Skip to main content

Full text of "A treatise on fraudulent conveyances and creditors' remedies at law and in equity: including a consideration of the provisions of the Bankruptcy law applicable to fraudulent transfers and the remedies therefor"

See other formats 


Google 


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  library  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 

to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 

to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 

are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  maiginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 

publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  tliis  resource,  we  liave  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 
We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  fivm  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attributionTht  GoogXt  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  in  forming  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liabili^  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.   Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 

at|http: //books  .google  .com/I 


Matthew  Bender  &  Co, 


ALBANY.  N.  Y. 


/• 


AX' 

y.  I 


1 


A   TREATISE 

02r 


Fraudulent  Conveyances 


Ain» 


Creditors'  Remedies 


AT  LAW  AND  IN  EQUITY 


INCLUDINQ   A   CONSIDERATION   OF    THE    PBOVISIONS    OP  THE 
BANKRUPTCY  LAW  APPLICABLE  TO  FRAUDULENT  TRANS- 
FERS AND  THE  REMEDIES  THEREFOI^-AND  THE  PRO- 
CEDURE OF  TRUSTEES  IN  BANKRUPlfcyrlN  ACTIONS 
EITHER   IN    STATE   OR    FEDERAL  porURTS    FOR 
THE   RECOVERY  OF   PROPERTY^  .FRAUDU- 
LENTLY TRANSFERRED  BYt^TgE 

BANKRUPT :':V:: 

.     .  •••  r 

ByDEWItt  o.  :» 

OF  THS  JOHHSTOWN  (NBW  TOBK)  %AB,  AUTHOU^QV*'  '91^  IiAW*  OJb  OABBIBBfl.' 


»  «<«a  r«>i 


•  >  «  «  rf 


-  -  -    •*       • 

If  •  »*  *  " 


• 


IN    TWO   VOtUME-S::: 


VOL.  Xv 


D] 


J  •  ^  • 


«  J  V  k 

V    ^    •    • 


> »  «  rf 


k  *  .  ^  tf 


V.    • 


• '  -  * 


ALBANY,  N.  Y.: 
MATTHEW  BENDER  &  CO. 

1908. 


«    •    • 

•  ••  •• 


Cqptbiobt,  1908, 
'9Bt  MATTHEW  BENDER  k  00* 


1  •  •  < 
•  • 


►  •  •  I 


•  •  •  •• 
•  •  • 

« «  • 

•  •  • 

•  •• 

•  •  •  <  * 

•  •  •  #• 

•  •  •  •  • 

•  ••  •  « 

•  •  ■  V   • 

•  •  •  »  ■ 

•  •  • 


•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  •  • 

•  •••  • 


»  • «  • 


•  •  •  •  • 

•  •     • 

•  •  • 

•  *  *  •  • 


^yZ^-^ 


■  •  •  • 
•  •  •  • 


*  »  •  • 
to  k  •  'J  4 


The  subject  of  fraudulent  conveyances  has  been  from  the 
earliest  times  one  of  great  interest  to  the  public  and  to  the  legal 
profession.  Notwithstanding  the  enlightened  efforts  of  modern 
jurisprudence  to  remedy  the  evils  growing  out  of  the  fraudulent 
acts  of  embarrassed,  failing,  or  dishonest  debtors  and  to  devise 
means  for  the  suppression  of  such  practices,  the  reported  cases 
involving  fraudulent  alienations  and  covinous  schemes  devised 
by  debtors  to  defeat  the  just  claims  of  their  creditors  are  sufficient 
to  demonstrate  that  this  peculiar  vice  of  society  is  in  our  day 
increasing  rather  than  diminishing.  The  subject  is,  therefore, 
one  of  present  and  of  great  and  far-reaching  importance. 

The  Bankruptcy  Law  now  in  operation  can  hardly  be  said  to 
have  proved  effective  in  ameliorating  this  condition  of  affairs,  and 
indeed  it  in  no  way  lessens  the  value  and  importance,  from  a 
professional  standpoint,  of  the  fxdlest  understanding  of  the  estab- 
lished principles  and  rules  of  law  pertaining  to  this  subject.  On 
the  contrary,  the  Bankruptcy  Law  gives  an  added  importance  to 
a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  law  of  fraudulent  conveyances. 

The  Bankruptcy  Law  makes  a  fraudulent  transfer  of  his  prop- 
erty by  a  debtor,  if  made  within  four  months  of  the  filing  of  a 
petition  in  bankruptcy,  an  act  of  bankruptcy,  and  declares  such  a 
transfer  void,  and  if  the  transfer  is  also  voidable  under  State 
laws,  it  may  be  set  aside  and  the  property  or  its  value  recovered 
by  proper  proceedings  begun  in  the  State  courts,  within  the  lim- 
itations of  time  fixed  by  the  State  statutes,  or  in  the  federal 
courts.  But  what  is  or  is  not  a  fraudulent  conveyance  is  not 
determined  by  the  Bankruptcy  Law,  nor  are  the  proceedings  for 
setting  it  aside  or  recovering  the  property  or  its  value  prescribed 
by  that  Act. 

Hence,  the  general  rules  and  principles  of  the  law  of  fraudulent 
conveyances,  the  statutory  law  of  the  various  States  on  the  subject 
and  its  exposition,  the  methods  of  procedure  in  the  State  courts, 


iv  Preface. 

and  all  kindred  questions,  become  of  prime  importance  when  a 
fraudulent  transfer  is  to  be  dealt  with.  None  of  these  questions 
-comes  properly  within  the  province  of  a  work  on  Bankruptcy,  as 
the  greater  portion  of  the  Bankruptcy  Law  is  foreign  to  the  sub- 
ject of  Fraudxdent  Conveyances.  These  views  have  led  me  to 
believe  that  this  work  will  be  a  timely  and  possibly  useful  one  to 
my  professional  brethren. 

