Halstead v. Gordon

Decided June 21, 1861

New York Supreme Court · decided 1861-06-21

A provision, in an assignment for the benefit of creditors, which authorizes the assignee to páy all reasonable expenses, costs, charges and commissions attending the execution thereof, with a reasonable and lawful commission for the services of the assignees, does not render the assignment void. Nor will a clause authorizing the property to be sold at private sale, avoid an assignment. A clause directing the assignees to sell and dispose of the property at public or private sale, as he may deem most beneficial to the interests of the creditors, is to be understood as applying to the mode of selling; viz. either at public or private sale, and not as authorizing a sale on credit.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1885

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1861-06-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court.

¶1A voluntary assignment for the benefit of creditors, which authorizes the assignee to pay all reasonable expenses, costs, charges and commissions attending the execution thereof, with a reasonable and lawful commission for the assignee’s services, is not void. -The commissions to the assignee are to be lawful. The other commissions are for persons (auctioneers and others) employed to do the work.

¶2It does not avoid the assignment to authorize the property to be sold at private sale.

¶3There is no authority, in the assignment, to sell on credit. The only direction given to the assignee by the words “ as he may deem most beneficial to the interest of the creditors *424is as to the mode of selling; viz. either at public or private sale, not to selling on credit.

[New York General Term, June 21, 1861.

¶4Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered; costs to abide the event.

¶5Clerke, Ingraham and Leonard, Justices.]