The Wellington enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 1867-188?, 1883-10-10
/. COMMERCIAL LAW.
Brief Digests of Late Decisions.
Compiled Specially for the st. Louis Comme
cial Gazette.l

Brief Digests of Late Decisions.
tCompfled Specially for the ST. Louis CONNER |
cial Gazette.l
TRUST FUND.
Plaintiff executed a note to the Riley |
County Bank, of Manhattan, Kansas, for
the loan of S7S2.50. Afterward, at the |
request of the Cashier that he should |
pay the same, and upon the promise of |
the former that he would send and get
the note, then owned and held by an
other party, he delivered to the Cashier, |
before the note was due, the amount
thereof, and the Cashier executed to him
a receipt acknowledging the payment of
the note. The Cashier then credited the
amount so received from the plaintiff to
the cash account of the bank, but the
bank failed to pay the note or any part
thereof at maturity, and appropriated
all the money to its own use. The court
held that by the transaction the relation
of principal and agent existed between
the plaintiff and the bank as regarded
the fund, and that upon an assignment
by the bank of all its property and ef-
fects to an assignee in trust for its cred
itors, the plaintiff had a right to follow
and reclaim the fund from the assignee,
for the reason that the money was
trust fund, and not assets of the bank,
tributlon to the general creditors of the
bank.-Peak VS.. Ell;cock, Supreme
Court of Kansas.
NsOLvENT BUILDING ASSOCIATION.
A building association which has,
without authority in its charter, re-
ceived deposits from strangers, can not
in case of Insolvency decline to repay
such deposits on the ground of its want
NJ 10 To-
posters are to he regarded as creditors
of the association. When the charter
of a building association authorizes it
to receive deposits of money from stock
holders, and to pay interest thereon, in
case of insolvency such stockholders
are, as regards their deposits, creditors
of the association, and entitled to share
in proportional parts with other credit
ors, taking precedence of the stock
holders The order prescribed by the
bylaws of building association for the
payment of money out of its fun!s
when engaged in business does not
create preferences in winding up an in
solvent association. In case of an as
signment by a building association for
the benefit of creditors, the holders of
matured stock are not creditors, and
can only share pro rata vita the hold
ers of immatured stock in the assets re-
manning after the payment of creditors.
Decision in weekly Notes." p. 4S9.
PARTNERSHIP.
Ordinarily the proper mode of taking
and stating partnership account, upon
a dissolution occasioned by the death or
retirement of a member of the firm, is
to ascertain the exact condition, as near
as may be, of the partnership estate at
IL L i Al
ber, amount and character of the claims
upon it. To do this it is necessary to
determine the amount or value of the
assets of every kind and description, the
amount of Indebtedness due from the
firm to third parties, the proportionate
shares or interests of the several MEM
bers of the firm in the joint property,
and the state of their respective accounts
| with the firm. In adjusting the ac-
counts of partners, the losses should be
paid first out of profit, next out of cap
ital, and lastly by having recourse to the
partners Individually The assets of
the partnership should be applied first
| in paying the Joint debts and liabilities
| to non-partners. Second, in paying
each partner ratably what is due from
the firm to him for advances, as distin-
guished from capital. Third, in paying
each what is due him from the firm in
respect of capital. Lastly, the ultimate
residue, if any, should be divided as
| profits between the partners.
| stiel VS.. Gray ct al, Supreme Court of
| Illinois.
| ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.
An attorney at law ought not to ac-
cept a retainer in case when he be-
lieves that the law is against his client.
1t is not his duty, in order to subserve
the interest of his client, to mis-state
the law and the facts. Ifhe be satisfied
that the client can not recover except
by perversion of the law and the facts,
the attorney ought not to take the case.
But the fact that an attorney has, under
a prior retainer, advocated views of the
law and facts different from those upon
which his client rests his case, or has
officially, as a Judge or officer of the
Government, held a different view OF
the law and the rights of the parties,
will not of.itself disqualify him from re-
ceiving a retainer. An attorney has the
right and privilege to change his views
upon the law and facts of a case when
reason requires it.-Smith ct al. VS.. Chi
cago & Northwestern Railway Compa-
ny, Supreme Court of Iowa.
CONCERNING LAND FOR PUBLIC USE
Every company seeking to condemn
land for public improvement must. in
modified degree, be permitted te
Judge for itself as to the amount that is
necessary for such purpose. This right
is subject to all constitutional and statu
tory restrictions, and to the further
limitation that the courts are clothed
with ample power to prevent any abuse
of the same. If the court can see, from
the facts stated and its general knowl
edge of the locality and public wants
that the lands sought to be taken arr
manifestly in excess of what is reason
ably necessary for the purpose stated il
the petition, it will be fully warranted
in denying the application; otherwis,
it will not.-Smith ct al. VS.. G. w. l
Railroad Company, Supreme Court o
Illinois.
CONSIDERATION.
In an action on a promissory note il
was alleged that the sole consideration
of the note was a debt to the payet
which he had voluntarily discharged
Held, that as it appeared from tht
agreed statement of facts that the cred
-itor had given the debtor release
of the debt, the presumption arises tha
the release was in such form as to op
crate as an eXtlnSulshIneHI VI Inc JUN
CATION in the absence of any showing a
to the form of such release. And I
debt voluntarily released by the cred
itor is not sufficient consideration Il
support a promise of the debtor to pa,
him the amount of the debt.-Carve
VS.. Second National Bank, Suprem'
Court of Ohio.
DRAM-SHOP LICENSE.
A license to keep dram-shop legal
ICES sales of liquor to some persons, bu