Case Name: Whetcroft, for the use of Vickers et al. v. White
Court: United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1813-12
Citations: 2 Cranch 96
Docket Number: 
Parties: Whetcroft, for the use of Vickers et al. v. White.
Judges: (Fitzhugh, J., absent,)
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (District of Columbia - reported by Mackey)
Volume: 2
Pages: 96–96

Head Matter:
Whetcroft, for the use of Vickers et al. v. White.
If the indorser of a promissory note accept an order from the indorsee, for the amount of the note, in favor of a third person, a subsequent attachment of the money in the hands of the indorser, by a creditor of the indorsee, will not avail him.
Assumpsit, against the maker of a promissory note indorsed by Burford to Minifie, who indorsed it to Whetcroft in trust for the benefit of Minifie. Minifie, being indebted to Long, gave him an order on Burford to let Long have such goods as he should want. Burford accepted the order. Yiekers and others, credit* ors of Minifie, served an attachment on Burford, and on White, and on Whetcroft. Burford afterwards let Long have goods on account of the order.
Mr. Key, for the plaintiff',
contended that the attachment having been served on Burford before he delivered the goods to Long, (although after his acceptance of the order,) bound Bur-ford, and that his delivery of them afterwards was in his own wrong.
Mr. Law, contra.

Opinion:
The CouRT
(Fitzhugh, J., absent,)
said the order and acceptance were to be presumed to be equal to the amount of the debt due from Burford to Minifie, and were an assignment thereof to Long; and that the assignment of the note to Whet-croft, being for the benefit of Minifie, the payment by Burford to Long was a good set-off.