Briefly,  the  statutes  and  decisions  cctnceming  fraudxdent  con- 
veyances to  defeat  creditors,  from  that  landmark  of  our  statutory 
law,  the  Statute  of  Elizabeth,  and  its  exposition,  to  the  present 
time,  have  been  reviewed,  and  the  law  and  the  practice  thereunder 
fully,  accurately,  and  concisely  stated.  The  recent  decisions,  in 
which  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  law  are  applied  to  the 
facts  which  reflect  present  day  conditions  and  the  skill,  cunning, 
and  ingenuity  of  fraudulent  debtors  in  devising  new  schemes  and 
methods  for  the  cover  of  fraudulent  transactions,  have  also  been  col- 
lated, and  given  precedence  in  the  citations  as,  perhaps,  the  most 
valuable,  being  on  some  questions  controlling,  because  they  are  the 
latest. 

I,  however,  present  the  result  of  my  labors  with  hesitancy, 
knowing  that,  as  it  must  necessarily  fall  short  of  one's  ideal,  it 
cannot  escape  the  criticisms  of  the  exacting  for  any  shortcomings 
which  it  may  reveal.  But,  with  the  consciousness  of  having  made 
it  as  accurate,  full,  and  complete  as  the  time  which  I  could  give 
to  the  work  and  the  ability  which  T  had  to  bestow  upon  it  would 
permit,  T  submit  it  to  the  consideration  of  the  profession,  trusting 
that  it  may  be  well  received  and  serve  a  useful  purpose. 

Johnstown,  N.  Y.,  June  1,  1908. 

DEWITT  C.  MOORE. 


•I 


TABI^E  OF  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  L 
FBAXTDtrLEiyT  Conveyances  Gbnebally* 

PAGE 

1.  No  positive  definition  of  fraud I 

2.  What  constitutes  a  fraudulent  conyeyaoce 3 

3.  Tests  as  to  fraudulent  conveyances 5 

4.  Characteristics  of  fraud   6 

5.  Circumstances  establishing  fraud   7 

0.  Origin  of  written  law  against  fraudulent  conveyances •Q 

7.  Early  English  statutes  avoiding  fraudulent  conveyances ...  10 

8.  Statute  of  13  Elizabeth  for  the  protection  of  creditors 11 

9.  Statutes  in  the  United  States 12 

10.  Statutes  merely  declaratory  of  the  common  law 13 

11.  Statute  of  27  Elizabeth  in  favor  of  subsequent  purchasers. .  H 

12.  Construction  or  interpretation  of  statutes 16 

13.  Effect  of  subsequent  statutory  provisions 17 

14.  Twyne's  Case   18 

16.  Prevalence  of  fraudulent  transfers 20 

16.  History  and  comparative  legislation 22 


CHAPTER  II. 
Natube  and  Form  of  Tbansfeb. 

1.  Nature  and  form  of  transfer  generally 26 

2.  Particular  forms  of  fraudulent  conveyances 28 

3.  Transfers   as   security 31 

4.  Conditional   sales    33 

5.  Purchase  of  property  through  or  in  name  of  third  person. .  35 

6.  Purchase  of  property  by  husband  in  name  of  wife 38 

7.  Purchase  of  personal  property  by  husband  in  name  of  wife. .  40 

8.  Payments    of    liens. — ^Loans. — Improvements    on    lands    of 

another 40 

9.  Collusive  and  fraudulent  legal  proceedings 41 

10.  Collusive  judgments   42 

11.  Confession   of  judgment 44 

12.  Statutory  requirements  as  to  confessions  of  judgment 48 

(V) 


vi  Table  of  Contents. 

PAGE 

Section  13.  Foreclosure  of  mortgages  and  deeds  of  trust 50 

14.  Execution  and  other  judicial  sales 52 

15.  Collusive  attachment 65 

16.  Fraudulent  organization  of  corporation 56 

17.  Waste  or  loss  through  debtor's  negligence 59 

18.  Payment  of  debt  before  it  is  due 60 

19.  Cancellation  or  release  of  debt  or  claim 60 

20.  Rescission  of  contracts  and  neglect  or  failure  to  take  con- 

veyance    60 

21.  Conducting  business  in  the  name  of  another 61 

22.  Keeping  mortgage  in  force  after  payment 63 

23.  Keeping  judgment  open  after  payment 63 

24.  Keeping  certificate  of  execution  sale  in  force 63 

25.  Antedated  note    63 

26.  Fraud  directed  against  debtor    64 


CHAPTER  III. 
The  Effect  of  Fraudulent  Convbyanoe. 

Section     1.  The  effect  of  fraudulent  conveyance  in  general 66 

2.  Transactions  fraudulent  in  part 71 

3.  Fraud  in  one  or  more  of  several  transactions 74 

4.  Effect  of  prior  fraudulent  transaction  on  subsequent  valid 

transfer 76 

6.  Effect  of  subsequent  fraudulent  transaction  on  prior  valid 

transfer 77 

6.  Conveyance  must  be  fraudulent  when  made 80 

7.  Purging  conveyance  of  fraud  by  matter  ese  post  fctcto 80 

8.  Conveyance  validated  by  assent  or  affirmance  of  creditors. .  83 

9.  Prejudice  to  rights  of  creditors 84 

10.  Conflict  of  laws. — What  law  governs 86 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Peopebtt  and  Rights  Tbansfebred  Whiioh  Ceeditobs  Mat 

Beach. 

