Veil v. Mitchel
This text of 28 F. Cas. 1135 (Veil v. Mitchel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The cases upon this subject are uniform, in laying down the rule, that where the principal can trace his property into the hands of his agent or factor, whether it be the identical article which first came to the hands of the factor, or other prop[1136]*1136erty purchased for the principal by the factor with the proceeds; ha may follow it, either into the hands of the factor, or of his legal representatives, or of his assigns if he should become insolvent or a bankrupt. The factor is a trustee for the principal, so long as he retains the property, or its representative in his hands; and his assignees, or legal representatives take it, subject to the same trust, which they cannot defeat by turning it into money; unless indeed, they should pay it away in their representative character, before notice of the claim. It is in this point of view only, that notice is necessary. Judgment for plaintiffs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
28 F. Cas. 1135, 4 Wash. C. C. 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/veil-v-mitchel-circtedpa-1821.