Murgatroyd v. McLure
17 F. Cas. 1026, 4 Dall. 342
Opinion
declared, that the whole transaction, between Murgatroyd and Duncanson, was a mere cover, to evade the laws of the United States; that the former was a mere trustee for the latter; and that, having been paid the full price for the ship, he had no property, on which the replevin could be maintained.
The plaintiff suffered a non-suit
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Murgatroyd v. McLure, 17 F. Cas. 1026, 4 Dall. 342 (circtdpa 1800).
17 F. Cas. 1026 (Murgatroyd v. McLure) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.