Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

21 Mass. 57

Dickinson v. Strong

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 30, 1826

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1826-09-30

It appeared from the answer of Leland, that before the service of the writ, he had signed as surety a promissory note for 2031 dollars, given by Strong to E. Kimball as the consideration for certain land, and had received for his own security from Strong sundry promissory notes given to G Cutler and L. Boltwood and by them indorsed, and also a promissory note given to Cutler and the wife of Strong, payable to bearer, out of the proceeds of which it was expected that the note…

Decided 1826-09-30

Per Curiam.

¶1It cannot be inferred from any facts disclosed, that Leland is in any way indebted to Strong so as to malee him liable as Ms trustee. The payments to Kim-ball were made in pursuance of an original understanding, which appears to have been fair and legal. In regard to the note which remained last in the hands of Leland, as it was not paid when the summons was .served,. he cannot be chargeable with it, as it was the note of a third person, which, if held by him in trust, cannot, according to cases decided, make him liable.1 Neither could the deed of the real estate render him liable, that being held by him as security for the same undertaking. If in giving the obligation to convey the land in trust for the wife and children of Strong there is any thing fraudulent as against creditors, the question must be settled in an action for the land.

¶2Trustees discharged.

¶3 See Maine F. & M. Ins. Co. v. Weeks, 7 Mass. R. 438; Rundlet v. Jordan, 3 Greenl. 47; Perry v. Coates, 9 Mass. R. 537; Lupton v. Cutter, 8 Pick. 298Gore v. Clisby, 8 Pick. 555; Andrews v. Ludlow, 5 Pick 28.

/21/mass/57 · .json · Public domain