Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/107/596/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/107/596/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Union Trust Company v. Walker, 107 U.S. 596 (1883)
Union Trust Company v. Walker
Decided March 12, 1883
107 U.S. 596
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Syllabus
An assignment of such claims as are mentioned in Union Trust Company v. Souther, ante, p. 107 U. S. 591, passes the right of the original holder to payment out of the fund in the hands of the receiver.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case differs from that of the Union Trust Co. v. Souther only in the fact that Walker, the present intervenor and appellee, is the assignee by purchase from the original holders of the claims he seeks to have paid, and one of the questions certified is whether, being an assignee and not an original holder, he is entitled to payment. We have no hesitation in answering this question in the affirmative. As was said in Fosdick v. Schall, 99 U. S. 235, 99 U. S. 253, these creditors are paid, not because they have in law a lien on the mortgaged property or the income, but because in equity the earnings of the company constitute a fund for the payment of the expenses which their claims represent, before any income arises which ought to be applied to the discharge of the mortgage debt. Under such circumstances, it is a matter of no importance that the original creditor has parted with the claim. The right is one that attaches to the debt and not to the person of the original creditor. Consequently the right passes with an assignment of the debt.
Decree affirmed.
