Wood v. Bodwell
Wood v. Bodwell
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court. The only question is, whether Waldo is chargeable upon his answer as trustee.
It appears by the answer of the trustee, that he had received a sum of money at New York, for Dinsmoor, one of the principal defendants ; and the question is, whether he discharged himself from the debt thereby created, by giving the promissory note in the manner and under the circumstances disclosed in his answer.
It is contended, on the part of the plaintiff, that it sufficiently appears that the giving of the note by the trustee to the principal wras merely colorable, and so understood by the parties, and therefore the trustee still continued to be the debtor of the principal, as in the case of Dennie v. Hart & Tr. 2 Pick. 204. This question must be decided upon the facts disclosed by the trustee ; and upon these facts the Court are of opinion, that the giving of this promissory note was intended and understood to be payment of the debt, pro tanto, that the note was to be the absolute property of the promisee, to dispose of it as he saw fit, and that the trustee, to that extent, was discharged. This distinguishes the case at bar from the ease cited, which proceeded expressly upon the ground, that
Trustee discharged.
See Barnard v. Graves, 16 Pick. 41.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- John Wood versus Nelson Bodwell Principals, and George A. Waldo, Trustee
- Status
- Published