Section     1.  Property  subject  to  claims  of  creditors  in  general 90 

2.  Estates  which  may  be  reached 92 

3.  Personal  property 93 

4.  Property  or  rights  without  pecuniary  value 94 

5.  Interest  of  debtor  in  property  conveyed 96 


Table  of  Contents,  vii 

PAGE 

Sbctiow    6.  Conveyance  of  property  in  another  county. 98 

7.  Rights  or  choses  in  action 98 

8.  Earnings  or  wages  of  debtor 103 

9.  Earnings,  services  and  savings  of  wife 105 

10.  Earnings  or  wages  of  debtor's  minor  child 108 

11.  Earnings  or  wages  of  public  officers  or  their  deputies. .....  Ill 

12.  Services,  labor,  talents  and  industry  of  debtor Ill 

13.  Services  rendered  by  husband  for  wife 112 

14.  Services  rendered  by  parent  for  child 116 

16.  Earnings  of  debtor's  property  116 

16.  Good-will  of  a  business 116 

17.  Membership  in  stock  or  merchant's  exchange 117 

18.  Patents,  Copyrights  and  trade-marks 117 

19.  Fire   insurance    1 18 

20.  Life  insurance  policies  and  proceeds  thereof 119 

21.  Payment  of  premiums  for  life  insurance 122 

22.  Payment  of  premiums  not  voluntary  or  fraudulent 127 

23.  Premiums  not  paid  by  debtor 128 

24.  Improvements,  rents  and  profits  of  real  estate 129 

26.  Crops,  ores  and  other  products  of  the  land 131 

20.  Equitable  estates,  rights  and  interests 133 

27.  Equity  of  redemption    135 

28.  Interest  under  contract  of  purchase 135 

29.  Property  purchased  in  name  of  third  person 135 

30.  Reservations  by  debtor   136 

31.  Property  conveyed  by  debtor  to  equitable  owner 137 

32.  Conveyance  in  pursuance  of  parol  trust 139 

33.  Conveyance  by  husband  to  or  for  wife 140 

34.  Reconveyance  by  fraudulent  grantee 143 

36.  Property  subject  to  power  of  appointment 144 

36.  Separate  estate  or  property  of  debtor's  wife 145 

37.  Husband's  curtesy  or  other  interest  in  wife's  property. ...  147 

38.  Wife's  dower  or  other  interest  in  husband's  property 149 

30.  Community  property    150 

40.  Property  of  adopted  child 160 

41.  Exempt  property  in  general 151 

42.  Homestead  in  general 159 

43.  Homestead  included  in  conveyance  of  other  property 166 

44.  Crops  grown  on  homestead 167 

46.  Purchase  of  homestead  and  payment  of  liens 167 

46.  Improvements  on  homestead 169 

47.  Insurance   on   homestead    170 

48.  Change  in  character  of  property  and  following  proceeds...  170 

49.  Stock  in  trade  sold  in  bulk 173- 


viii  Table  of  Contents. 


CHAPTER  V. 
Who  Mat  Attack  Validity  of  Convktanob. 

PAGE 

fiBcnoN     1.  Persons  who  may  attack  conveyance  generally 176 

2.  Pre-existing  creditors 17^ 

3.  Subsequent  creditors 186 

4.  Effect  of  fraud  as  to  pre-existing  creditors 191 

5.  Effect  of  prior  and  continuing  indebtedness 194 

6.  Knowledge  or  notice  of  fraudulent  transactions 195 

7.  Creditors  whose  claims  are  barred  or  satisfied 19tt 

8.  Nature  of  claims  of  creditors 198 

9.  Claims  for  torts   200 

10.  Claims  for  alimony 202 

11.  Persons  representing  creditors    203 

12.  Receivers  in   supplementary  proceedings 204 

13.  Sureties  and   endorsers 206 

14.  Purchasers  at  judicial   sales 206 

15.  Officers  levying  attachment  or  execution 207 

16.  Personal  representatives    208 

17.  Estoppel  and  waiver    209 

18.  Knowledge  or  assent 210 

19.  Affirmance    or    ratification 211 

20.  Participation 212 

21.  Receipt  of  benefit  under  conveyance 213^ 

22.  Subsequent  purchasers  in  general 214 

23.  Who  are  subsequent  purchasers 216 

24.  Bone  fide  purchasers  for  value 217 

26.  Effect  of  notice 218 


CHAPTER  VI. 
Badges  of  Fbaud. 

SBCnoN     1.  Badges  of  fraud  in  general 222 

2.  Recital  of  false  consideration 226 

3.  Consideration  fictitious  in  whole  or  part 229 

4.  Consideration  inadequate    230 

6.  Excessive  securitv    236 

6.  Excess  in  amount  secured 237 

7.  Transfers  in  anticipation  of  or  pending  legal  proceedings..  238 

8.  Transfers  of  all  the  debtor's  property 243 

9.  Excessive  effort  to  give  appearance  of  fairness 246 

10.  Suspicious  circumstances  unexplained 24  (► 


Tabl£  of  Contents.  ix 

PAGE 

Sbctidst  11.  Transfer  without  change  of  possession 247 

12.  Reservation  of  trust  or  benefit  for  grantor 24^ 

13.  Relationship  of  parties   248 

14.  Indebtedness  or  insolvency  of  debtor 249 

16.,  Absolute  transfer  intended  as  security 250 

16.  Concealment  of  or  failure  to  record  or  file  instrument 251 

17.  Secrecy  and  haste  254 

18.  Sales  on  credit   256 

19.  Transactions  not  in  usual  course  of  business 257 

20.  Other  circumstances  indicating  fraud 259 

21.  Repelling  badges  of  fraud 261 


CHAPTER  VIL 
Indebtedness  ob  Insolvency  of  Grantor 

SBcmoif     1.  Effect   of   indebtedness   of   grantor   upon   conveyances   for 

valuable  consideration 262 

2.  Effect  of  indebtedness  of  grantor  upon  voluntary  convey- 

ances    268 

3.  What  constitutes   Indebtedness 266 

4.  Payment  or  provision  for  payment  of  debts  by  grantor 268 

5.  Assumption  and  payment  of  debts  by  grantor 270 

6.  Effect  of  insolvency  of  grantor  upon  conveyances  for  valu- 

able consideration    271 

7.  Effect  of  insolvency  of  grantor  upon  voluntary  conveyances  273 

8.  What  constitutes  insolvency 275 

9.  Retention  of  property  sufficient  to  pay  debts 277 

10.  Effect  of  insolvency  subsequent  to  transfer 283 

11.  Executory  contract  or  gift  consummated  after  insolvency..  285 

12.  Insolvency  at  time  suit  is  brought 286 


CHAPTER  Vin. 
Consideration. 

