by John Marshall Harlan

Name: Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court
Author: by John Marshall Harlan

Summary

“Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by by John Marshall Harlan. It explores elements such as trustee, assessment and receiver.

Quotes from Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court (by John Marshall Harlan)

by John Marshall Harlan, Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court

“ Justice MATTHEWS, delivering, judgment, said: 'Whether an assignee of a chose in action shall sue in his own name or that of his assignor is a technical question of mere process, and determinable by the law of the forum; but whether the foreign assignment, on which the plaintiff claims, is valid at all, or whether it is valid against the defendant, goes to the merits, and must be decided by the law in which the case has its legal seat. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court

“ But the making of the call or assessment by the court, for the company, does not, in the absence of some statutory provision on the subject, change the rule that a demand upon the stockholder to meet a call or assessment, by competent authority, must be enforced in the name of the person or corporation holding the legal title to the stock subscription, and to whom the promise of the stockholder was made. There is no reason why the trustee Glenn could not have sued in the name of the company ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court

“ Each member of a partnership is the agent of all, and all the others are the agents of each, and all or each would have authority to settle debts by the assignment of property of the firm. If, then, one becomes indebted to the firm on an open account, the firm, on the principles before mentioned, could assign or negotiate the debt, and so give the assignee a right of action in his own name. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court

“ The right which the express company acquired by the defendant's subscription to its capital stock was only a chose in action. It passed by the deed of September 20, 1866, to the trustees, Blair, Kelly, and O'Donnell, but subject to the condition that a chose in action is not assignable so as to authorize the assignee to sue at law, in his own name, unless the right to do so is given by a statute, or by settled law, in the jurisdiction where suit is brought. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court

“ Thus, if a stockholder borrowed money from the company on his sealed bond, the agreement would be that as his bond is a part of the assets of the company, and he has generally and impliedly assented to the assignment or negotiation of its property, as it may think best, ergo his bond may be negotiated like a promissory note. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court

“ The defendant contends that liability upon his subscription of stock could have been enforced, by the receiver appointed by the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Virginia in the Reynolds suit, at any time after the 12th of January, 1867, on which day the receiver's bond was filed and approved by the court; and that, as more than three years elapsed, after that date, and while the Reynolds Case was pending, without suit being brought against him, he is protected by the statute of limitation. We are of opinion that this position cannot be sustained. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court

“ We concur entirely in the views expressed by Mr. Justice Cox, speaking for the court, in Glenn v. Busey, where will be found a careful and elaborate discussion of this question. In harmony with the decision in that case, we hold that the present suit cannot, consistently with the principles of the common law,-which is the law, upon this question, for the District of Columbia,-be maintained by the plaintiff in his own name, as trustee. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

by John Marshall Harlan, Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court

“ It is not disputed that the time prescribed by the statutes in force in the District of Columbia for the bringing of suits like the present one is three years from the accruing of the cause of action. ”

by John Marshall Harlan

Summary

Quotes from Glenn v. Marbury — Opinion of the Court (by John Marshall Harlan)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature