¶1The cases upon this subject are uniform, in laying down the rule, that where the principal can trace his property into the hands of his agent or factor, whether it be the identical article which first came to the hands of the factor, or other prop*1136erty purchased for the principal by the factor with the proceeds; ha may follow it, either into the hands of the factor, or of his legal representatives, or of his assigns if he should become insolvent or a bankrupt. The factor is a trustee for the principal, so long as he retains the property, or its representative in his hands; and his assignees, or legal representatives take it, subject to the same trust, which they cannot defeat by turning it into money; unless indeed, they should pay it away in their representative character, before notice of the claim. It is in this point of view only, that notice is necessary. Judgment for plaintiffs.
28 F. Cas. 1135
Veil v. Mitchel
U.S. District Court
Decided April 15, 1821
U.S. District Court · decided 1821-04-15
The special verdict stated, that in the lifetime of Abner Mitchel, the intestate, the plaintiffs sent to him, tor sale, two bills of exchange on France, with instructions to remit them the proceeds. The intestate sold the .bills, and remitted to the plaintiffs the proceeds of one of them, except $60, which he had in bank notes of the South Carolina banks. For the other bill he took the check of the purchaser, payable some days after the sale.
Decided 1821-04-15