Law J. K.B. aa, s, c. A Louboutin Sale B. Louboutin Sale & C. Aaa.Where the goods of s bankrupt taken in execution, are discharged by payment of beats by dre the aum to be levied by a creditor after a docket struck, the assignees subsequently chosen cannot, by repaying that sum, maintain an action for money had and received against the sheriff. Buckcr v. Booth, a M.& M. Aaa. Cpsrke](M) Op Partners.The statute a Geo. A. C. Aa. dre beats S. Aa. Did not extend to prevent partnera from lending money on respon¬dentia. Gore v. Wynne, a insanity workout calendar M. insanity workout calendar & M. Aaa. get insanity [Tindal]If a commission issqe against three, and Christian Louboutin Sale the joint wtate is insufficient, and one partner pay the defi¬ciency from hia private estate, and there is a surplus on ths insanity workout video separate eststes of esch of tbe others, tbe beats by dre partner wbo paid tbe deficiency is entitled to such surplus before interest is paid to tbe separate credi¬tors. Ex parte Rix, a Mont. Aaa. , Assignees appointed ef a bankrupt's estate— naoney not paid into a banker's, but to a merchant's Tiffany and Co Earrings bouse; one of the assignees was one of tbe mer¬chants ; he beceme bankrupt, and bis Tiffany and Co Necklaces partner held liable for tbe money in tbeir bands belonging to the DIGEST, aaaa—aaaa.sssignee of the originsl bankrupts, but not for any interest. Tobin v. Cass, Tiffany and Co Bangles a Law J. Chanc. Aaa.A trust deed, for tbe benefit of Scotch creditors, made by one of three partners Tiffany and Co Pendants in two Scotch firms, all of whom are also partners in English firms, is not such an act, in Red Bottom Shoes the ordiuary course of the partnera ship business, as to be valid Tiffany and Co Rings against the other two partners or tbeir representatives, and tbe assignees under a general commission against all cannot homo¬logate it. Douglas v. Brown, a Dow. & C. Aaa.Where one member of a firm, who carries on bu¬siness on bis separate account, supplies goods to the firm, and a commission issues against the firm, the debt is proveable; but not so for money advanced. Ex pone Cook, a Mont. Aaa.In December aaaa, A, B, C, and D, dissolved partnership as bankers by deed, by which it was agreed, tbat A and B should retire, and the business beats by dre be csrried on in future by C and D. C and D co¬venanted to indemnify A and B against all outstand¬ing demands. In October aaaa, C died, and a coma mission issued against D ; A having been obliged to pay certain partnership debts which C and D had undertaken to indemnify bim against: Held, tbat he might prove under tbe commission for tbe amount so paid, although he knew the firm to have been insolvent at the time of tbe dissolution in aaaa. Ex parte Carpenter, a M. & M'Ar. A.A, being in partnership with B and C, aod hold¬ing stock, as a trustee, along with two other trus¬tees, forges tbe signature of his co-trustees to a power of attorney, authorising B and C to Tiffany Jewelry sell the stock : they sell the stock, and transfer it to the