Husband and Wife: Separation Agreements: Validity: Defenses

1905 Michigan law review  
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the mid--seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non--commercial purposes. Read more about Early Journal
more » ... out Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate--jstor/individuals/early-journal--content. JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not--for--profit organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. MICHIGAN LAW REVIEW of the statute to be void. Under such circumstances a few cases hold contracts made by foreign corporations to be valid. But in the last analysis the question is one of interpretation of the legislative intent. GARNISHMENT-SITUS OF DEBT.-The plaintiff, a New York banking corporation, doing business in New York, brought suit in a court of New York city, against a Massachusetts corporation having its place of business in Boston, and in aid of this suit had attachment issued and garnishment served on a limited partnership of Massachusetts, having its principal office in Boston and a branch office in New York in charge of the partner on whom the garnishment was served. The garnishee was the sales agent of the defendant corporation, and was indebted to it for goods received and sold and for money collected on sales made under such agency. Held, that the garnishee could not be charged because the situs of the debt owing by the garnishee was in Boston, so that the court had no jurisdiction of it. National Broadway Bank v. Sampson (1904),-N. Y. -, 71 N. E. Rep. 766. The court relied on its previous decisions, including the following: Plimpton v. Bigelozw, 93 N. Y. 592; Douglass v. Phenix Ins. Co., I38 N. Y.
doi:10.2307/1272931 fatcat:wltsw7oyr5dixcpnlr5q3nv6ri