Court Opinion

ID: 8311816
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-17 15:50:47.476913+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:44:45.363626
License: Public Domain

THE COURT
(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent)
was of opinion, that the assignment and indorsement of the bill of lading of the thirty-two bags of cocoa, transferred the legal title to Warfield, and that the court could not deprive him of that legal title, if his equity was equal to that of the plaintiff. Warfield is responsible for Manro to the *507amount of $4,000 or $5,000 and he is doubtful whether his other security is sufficient to indemnify him. If there should be a surplus of the trust-funds in his hands, after paying the trust-debts, he will have a right in equity to retain enough to secure an indemnification. It does not yet appear what that surplus, if any, will be; nor whether the other security, which he holds, is sufficient. Under such circumstances, a court of equity will not oblige him to relinquish that surplus, unless the plaintiff will indemnify him. We think that Mr. Warfield ought to take measures to obtain payment of the notes (for which he is responsible,) out of the funds pledged to the bank; and to settle the trust-debts, so as to ascertain what he will have to pay to the bank upon his indorsements, and what surplus there may be of the trust-fund; and that the cause should stand continued until he shall state such an account; and that the marshal pay into court the net proceeds of the sales of the cocoa, and that they be invested in some productive fund, until the court can make a final decree in the cause.
NOTE, [from original report.) At April term, 1826. the court ordered the bill to be dismissed with costs; and ordered the marshal to pay to Warfield the net proceeds of the sales of the cocoa.