SacnoN     1.  Nature  and  sufficiency  of  consideration  generally 289 

2.  Nominal   consideration    292 

3.  Illegal   consideration    293 

4.  Fictitious   consideration    294 

5.  Natural  love  and  aff option 294 

6.  Moral  obligation   296 

7.  Executory  consideration    296 

8.  Promissory  notes  and  bonds 29T 


X  Table  of  Contents. 

PAOB 

Section    0.  Future  senrices 297 

10.  Future  support    298 

11.  Future  advances   300 

12.  Contingent  liability  in  general 302 

13.  Security  to  endorser,  surety  or  guarantor 303 

14.  Assumption  of  liability  in  general 305 

15.  Assumption  and  payment  of  debt  by  indorsee  or  surety. . . .  307 

16.  Assumption  of  mortgage  or  other  lien 308 

17.  Executed  agreement  to  pay  debt 308 

18.  Pre-existing    liability. — ^Payment    or     satisfaction    of,    or 

security  for,  pre-existing  debt 309 

19.  Property  in  excess  of  debt 313 

20.  Amoimt  secured  in  excess  of  actual  debt 316 

21.  Debts  not  yet  due 319 

22.  Debts  barred  by  limitation 319 

23.  Taking  additional  security  for  debts  amply  secured 320 

24.  Conveyance  in  execution  of  prior  valid  agreement 321 

25.  Marriage  as  consideration. — Ante-nuptial  settlement 322 

26.  Effect  of  marriage  on  prior  voluntary  conveyance 325 

27.  Conveyance  after  marriage  in  accordance  with  ante-nuptial 

agreement 325 

28.  Post-nuptial  agreement 327 

29.  Adequacy  of  consideration    329 

30.  Partial  invalidity  or  illegality  of  consideration 331 

31.  Consideration  usurious  in  part 334 

32.  Voluntary  conveyance. — Effect  of  want  of  consideration. ...  335 

33.  Voluntary  conveyances  as  to  existing  creditors 336 

34.  Conveyance  in  accordance  with  prior  parol  gift 345 

35.  Statutory  rule 345 

36.  Voluntary  conveyances  as  to  subsequent  creditors 347 

37.  Insufficiency  or  inadequacy  of  consideration 352 

38.  Transactions  between  husband  and  wife. — ^Nature,  adequacy, 

and  sufficiency  of  consideration 356 

39.  Release  of  wife's  dower  right 357 

40.  Release  of  homestead  right 360 

41.  Property  vested  in  husband  by  marriage 360 

42.  Effect  of  failure  to  reduce  property  to  possession 361 

43.  Earnings,  services  and  savings  of  wife 362 

44.  Consideration  paid  by  husband  for  property  purchased  in 

name  of  wife    363 

45.  Assumption  of  husband's  debts    365 

46.  Payment  of  pre-existing  debts  in  general 365 

47.  Repayment  of  money  loaned  by  wife 369 

48.  Appropriation   of  wife's   separate  estate 370 

49.  Rents  and  profits  of  wife's  separate  estate 370 

50.  Satisfaction  of  wife's  paraphernal  rights 371 


Table  of  Contents. 


XI 


PAGE 

Sectio:;  51.  Property  in  excess  of  debt 371 

52.  Laches  of  wife  in  asserting  claim 372 

53.  Cllonveyance  in  execution  of  prior  agreement 373 

64.  Conveyance  to  confirm  prior  conveyance 374 

55.  Effect  of  want  or  insufficiency  of  consideration 375 

56.  Transactions  between  parent  and  child. — ^Nature,  adequacy, 

and  sufficiency  of  consideration 376 

57.  Earnings  of  minor  child • 379 

58.  Services  rendered  by  minor  child 379 

59.  Services  rendered  by  a  child  after  majority 380 

60.  Services  rendered  by  grandchild 382 

61.  Future  support  generally 382 

62.  Future  support  as  part  consideration 383 

63.  Past  support  as  part  consideration 384 

64.  Assumption  of  debts   384 

65.  Payment  of  pre-existing  debts 385 

66.  Effect  of  want  or  insufficiency  of  consideration 387 


Section 


CHAPTER  IX, 

Confidential  Relations  of  Parties. 

1.  Transactions   between    persons    in    fiduciary    and    friendly 

relations 389 

2.  Transactions  between  employer  and  employee 391 

3.  Transactions  between  relatives  in  general 391 

4.  Transactions  between  husband  and  wife 396 

6.  Purchase  of  husband's  property  at  private  or  public  sale . .  400 

6.  Conveyances  to  wife  from  third  persons 401 

7.  Giving  false  credit  to  husband 404 

8.  Transactions  between  parent  and  child 407 

9.  Procuring  conveyance  from  third  person 411 


Section 


CHAPTER  X. 
Resebvationsand  Trusts  fob  Grantor. 

1.  Benefits  reserved  to  grantor  in  general  as  element  or  evi- 

dence of  fraud 412 

2.  Conveyances  in  trust  for  grantor 417 

3.  What  constitutes  conveyances  in  trust  for  grantor 420 

4.  Reservation  of  life  estate  in  grantor 422 

6.  Beservation  of  life  estate  with  power  of  appointment  at 

death * 423 


xii  Table  of  Contents. 

