Filed: Mar. 01, 1796
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: 2 U.S. 242 2 Dall. 242 1 L. Ed. 365 Ralston Assignee v. Bell Supreme Court of Pennsylvania March Term, 1796 1 This was an action for money had and received, &c. brought by Ralston, as assignee of Dewhurst, a bankrupt, against the defendant, who had sold goods of the bankrupt, by virtue of an authority from him; but, it appeared in evidence, that no money had been received by the defendant, at the time of commencing the action. 2 The counsel for the defendant (Ingersoll, Lewis & Dallas) objected,
Summary: 2 U.S. 242 2 Dall. 242 1 L. Ed. 365 Ralston Assignee v. Bell Supreme Court of Pennsylvania March Term, 1796 1 This was an action for money had and received, &c. brought by Ralston, as assignee of Dewhurst, a bankrupt, against the defendant, who had sold goods of the bankrupt, by virtue of an authority from him; but, it appeared in evidence, that no money had been received by the defendant, at the time of commencing the action. 2 The counsel for the defendant (Ingersoll, Lewis & Dallas) objected, ..
More
2 Dall. 242
1
This was an action for money had and received, &c. brought by Ralston, as assignee of Dewhurst, a bankrupt, against the defendant, who had sold goods of the bankrupt, by virtue of an authority from him; but, it appeared in evidence, that no money had been received by the defendant, at the time of commencing the action.
2
The counsel for the defendant (Ingersoll, Lewis & Dallas) objected, that, on this evidence, the present action could not be maintained.
3
The counsel for the plaintiff (Rawle & Wilcocks) after some remarks, and citing Doug. 132, submitted to the decided inclination of the Court, and suffered
