Replies

I went thru the top 100 books in Google book, and this is all I found:

In Leake v Gilchrist supra it is said that the assignee of the debt by the administrator appointed at the domicile of the deceased could maintain an action here

North Carolina reports: cases argued and determined in the Supreme ...: Volume 126 - Page 627

Leake v Gilchrist 13 NC 2 Dev L 73 sustaining power of a foreign administrator having possession of bond to assign such bond giving assignee power to sue in his own name

The American decisions: cases of general value and authority ..., Volume 11
By John Proffatt, Abraham Clark Freeman,

In Leake v Gilchrist 1829 13 NC 2 Dev L 73 a foreign administrator appointed in South Carolina in March having possession of a bond assigned it in September to the plaintiff who brought a suit upon it in North Carolina where administrators of the estate had been appointed in April It was held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover as the bond was assets where found

American law reports annotated, Volume 10

the early case of Leake v Gilchrist 13 NC 2 Dev L at page 85 They all lead us to the conclusion that a foreign creditor cannot by the operation of any law of his own state acquire any preference over resident creditors in the administration of assets which are situated here

Lawyers’ reports annotated, Book 70

In Leake v Gilchrist 2 Dev 75 it was broadly and distinctly held that debts due by specialty follow the person of the obligee and are assets of the domicile In that case an assignment by the administrator of the domicile in South Carolina of a bond on a citizen in North Carolina was recognized as valid and brought by the assignee in North Carolina was sustained.

Reports of cases heard and determined by the Supreme Court of ...: Volume 14 - Page 581

Not much to go on for checking context and applicability!