Rockhold v. Rockhold

92 U.S. 129, 23 L. Ed. 507, 1875 U.S. LEXIS 1737
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedFebruary 14, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 92 U.S. 129 (Rockhold v. Rockhold) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rockhold v. Rockhold, 92 U.S. 129, 23 L. Ed. 507, 1875 U.S. LEXIS 1737 (1876).

Opinion

Me. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

The object of this suit was to bring the executors of the will of Thomas Rockhold, deceased, to an account with the plaintiff, Charles Rockhold, one of the legatees. The defendant, William D. Blevins, one of the executors, answering the bill, said, in substance, that, contrary to his wishes, he was forced by a military power that he could not control to .receive the sum of $5,004.74 from one of the debtors of the estate, in Confederate money, and pay it over to the receiver of the Confederate States. When this was done, the country was under complete military rule; and he acted, contrary to his Avishes, under Confederate authority, which he was compelled to obey. This, he *130 claimed, excused Mm from accountability to the plaintiff for this amount; and the Supreme Court of the State has so decided.

To reverse this decision the present writ of error has been brought.

We cannot distinguish this .case from Bethel v. Demaret, 10 Wall. 537; Delmas v. Insurance Company, 14 id. 661; and Tarver v. Keach, 15 id. 67. The State court has only decided, that, upon principles of general law, a trustee cannot be held responsible to his cestui que trust for the loss of a trust-fund, if the loss has not been occasioned by his own laches or bad faith; and that the delivery of the trust-fund in this case by the defendant into the hands of the Confederate authorities, under an order which he dared not disobey, excused him from liability to the plaintiff. This is not a Federal question.

Writ of error dismissed.

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

Related

Chicago & Alton Railroad v. Wiggins Ferry Co.
119 U.S. 615 (Supreme Court, 1887)
Dugger v. Bocock
104 U.S. 596 (Supreme Court, 1882)
Bank v. McVeigh
98 U.S. 332 (Supreme Court, 1878)
Chicago & Alton R. Co. v. Wiggins Ferry Co.
119 U.S. 615 (Supreme Court, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
92 U.S. 129, 23 L. Ed. 507, 1875 U.S. LEXIS 1737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rockhold-v-rockhold-scotus-1876.