National Mount Wollaston Bank v. Porter

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

National Mount Wollaston Bank v. Porter

122 Mass. 308, 1877 Mass. LEXIS 126

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMarch 7, 1877

StatusPublished

Cited by18 cases

This text of 122 Mass. 308 (National Mount Wollaston Bank v. Porter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

National Mount Wollaston Bank v. Porter, 122 Mass. 308, 1877 Mass. LEXIS 126 (Mass. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

Devens, J.

If the claim of the plaintiff, which was upon a contingent liability of the defendants upon an indorsement made by them upon a negotiable note not yet matured, was a debt provable in bankruptcy, and one which could be satisfied by a composition with their creditors, it could only be thus satisfied upon compliance with the terms thereof. In re Hurst, 13 Bank. Reg. 455. In re Reiman, 12 Blatchf. C. C. 562.

The plaintiff had received fifty per cent, of its debt from the metate of the maker, but this was no reason why the defendants should not pay them the fifty per cent, upon the whole debt as they had entered it upon their schedule. The plaintiff was entitled to the benefit of its double security. Where both maker and indorser are liable, the holder of a note may prove the amount against each, and receive dividends to the full amount of his debt. [310]*310Sohier v. Loring, 6 Cush. 537. Blake v. Ames, 8 Allen, 318, Ex parte Talcott, 2 Lowell, 320. Having refused to pay according to their composition, the defendants cannot now protect themselves by it from an action at law. Edwards v. Coombe, L. R. 7 C. P. 519. In re Hatton, L. R 7 Ch. 723.

If the note was not provable in bankruptcy before maturity, and it would seem that it was not, the same result follows. U. S. Rev. Sts. § 5069. In re Loder, 4 Bened. 305. Claims against a bankrupt, which are not provable, are not barred by any discharge. In re Kingsley, 1 Lowell, 216. Hamblen v. Ratigan, 119 Mass. 153. They cannot be satisfied by a composition to which the holders of them have no right to become parties, even if such claims are properly described on the schedule of the debtor.

The defendants do not cease to be liable because the debt has been satisfied, as against the maker, by the composition into which he was permitted to enter, nor because of the receipt by the plaintiff of a dividend under it. The resolution for such-composition does not appear to have been passed with the concurrence of the plaintiff. It may have been the act of others and of the court, which it was powerless to prevent. Whether, if, without the consent of the indorser, the plaintiff had concurred in the composition with the maker, it would have operated to release the indorser, is not now before us.

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

Devens, J.

If the claim of the plaintiff, which was upon a contingent liability of the defendants upon an indorsement made by them upon a negotiable note not yet matured, was a debt provable in bankruptcy, and one which could be satisfied by a composition with their creditors, it could only be thus satisfied upon compliance with the terms thereof. In re Hurst, 13 Bank. Reg. 455. In re Reiman, 12 Blatchf. C. C. 562.

The plaintiff had received fifty per cent, of its debt from the metate of the maker, but this was no reason why the defendants should not pay them the fifty per cent, upon the whole debt as they had entered it upon their schedule. The plaintiff was entitled to the benefit of its double security. Where both maker and indorser are liable, the holder of a note may prove the amount against each, and receive dividends to the full amount of his debt. [310]*310Sohier v. Loring, 6 Cush. 537. Blake v. Ames, 8 Allen, 318, Ex parte Talcott, 2 Lowell, 320. Having refused to pay according to their composition, the defendants cannot now protect themselves by it from an action at law. Edwards v. Coombe, L. R. 7 C. P. 519. In re Hatton, L. R 7 Ch. 723.

If the note was not provable in bankruptcy before maturity, and it would seem that it was not, the same result follows. U. S. Rev. Sts. § 5069. In re Loder, 4 Bened. 305. Claims against a bankrupt, which are not provable, are not barred by any discharge. In re Kingsley, 1 Lowell, 216. Hamblen v. Ratigan, 119 Mass. 153. They cannot be satisfied by a composition to which the holders of them have no right to become parties, even if such claims are properly described on the schedule of the debtor.

The defendants do not cease to be liable because the debt has been satisfied, as against the maker, by the composition into which he was permitted to enter, nor because of the receipt by the plaintiff of a dividend under it. The resolution for such-composition does not appear to have been passed with the concurrence of the plaintiff. It may have been the act of others and of the court, which it was powerless to prevent. Whether, if, without the consent of the indorser, the plaintiff had concurred in the composition with the maker, it would have operated to release the indorser, is not now before us.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 Mass. 308, 1877 Mass. LEXIS 126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-mount-wollaston-bank-v-porter-mass-1877.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack