Shoemaker v. Keely, (1793)
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Number:
Visitors: 4
Filed: Apr. 01, 1793
Latest Update: Apr. 01, 2017
Summary: 2 U.S. 213 (_) 2 Dall. 213 SHOEMAKER, Assignee versus KEELY. Supreme Court of United States. The defendant's Counsel (Rawle), observed. The plaintiff's Counsel (M. Levy) answered. *214 BY THE COURT: It is plain, that the action, in its present form, cannot be supported. Under the act of Assembly, nothing but debts are assigned, or assignable; and torts must be considered as the mere personal concern of the bankrupt. Let Judgment be entered for the defendant.
2 U.S. 213 (____)
2 Dall. 213
SHOEMAKER, Assignee
versus
KEELY.
Supreme Court of United States.
The defendant's Counsel (Rawle), observed.
The plaintiff's Counsel (M. Levy) answered.
BY THE COURT: It is plain, that the action, in its present form, cannot be supported. Under the act of Assembly, nothing but debts are assigned, or assignable; and torts must be considered as the mere personal concern of the bankrupt.
Let Judgment be entered for the defendant.
Source: CourtListener