PAGE 

Section    6.  Reserration  of  power  to  revoke 424 

7.  Resenration  of  support  or  care  of  grantor  or  family 426 

8.  Reservation  of  surplus   427 

9.  Reservation  of  power  to  direct  application  of  proceeds 429 

10.  Employment  of  debtor    430 

11.  Reservation  of  right  of  repurchase  or  return  of  property. . .  431 

12.  Reservation  of  power  to  appoint  substitute  trustee 432 

13.  Reservation  of  exempt  property 432 

14.  Secret  reservations  or   trusts   as  element   or   evidence   of 

fraud 433 

15.  What  constitutes  a  secret  reservation  or  trust 438 

16.  Absolute  conveyance  intended  as  security 440 

17.  Absolute  sale  with  reservation  of  surplus 444 

18.  Reservation  of  right  to  repurchase 446 

19.  Employment  of  debtor 447 

20.  Future  support  of  grantor 449 

21.  Purchase  at  execution  or  other  sale  for  benefit  of  debtor. . .  450 

22.  Subsequent  disposition  of  property  by  debtor  in  creditor's 

favor 451 

28.  Discharge  of  secret  trust  by  subsequent  agreement 452 


CHAPTER  XL 
Preferences  to  Ceeditoeb. 

Sbotion     1.  Right  to   prefer   creditor  and   validity  of  transaction  in 

general : 455 

2.  Statutory  provisions 467 

3.  Constitutionality  of  statutes   469 

4.  What  law  governs   469 

5.  Nature  and  form  of  preference  in  general 470 

6.  Sale  to  pay  debts  to  preferred  creditors 476 

7.  Failure  to  apply  proceeds  to  debts 478 

8.  Splitting  demand  to  expedite  recovery 478 

9.  Delegation  of  power  to  prefer 479 

10.  Nature  of  property  transferred 479 

11.  Nature  of  debts  preferred  in  general 480 

12.  Debts  not  due   481 

13.  Contingent  debts  and  liabilities  on  behalf  of  debtor 482 

14.  Usurious  interest 483 

16.  Attorney's  fees 483 

16.  Debts  arising  out  of  breach  of  trust 484 

17.  Secured  debts  generally   485 

18.  Discharge  of  mortgage  on  homestead 485 

19.  Transfer  of  incumbered  property  in  pajrment  of  incumbrance  486 


Table  of  Contents.  xiii 

PAGE 

Section  20.  Transfer  of  all  the  debtor's  property 48G 

21.  Knowledge  and  intent  of  parties  generally 488 

22.  Participation  of  preferred  creditor  in  fraudulent  intent. . .  493 

23.  Preference  not  invalidated  by  mere  fraudulent  intent 494 

24.  Secrecy  and  haste   498 

25.  Preference  pending  suit  in  general 499 

26.  Intent  to  defeat  judgment,  execution  or  attachment. .....  500 

•27.  Agreement  to  prefer    502 

28.  Transfer  partly  as  preference  and  partly  on  other  considera- 

tion    503 

29.  Where  present  consideration  is  exempt 505 

30.  Present    consideration    to    be    paid    by    debtor    to    other 

creditors 505 

31.  Other  debts  assumed  by  transferee 506 

32.  Creditor's  promise  to  compound  felony 507 

33.  Preferences  between  relatives  generally 508 

34.  Preference  of  husband  and  wife 512 


CHAPTER  XII. 
Retention  op  Possession  or  Apparent  Title  by  Grantor. 

Section     1.  Retention  of  possession  as  element  or  evidence  of  fraud. . .  517 

2.  Transfers  presumptively  or  prima  facie  fraudulent 517 

3.  Transfers  fraudulent  per  ae  or  conclusively 524 

4.  Sufficiency    of    change    of    possession. — Open,    visible,    and 

notorious  possession    528 

5.  Elxclusive  possession  necessary    630 

6.  Exclusive  possession  necessary  where  parties  live  together. .  631 

7.  Gifts   to  minor  children 532 

8.  Question   for   the   jury 533 

9.  Continued  change  of  possession 634 

10.  Subsequent  possession  by  vendor  after  change  of  possession.  535 

11.  Possession  by  vendor  as  agent  or  bailee  of  purchaser 636 

12.  Possession  by  vendor  as  clerk  or  servant  of  purchaser ....  637 

13.  Possession  by  vendor  as  lessee  of  purchaser 638 

14.  Constructive  and  symbolical  delivery 539 

15.  Where   actual   delivery    is   impossible   or   property   is    not 

susceptible   of  complete  manual   delivery 540 

16.  Bulky,  cumbersome,  and  ponderous  articles 542 

17.  Property  in  possession  of  third  party  as  bailee 543 

18.  Grain  stored  in  elevator 645 

19.  Possession  by  agent  or  servant  of  vendor 646 

20.  Delivery  of  a  part  for  the  whole 546 

21.  Intangible  property ^47 


xiv  Table  of  Contents. 

PAGE 

Section  22.  Delivery  of  bill  of  sale 648 

23.  Possession  of  land  on  which  personal  property  is  situated. .  648 

24.  Delivery  to  common  carrier 649 

26.  Vendee  already  in  possession 649 

26.  Separation  or  marking  of  property  purchased 660 

27.  Time  of  delivery. — Must  be  within  reasonable  time 661 

28.  Change  of  possession  before  levy 662 

29.  Assignment  in  trust  for  creditors 663 

30.  Possession  remaining  with  mortgagor 664 

31.  Effect  of  retaining  vendor's  sign 566 

32.  Notice  of  transaction. — Publicity  and  notoriety 666 

33.  Judicial  and  public  sales 666 

34.  Effect  of  knowledge  or  notice  as  to  existing  creditors 668 

36.  Effect  of  knowledge  or  notice  as  to  subsequent  creditors 668 

36.  Constructive  notice  and  want  of  it. — Recording  instrument 

of  transfer 669 

37.  Effect  of  failure  to  record  or  file  instrument  in  general ....  669 

38.  Rule  as  to  conveyance  of  real  estate 662 

39.  Growing  crops 666 

40.  Burden  of  proof 667 


CHAPTER  XIII. 
Feattdtjlent  Knowledge  and  Intent. 

