Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

Sansom v. Mercer.....

.Burglary..

..Bailments..

.Mandamus.

.115 Pa. St. 530.... 580
.116 Pa. St. 129.... 591

68 Tex. 488...... 505

Sisk v. Crump..

Smith v. Kerr......
Smith v. Seaton..

.....

South Side Passenger Railway
Company v. Trich.

State v. Calhoun..

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

69 Wis. 224...... 738

98 N. C. 393..... 338

} 76 Ga. 322....... 44

..Contracts.... ....117 Pa. St. 67..... 645

.Murder...

98 N. C. 599..... 351

Jurisdiction-wills. 15 R. I. 553...... 925

.Highways.... .112 Ind. 133.

[blocks in formation]

Trammell and Company v. Mount. Mechanics' liens.... 68 Tex. 210...... 479

[blocks in formation]

Ulrich v. New York Central & Common carriers..108 N. Y. 80...... 369

H. R. R. R. Co.

}

82

Vogel v. Brown Township........Judgments........112 Ind. 299...... 187
Wabash etc. R'y Co. v. Hawk....Master and servant. 121 Ill. 259..
Wabash etc. R'y Co. v. Locke.... Railroads...... .112 Ind. 404..
Walet v. Haskins..

[blocks in formation]

........

.Laches-executions. 68 Tex. 418..

193

501

[blocks in formation]

West Mahanoy Towns'p v. Watson. Negligence...

Whaley v. Jarrett...

Ways.....

Bailments

15 R. I. 563.....

.121 Ill. 91....

929

68

.116 Pa. St. 344.... 604

69 Wis. 613...... 764

Wheeler and Wilson Manufac husband and wife. 115 Pa. St. 487.... 575

turing Company v. Heil.

[blocks in formation]

AMERICAN STATE REPORTS.

VOL II

CASES

IN THE

SUPREME COURT

OF

GEORGIA.

TURNIPSEED v. SCHAEFER.

[76 GEORGIA, 109.]

ACTS RELATIVE TO VOLUNTARY ASSIGNMENTS by insolvent debtors are remedial statutes, and, as against the assignor and those holding under him, should be construed liberally in favor of creditors.

Assignment For Creditors. —Incomplete schedule and no schedule differ in degree only.

ID. - OMISSION FROM SCHEDULE of property of little or no value, or of creditors whose claims aggregate but a small amount, may not invalidate assignment; but if such omissions are of large sums from assets and from amount due creditors, the case is otherwise.

TO INVALIDATE ASSIGNMENT for benefit of creditors on account of omissions of creditors from schedule, it is not necessary that there should be a guilty intention to make such omissions.

SCHEDULE MUSt be Full and Complete to be valid, as no means are provided for perfecting incomplete schedules, and our courts are not authorized to amend such schedules.

GENERAL PROVISION IN ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS, that the assignee be directed to take possession of any property of assignor that may have been omitted from assets as named in schedule, is against the policy of the law, especially where details are required to be set forth with particularity. PREFERENCES IN AJSIGNMENTS FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS, although permitted, aro not favored. Act of 1885 corroborates sections 1945 and 1946 of the code, and article 1, section 2, paragraph 6, of the constitution of 1877 (code, section 5023), by encouraging all creditors of assignor to use any proper means to detect and defeat any fraudulent concealment or disposition of property of assignor.

ACTION by W. W. Turnipseed and other creditors against George Schaefer and his assignees to set aside an assignment for the benefit of creditors, and for the appointment of a

[blocks in formation]
« PředchozíPokračovat »