by John Marshall Harlan

Name: Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court
Author: by John Marshall Harlan

Summary

“Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by by John Marshall Harlan. It explores elements such as assignment, schedule and the United States.

Quotes from Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court (by John Marshall Harlan)

by John Marshall Harlan, Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court

“ Be this as it may, and without saying that the intention of the parties could be ascertained by parol evidence or otherwise than from the assignment itself, we are of opinion that the better and safer construction is that the general words in the first part of the granting clause are limited by the particular description in the latter part of the same clause of the property actually conveyed to the assignee. These views are sustained by the weight of authority; and we are referred to no decision of the supreme court of Iowa to the contrary. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court

“ In the event of a general assignment of property, by one insolvent or in contemplation of insolvency, for the benefit of creditors, the debtor is required to annex to the assignment an inventory of his estate, and the assignment is not invalidated or rendered void for the want of such an inventory. Whatever estate belongs to the debtor, at the time of a general assignment, passes, by force of the statute, to the assignee. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court

“ The probability is that the assignment and schedule were not prepared at the same time, and that the conclusion ultimately reached by Lane was to make only a partial assignment, which was permissible under the laws of Iowa, and, through Bock, his clerk and assignee, retain control of the goods in the store without subjecting the latter to responsibility to creditors for their management; for, by the terms of the assignment, the assignee would only be liable to them for the proper management and distribution of the property enumerated and described in Schedule A, made part of the assignment. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court

“ The decision sustains the proposition that where a marshal, being sued in trespass in a state court for taking property under a writ of attachment to him directed, defends upon the ground that the property attached belonged to the defendant named in the writ, the case is one arising under the laws of the United States, and therefore removable. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court

“ Bock v. Perkins
*This action involves the title to a certain stock of goods seized under attachments sued out against the property of H. P. Lane from the circuit court of the United States for the northern district of Iowa, and directed to the marshal of that district for execution. The goods, when seized, were in the possession of the plaintiff in error, who claimed the right to hold them under an assignment made to him by Lane before the attachments were issued. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court

“ But this language must be taken in connection with other parts of the instrument, showing that the distribution proposed had reference only to the property particularly enumerated in the schedule. We must assume that Lane did not verify Schedule A by his oath, without reading or understanding what it contained. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court

“ The plaintiff moved to remand it to the state court. The motion was denied, and by direction of the court the jury returned a verdict for the defendants. A judgment in their favor was accordingly entered. Bock v. Perkins, 28 Fed. Rep. 123.
Thecou rt below properly retained the case for trial. Every marshal of the United States, as well as his deputy, must take an oath or affirmation that he will faithfully execute all lawful precepts directed to him, and in all things well and truly perform the duties of his office. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court

“ Packard, 109 U.S. 421, 423, 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 289; Bachrack v. Norton, 132 U.S. 337, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 106; Reagan v. Aiken, ante, 283, (present term;) Houser v. Clayton, 3 Woods, 273; Ellis v. Norton, 16 Fed. Rep. 4. ”

by John Marshall Harlan

Summary

Quotes from Bock v. Perkins — Opinion of the Court (by John Marshall Harlan)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature