St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-02-28
HENNEPIN HARD HIT
Two of~Its Trial Judges Re-
versed by the Supreme
IN DECISIONS By COLLINS
While Four Of Ramsey Coun-
tvs District Judges Are
Affirmed.
AN IMPORTANT DECISION
Filed in the Case Of Treasurer
Haugan, Of Minneapolis,
VS.. LunWall.
AN IMPORTANT DECISION

The supreme court handed down
six decisions yesterday, all written
by Justice Collins. In four cases
the decisions of the lower courts are
affirmed, and one of the reversals is
in the case of the city treasurer of
Minneapolis against G. F. Lunwall.
The treasurer had taken as security
for some city money deposited in one
of the banks negotiable note trans
ferred to him by the cashier of the
bank, which soon afterwards sus-
pended payment. Haugan, the treas
urer, sues the maker of the note,
and in his defense Lunwall holds
that the cashier had no business to
dispose Of the note, and that his act
violated the provisions of the in
solvency law relating to fraudulent
preferences. The title and syllabus
Of the case follow:
Andrew c. Hangar, appellant, VS.. G.
F. LunWall, respondent.
l. The rule laid down in Rosemond
VS.. Graham, 81 Mimi, 1923, that the in
uorsee of negotiable paper taken before
maturity as collateral security for an
antecedent Indebtedness, in good faith,
and without notice of defenses which
might have been available between
the original parties, holds the same
free from such defenceS followed and
applied.
2. By the words good faith is meant
the good faith of the indorsee, simply.
3. Upon the testimony offered and
received as well as that offered and eX-
cluded, it is held that there was moth
ing tending to indicate fraud or bad
faith on plaintiffs part when taking
the note in question.
4. Whether the general rule in re-
spect to the powers of bank cashiers
to negotiate, manage and dispose of
notes and securities held by the bank
is applicable to the facts in the case
is immaterial, for at most the act of
the cashier when transferring and in
dorsing the note to plaintiff was merely
voidable. His act can only be ques-
toned by the representative of the
bank, it's assignee in insolvency.
5. In an action brought upon a ne
gotiable promissory note by an in
dorsee before maturity, the maker cam
not avail himself of a defense based
upon the claim that the provisions of
the insolvency law of the state re-
lating to fraudulent preferences were
violated when the note was trans
ferred to such indorsee. Order re-
versed. COLLINS, ].
Appeal from Hennepin county.
Smith, trial judge.
SUBJECT TO GARNISHMENT.
The Puget Sound National Bank of
Everett, Washington, plaintiff, re-
spondent, VS.. John Mather ct al, de-
Observation-Disclosures Trust-sCom--
pany, garnishee, appellant.
Certificates of stock in a foreign cor
poration are personal property, and
when in the hands of third parties
within this state are subject to gar
nishment proceedings under G. S. 1878,
chapter &C., section 1877. Order af-
firmed. COLLINS, j.
Appeal from Ramsey county. Egan.
| trial judge.
KELLY AFFIRMED.
In re application of Emmett Rice for a
! receiver; E. G. Rollins ct al, appel
! lants, VS.. Emmett Rice, petitioner,
respondent
| l. Assuming that nonresident
debtor owning property in this state
cannot make an assignment under our
! insolvency laws, because of the provi-
sions of G. S. 1878, CHI. Al, sec. %, unless
he has carried on business within our
borders, and consequently that a re-
ceiver cannot be appointed for his es-
| IN
14S, Sec /, as amended, no hard and
fast rule can be formulated for deter
mining whether he has carried on such
| business.
2. On the facts of this case it is held
that the debtor, nonresident had
carried on business of such nature
and character as to bring him within
the terms of sec. %, CHI. Il, supra, and to
make it incumbent upon him, under our
insolvency laws, to execute an assign
ment of his property for the benefit Of
| his creditors. within ten days after a
part thereof had been levied upon an
| attachment.
8. Held, further, that it was imma-
terial in proceedings for the appoint
ment of a receiver of his estate, that it
was made to appear that he had made
an assignment for the benefit of credit
ors in the state of his domici1e before
the property here was attached.
A. G. L. 1856, CHI. 1859, sec. 1, hos no
application to proceedings for the ap-
pointment of a receiver in insolvency.
Order affirmed. COLLINS, j.
Appeal from Ramsey county. Kelly.
trial judge.
EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT.