Case Name: Reuben Hudson versus Caleb Hunt and E. Fisk, his trustee
Court: New Hampshire Superior Court
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire
Decision Date: 1831-11
Citations: 5 N.H. 538
Docket Number: 
Parties: Reuben Hudson versus Caleb Hunt and E. Fisk, his trustee.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Hampshire Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 538–539

Head Matter:
Reuben Hudson versus Caleb Hunt and E. Fisk, his trustee.
One of two joint debtors cannot be charged as a trustee, in a suit,where the other debtor is not joined.
No person can be adjudged a trustee, on account of goods which have been pledged to him by the principal.
Fisk, the trustee in this ease, disclosed, in his answers to the interrogatories, that lie and Joab Hunt had the use of a brick yard, belonging to C. Hunt, the principal, during the summer of the year 1829, for which they agreed to pay to the said Caleb Hunt the sum of §70, in bricks ; which sum still remains due and unpaid ; that the trustee, at the close of the summer of the year 1829, purchased all the right of the said Joab Hunt in the bricks, which they had made in the said yard, and agreed with the said Joab, to pay the said sum of $70, to the said Caleb Hunt ; that soon after the trustee and the said Joab Hunt went into the possession of the brick yard. Joshua Woodward, Caleb Hunt, and the trustee were together, and Caleb Hunt told the trustee, that he owed a sum of money to Woodward, and that he wished the trustee to pay to the said Woodward the sum thai the trustee and Joab Hurst were to pay him, for the rent of the brick yard, to which the trustee replied, that he would pay it to Woodward, if the said Caleb Hunt wished him so to do.
The trustee further stated, that he had in hi»hands certain property, belonging to the principal, which the latter had delivered to him in pledge, and which he still held in pledge, to indemnify him for having become a surety upon.a promissory note, at the request of the principal.
Goodall and Woods, for the plaintiff.
J. Smith, for the trustee.
It was urged on behalf of the trustee, that he could m,í Le eMug'T Lí i ' 11 r- t ir •’> W0 í he j( i-'i i'C' i < r '* C Ir,, t W of two j t'R tot- < rr . ,1 ’,r> c L T ií Pe;, :d L . ’ ” - ‘ ■ ’ :rr, Let i use k i r 1 ,■ u,u.ee, arel wia ¡ T51 ,e o ú i.sfri , - Pee,

Opinion:
l'lj t':° f> ,hÍ
P ie K''d°d i]>r.< Le who holds goods as a pledge, cnnnoi. be heb1 ~s *kc truth ce cf i ion veho pledged the goo'V Too ¡.¡lotee c-noet, thereine. be charged in this case, on account cf ihe goods he holds in his hands.
It is also settled, as a general rule, that one of Ino joint debtors cannot be charged as a irrs.ec, unless the other debtor is joined with him ir the proco.'S. And v. e see no reason, why the general role should not gave n the decision of this case. Foi, t.ePvhVi-aiuing the agreement betwen the trustee and .Soar Hunt, that d.-' trustee should pay the rent to Celeb Hunt, *hc reel f-::il remained their joint debt. It does not appeal ⅛ >1 OrlP1 ever agreed to take ihe trustee as Lis pole cVl/.c'- rum discharge Joab, or that he has any lemedy ío'* il e rent against the trustee alone. The tru&íoe ij not diaree.. Ijle, then, on account of the rent.
Tn'H ( (hud av't </