« 

Section    1.  Intent  of  grantor  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  creditors. . . .  668 

2.  Intent  to  defraud  one  or  more  creditors 676 

3.  Accomplishment  of  purpose   676 

4.  Knowledge  and  intent  of  grantee. — Effect  of  want  of  knowl- 

edge or  notice  where  transfer  is  for  a  valuable  considera- 
tion   1 677 

6.  Effect  of  want  of  knowledge  or  notice  where  transfer  is 

voluntary 684 

6.  Effect  of  knowledge  or  notice  where  transfer  is  to  one  not 

a  creditor 687 

7.  Effect  of  proper  application  of  proceeds \ 691 

8.  E^owledge  of  co-grantee  691 

9.  Effect  of  knowledge  or  notice  where  transfer  is  to  a  cred- 

itor.— Participation  in  fraudulent  intent  where  debt  is' 
sole  consideration 692 

10.  Participation  in  fraudulent  intent  where  debt  is  only  part 

of  consideration 602 

11.  Recital  of  false  consideration 606 

12.  When  creditor's  intent  is  immaterial 606 

13.  Participation  of  trustee  imputable  to  beneficiary 607 


Table  of  Contents.  xv 

PAGE 

Sectioit  14.  Participation  of  one  creditor  imputable  to  all 608 

15.  Time  when  knowledge  or  notice  is  acquired 608 

16.  Duty  to  see  to  application  of  proceeds  of  property 611 

17.  ConBtructive   or    implied   notice   as   equivalent   to    actual 

knowledge 611 

18.  Knowledge  of  facts  to  put  on  inquiry 615 

19.  Mere  suspicion 616 

20.  Matters  of  common  or  general  knowledge 617 

21.  Knowledge    or    notice    of    indebtedness   ^r    insolvency    of 

grantor 617 

22.  Inadequacy  of  consideration   619 

23.  Sale  of  business  and  entire  stock  of  goods 621 

24.  Knowledge  or  notice  of  the  pendency  of  suits  against  the 

grantor 622 

26.  Knowledge  that  debtor  is  about  to  abscond 623 

26.  What  inquiry  is  sufficient 623 

27.  Examination  of  books  and  papers 623 

28.  Knowledge  of,  or  notice  to,  agent 624 

29.  Knowledge  or  notice  implied  from  relation  of  parties 625 

30.  Transactions  founded  on  consideration 626 


CHAPTER  XIV. 
Rights  and  Liabilities  of  Parties  and  Pubchasebs. 

8BCIION     1.  Validity  of  transaction  as  between  original  parties 630 

2.  Right  to  impeach  or  rescind  transaction  as  fraudulent 638 

3.  Where  parties  are  not  in  pari  delicto 643 

4.  Mutual  rights  and  liabilities. — ^Effect  of  transaction  as  to 

property  rights  in  general 645 

5.  As  to  title  subsequently  acquired 647 

6.  Adverse  possession  as  between  grantor  and  grantee 648 

7.  Effect  of  setting  aside  conveyance 649 

8.  Right  to  recover  property  fraudulently  conveyed 649 

9.  Effect  of  voluntary  conveyance 653 

10.  Right  to  redeem  property  transferred  as  security 654 

11.  Enforcement    of    fraudulent    contract    or    conveyance    in 

general 655 

12.  Enforcement  of  fraudulent  mortgage 656 

13.  Enforcement  of  trust  for  grantor  in  general 657 

14.  Purchase  at  execution  sale  for  benefit  of  debtor 659 

15.  Right  to  proceeds  or  profits 660 

16.  Right  to  enforce  payment  of  consideration 661 

17.  Enforcement  of  note  given  as  consideration 662 

18.  Recovery  by  grantee  of  consideration  paid 663 


xvi  Table  of  Contents. 

PAOB 

Section  19.  Rights  and  liabilities  of  several  grantees  inter  ae 664 

20.  Contribution  between  several  grantees 665 

21.  Rights  and  liabilities  as  to  third  persons  in  general 666 

22.  Rights  of  maker  of  note  fraudulently  transferred 667 

23.  As  to  creditors  of  grantee 667 

24.  Rights  and  liabilities  of  grantees  as  to  creditors  and  sub- 

sequent purchasers. — ^As   to   creditors. — ^As   to   property 

and  proceeds  thereof 669 

25.  Right  to  require  resort  to  other  property 672 

26.  Intermingled  goods 673 

27.  Increase  or  product  of  property  generally 673 

28.  Right  to  growing  crops 674 

29.  Several  fraudulent  transactions 675 

30.  Possession  of  grantee  adverse  to  creditors 675 

31.  Right  of  grantee  to  attack  execution  sale 676 

32.  Right  of  grantee  to  pay  creditor's  claim  and  retain  prop- 

erty    677 

33.  Personal  liability  of  grantee  in  general 678 

34.  Conveyances  in  name  of  third  person 681 

35.  Liability  as  to  property  never  in  possession 684 

•    36.  Liability  as  garnishee   685 

37.  Extent  of  liability  in  general 685 

38.  Rents,  issues,  and  profits 687 

39.  Interest 689 

40.  Reimbursement  of  consideration  and  expenditures,  indem- 

nity, and  subrogation,  in  case  of  constructive  fraud ....  690 

41.  Where  conveyance  is  actually  fraudulent 694 

42.  Care  of  property  and  expenses  in  general 698 

43.  Compensation  for  improvements   700 

44.  Purchase  of  judgment  against  grantor 701 

45.  Title  subsequently  acquired  by  grantee 702 

46.  Rights  of  grantees  as  bona  fide  purchasers 702 

47.  Nature  and  extent  of  consideration  in  general 705 

48.  Rights  and  liabilities  of  grantees  as  to  subsequent  pur- 

chasers    707 

49.  Rights  and  liabilities  of  purchasers  from  grantee  generally.  708 

50.  Rights  and  liabilities  as  to  original  grantor 709 

51.  Rights  and  liabilities  as  to  original  grantee 710 

52.  Rights  and  liabilities  as  to  creditors  of  original  grantor. . .  711 

53.  Mortgage  or  conveyance  to  creditors  of  grantor 713 

54.  Rights  and  liabilities  of  bona  fide  purchasers  from  grantee 

generally 714 

55.  Notice 715 

56.  Consideration 718 

57.  Rights  and  liabilities  as  to  original  parties 719 


Table  of  Contents.  xvii 

PAGE 

SacnoN  58.  Rights  and  liabilities  as  to  creditors  of  original  grantor 

generally 720 

59.  Protection  according  to  nature  and  extent  of  consideration  723 

60.  Mortgagees   and  pledgees 724 

61.  Creditors  of  grantee    725 

62.  Purchaser  from  hona  fide  grantee 726 

63.  Original  grantor  claiming  under  bona  fide  purchaser  from 

grantee 727 

64.  Rights    and    liabilities    as    to    purchasers    from    original 

grantor  .  .^ 728 


CHAPTEK  XV. 

Bemedies. 

SBOnoif     1.  Nature  and  form  of  remedy  in  general 731 

2.  Remedy  by  action  at  law 731 

3.  Remedies  of  creditors   on   ground   of   nullity   of   transfer 

generally 733 

4.  Execution  generally 737 

5.  Where  property  has  been  disposed  of  by  grantee  or  pur- 

chaser    739 

6.  Where  conveyance  was  made  before  rendition  of  judgment.  740 

7.  Attachment  generally 740 

8.  Property  which  may  be  seized 741 

9.  Garnishment  generally 743 

10.  Where  lands  are  subject  of  conveyance 746 

11.  Debtor's  fraudulent  transfer  of  claim  due  from  garnishee. .  747 

12.  Statutory  provisions 747 

13.  Ejectment 748 

14.  Right  of  creditor  or  levying  officer  to  attack  conveyance  in 

action  by  grantee  generally  748 

15.  Contest  of  claim  to  property  levied  on 760 

16.  Right  of  creditor  on  intervention  by  grantee 750 

17.  Intervention  by  creditors   751 

18.  Remedy  where  equitable  interests  in  real  estate  are  sought 

to  be  reached    752 

19.  Right  of  creditor   to   appropriate   property  without   legal 

process 764 

20.  Collateral  attack  on  fraudulent  judgment  or  transfer 755 

21.  Remedy  by  action  for  damages 756 

22.  Action  for  penalty    767 

23.  Remedy  by  suit  in  equity  generally 758 

24.  Action  in  equity  in  aid  of  remedy  at  law 762 

25.  Effect  of  statutory  provisions  for  proceedings  supplementary 

to  execution 764 

h 


• 


xviii  Table  of  Contents. 

PAGE 

Section  26.  Action  by  personal  representative  after  death  of  grantor..  765 

27.  Action  by  creditor  after  death  of  grantor 766 

28.  Relief  in  equity  on  theory  of  resulting  trust 767 

29.  Jurisdiction  with  respect  to  transfers  of  personal  property.  768 

30.  Election  of  remedies    768 

31.  Conditions  precedent. — ^Necessity  of  exhausting  legal  remedy 

generally 770 

32.  Necessity  of  judgment  in  general 772 

33.  Statutory  modification  of  rule  as  to  necessity  of  judgment.  777 

34.  Sufficiency  of  judgment  generally a 779 

35.  Effect  of  foreign  judgment 780 

36.  Effect  of  judgment  of  justice  of  the  peace 781 

37.  Effect  of  having  acquired  lien  by  attachment 782 

38.  Effect    of    lien   acquired   otherwise   than   by   judgment   or 

attachment 785 

39.  Circumstances   excusing   failure  to   obtain   judgment  gen- 

erally    785 

40.  Non-residence  of  debtor  or  absence  from  jurisdiction 787 

41.  Enforcement  of  claims  against  estates  of  decedents 789 

42.  Adjudication  equivalent  to  judgment 791 

43.  Waiver  of  failure  to  secure  judgment 791 

44.  Necessity  of  issuance  of  execution  generally 791 

45.  Rule  where  judgment  is  not  per  ae  a  lien 792 

46.  Rule  where  creditor  has  acquired  a  lien 793 

47.  Necessity  of  levy  of  execution 795 

48.  Necessity  of  return  of  execution  unsatisfied  generally ....  795 

49.  Rule  where  action  is  brought  in  aid  of  execution  or  legal 

remedy 70S 

60.  Sufficiency  of  return    709 

51.  Effect  of  return  of  execution  as  evidence 801 

52.  Necessity  of  outstanding  execution 801 

53.  Issuance  and  return  of  execution  against  decedent's  estate.  802 
64.  Necessity  of  lien  in  general 803 

55.  Necessity  of  exhausting  other  assets  of  debtor 805 

56.  Exhaustion  of  estate  of  deceased  debtor 808 

57.  Necessity   of   pursuing   legal   remedy   against   debtor's   co- 

obligor  808 

58.  Reimbursement  of  grantee  or  other  creditors 809 

59.  Joinder  of  causes  of  action 810 

60.  Jurisdiction  of  the  person  and  cause  of  action 812 

61.  Venue 813 

62.  Parties  plaintiff S14 

63.  Parties  defendant  in  general 816 

64.  Grantor  or  debtor  as  defendant 819 

65.  Representatives  of  grantor  or  debtor 820 


Table  of  Contents.  xix 

PAGE 

SEcnoif  66.  Co-grantors  or  co-obligors    822 

67.  Grantee   as  defendant    822 

68.  Intermediate  grantees 824 

69.  Purchasers  from  grantee  825 

70.  Representatives  of  grantee. — ^Assignees 825 

71.  Preferred  creditors  under  trust  deed 826 

72.  Intervention  and  change  of  parties 826 

73.  Defenses  in  general   828 

74.  Impeachment  of  creditor's  claim  or  judgment 829 

75.  Effect  of  judgment  obtained  by  creditor 830 

76.  Effect  of  judgment  in  absence  of  fraud  or  collusion 831 

77.  Alternative  defenses 832 

78.  Limitation  of  actions  generally 832 

79.  Nature  of  action  834 

80.  Accrual  of  right  of  action 835 

81.  Prior  establishment  of  creditor's  claim 837 

82.  Laches 839 


CHAPTER  XVL 
Pleadings. 

