Jones v. McQuien
Jones v. McQuien
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
Whatever was thought or intended by Stoner, the maker, as to the character of the assignment, it is to be judged of by its terms, and it is only a partial assignment, operating on the specific things enumerated in it, and therefore the contest about things left out was aside from the real ground of controversy.
The only real question in the case is as to the note for $500 to Ford, mentioned in the assignment as a preferred debt to be paid, but which was paid before the delivery of the assignment, and was handed to the assignee with the assignment, accompanied by an express declaration that it had been paid and extinguished, and was not to be regarded by him as among the debts to be paid. The instrument is good on its face. The facts about the Ford note appear aliunde, and, as shown, do not annul the assignment. The facts accepted as true, as they were, exclude all idea of harm to creditors from the mere failure to redraw the paper after payment of the Ford note or to draw lines across the part relating to it in the assignment.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Winston Jones v. J. C. McQuien
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Assignment fob Creditors. Whether general or partial. Intent. Whether an assignment for creditors is general or partial is to be determined by its terms. An assignment which, without purporting to embrace all the assignor’s property, conveys his stock of merchandise in a designated stor.e, together with the notes and books of account pertaining thereto, is partial, regardless of what the grantor thought or intended. 2. Partial Assignment. Fraud. Evidence of things omitted. A partial assignment acts only on the property embraced in it. Therefore, on the issue whether such partial assignment is fraudulent as to creditors, evidence that certain property of the grantor was not included, is immaterial. 3. Same. Fraud. Evidence aliunde. Fictitious debt. Pa/yment. An assignment, good on its face, is not rendered fraudulent merely because, after signing, but before delivery thereof, a debt preferred in it was paid, it appearing that the assignor, without altering the instrument, delivered it, together with the note, to the assignee, informing him of the facts and instructing him to disregard the provision for the payment of the note.