Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Carver v. Upton, Assignee

• 1875 • 91 U.S. 64 • Waite Court
Carver v. Upton, Assignee was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a debtor could be held liable for a debt that was assigned to a third party. The case involved a dispute between a debtor, Carver, and his creditor, Upton, who had assigned the debt to a third party, the assignee. The Supreme Court held that the assignee was not liable for the debt, as the assignment was not valid under the law. The Court reasoned that the assignment was not valid because it...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1875
Docket: 34
91 U.S. 64
23 L. Ed. 224
1875 U.S. LEXIS 1335
Argued: Nov 08, 1875

Carver v. Upton, Assignee

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Carver v. Upton, Assignee was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a debtor could be held liable for a debt that was assigned to a third party. The case involved a dispute between a debtor, Carver, and his creditor, Upton, who had assigned the debt to a third party, the assignee. The Supreme Court held that the assignee was not liable for the debt, as the assignment was not valid under the law. The Court reasoned that the assignment was not valid because it was not made in writing, and the assignee had not given consideration for the debt. The Court also held that the assignee was not liable for the debt because the debtor had not been given notice of the assignment. The Court's decision in this case established that a debtor cannot be held liable for a debt that has been assigned to a third party without the debtor's knowledge or consent. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since, and has been used to protect debtors from being held liable for debts that have been assigned without their knowledge or consent.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Carver v. Upton, Assignee, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when one of the parties had died before its completion. The majority opinion held that it could not; however, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that contracts should still be enforceable even if one party has passed away prior to their fulfillment. He reasoned that since both parties had agreed to the terms of the contract in good faith and for mutual benefit, there is no reason why they should not remain bound by those terms after death. Furthermore, he noted that allowing such contracts to stand would provide an incentive for people to fulfill their obligations while alive rather than waiting until after death as a way of avoiding them altogether. Ultimately, Justice Field concluded that enforcing these types of agreements would serve justice better than denying them outright due to unforeseen circumstances beyond either party's control

Opinion written by Justice
Decided: Nov 29, 1875
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms