Ralston Assignee v. Bell

2 U.S. 242, 2 Dall. 242
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided March 1, 1796·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

2 U.S. 242

2 Dall. 242

1 L.Ed. 365

Ralston Assignee
v.
Bell

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

March Term, 1796

This was an action for money had and received, &c. brought by Ralston, as assignee of Dewhurst, a bankrupt, against the defendant, who had sold goods of the bankrupt, by virtue of an authority from him; but, it appeared in evidence, that no money had been received by the defendant, at the time of commencing the action.

The counsel for the defendant (Ingersoll, Lewis & Dallas) objected, that, on this evidence, the present action could not be maintained.

The counsel for the plaintiff (Rawle & Wilcocks) after some remarks, and citing Doug. 132, submitted to the decided inclination of the Court, and suffered

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

Ralston Assignee v. Bell, 2 U.S. 242, 2 Dall. 242 (1796).

2 U.S. 242 (Ralston Assignee v. Bell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Neilson v. Blight
1 Johns. Cas. 205 (New York Supreme Court, 1799)