxwell v. McCune

37 Tex. 515
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 37 Tex. 515 (Maxwell v. McCune) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Maxwell v. McCune, 37 Tex. 515 (Tex. 1873).

Opinion

Walker, J.

The defense set up in this action is utterly insufficient in law. The suit is by the assignees of a negotiable promissory note, against the maker, negotiated before maturity ; and the plaintiffs are not chargeable with notice of any rights or equities against the note.

The note was given for the rent of the homestead of C. 3£. Hillburn. Hillburn and wife had given a deed of trust over the property. The husband subsequently went into bankruptcy, and it would appear that the bankrupt court regarded the property as passing to the assignee, and ordered the same to be sold as assets. Maxwell, the maker of the note, purchased the property with a full knowledge of all the facts.

It is not for us to review the proceedings of the bankrupt court; but certainly all property exempt from forced sale under the laws of the different States is saved to the bankrupt under the proviso in Section 14 of the Bankrupt Act of March 2d, 1861. But it is unnecessary for us to follow the learned argument of counsel in this case. Admitting the law touching the bankrupt’s estate to be as claimed by the appellant, the appellees are still entitled to their judgment, and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed

Affirmed.

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

Related

Curtis v. Ozcelebi
S.D. Texas, 2022
Gayle v. Randall
71 Ala. 469 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1882)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
37 Tex. 515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maxwell-v-mccune-tex-1873.