Section     1.  Pleadings;  the  bill,  complaint,  or  petition. — Jurisdictional 

facte 841 

2.  Statutory  provisions 845 

3.  Right  to  sue  in  general. — Existence  of  creditor's  claim 846 

4.  Time  when  claim  accrued 8^7 

5.  Ownership  and  description  of  property  conveyed 848 

6.  Nature  and  execution  of  conveyance 850 

7.  Insolvency  of  debtor  or  want  of  assete  other  than  property 

conveyed 861 

8.  Necessity  of  alleging  facts  constituting  fraud 855 

9.  Facte  neod  not  be  minutely  alleged 858 

10.  Fraudulent  intent  of  grantor 859 

11.  Knowledge  and  intent  of  grantee 860 

12.  Fraudulent  intent  and  knowledge  as  to  subsequent  creditors 

or  purchasers 862 

13.  Suing  in  behalf  of  all  creditors 863 

14.  Excusing  laches 864 

15.  Pleading  evidence 865 

16-  Prayer  for  relief 866 

17.  Multifariousness 868 

18.  Amendments 871 

19.  Supplementel  pleadings '  872 


XX  Table  of  Contents. 

PAGK 

Section  20.  Demurrer 873 

21.  Cross  bill 875 

22.  Plea  or  answer  in  general 876 

23.  Voluntary  conveyance 876 

24.  Purchaser  from  fraudulent  grantee 877 

26.  Exempt  property 877 

26.  Justifying  seizure 878 

27.  Answers,  denials,  and  admissions  as  evidence 878 

28.  Replication 880 

29.  Bills  of  particulars   880 

30.  Venue 881 

31.  Issues,  proof,  and  variance  generally 882 

32.  Under  a  general  denial 883 

33.  Confession  and  avoidance  886 

34.  Variance 886 

36.  Disclaimer 886 


CHAPTEE  XVn. 

Evidence. 

Seozion     a.  Presumption  and  burden  of  proof  generally 889 

2.  Burden  of  proof  imder  pleadings 890 

3.  Fraudulent  character  of  transaction  in  general 891 

4.  Transactions  between  parties  generally  894 

5.  Transactions  between  husband  and  wife 896 

6.  Plaintiff's  right  to  sue 900 

7.  Nature  and  value  of  property  conveyed 901 

8.  Solvency  or  insolvency  of  grantor 901 

9.  Consideration 903 

10.  Knowledge  and  intent  of  grantee 906 

•#.         11.  Retention  of  possession   910 

12.  Reservations  and  trust  for  grantor 911 

13.  Intent  to  defraud  subsequent  purchasers 912 

14.  Good  faith  of  purchasers  from  grantee 912 

16.  Presumption  from  failure  to  testify  or  produce  evidence. . .  913 

16.  Admissibility  and  relevancy  of  evidence  in  general 914 

17.  Financial  condition  of  parties 919 

18.  Pendency  or  threat  of  action 921 

19.  Declarations  and  acts  of  grantor 921 

20.  Statements  of  debtor  as  to  financial  condition 923 

21.  Other  and  separate  fraudulent  conveyances  and  transactions  923 

22.  Subsequent  conduct  of  parties  and  persons  interested 926 

23.  Testimony  of  parties  as  to  their  motive,  purpose,  or  intent. .  927 

24.  Fraudulent  instrument  or  conveyance 928 


Table  of  Contewts.  xxi 

PAGE 

SBC?no2f  26.  Admissibility  of  pleadings  in  evidence 929 

26.  Nature  and  form  of  transaction 929 

27.  Plaintiff's  right  to  sue 930 

28.  Attack  on  plaintiff's  right  to  sue 932 

29.  Proof  of  date  of  plaintiff's  claim 932 

30.  Indebtedness  of  grantor  933 

31.  Solvency  or  insolvency  of  grantor 935 

32.  Consideration  in  general  937 

33.  Statements  of  parties. — Books  of  accounts 940 

34.  Recitals  in  instrument  of  transfer 941 

36.  Knowledge  and  intent  of  grantee  generally 942 

36.  Knowledge  of  grantor's  indebtedness  or  insolvency 944 

37.  Testimony  of  grantee  as  to  his  own  knowledge  or  intent. . .  945 

38.  Participation  in  fraudulent  intent 946 

39.  Separate  conveyances  or  transactions 947 

40.  Grood  faith  of  purchaser  from  grantee 948 

41.  Title  to  or  control  of  property 949 

42.  Retention  or  change  of  apparent  title  or  control 950 

43.  Weight  and  sufficiency  of  evidence  generally 951 

44.  Circumstantial  evidence 953 

46.  Evidence  of  plaintiff's  right  to  sue 955 

46.  Adjudication  of  creditor's  claim   956 

47.  Pleadings 957 

48.  Nature  and  circumstances  of  transaction  generally 958 

49.  Transactions  between  relatives   964 

60.  Indebtedness  and  insolvency  of  grantor 969 

61.  Consideration 970 

62.  Intent  of  grantor  to  defraud  creditors 975 

63.  Knowledge  and  intent  of  grantee  or  purchaser  from  grantee  978 


CHAPTER  XVIIL 
Trial. 

Sbctiok     1.  Trial. — ^Mode  and  conduct  in  general 982 

2.  Submission  of  issues  to  jury 983 

3.  Reference  and  accounting   984 

4.  Questions  for  jury. — Questions  of  law  and  fact. — Fraudu- 

lent intent  in  general  985 

6.  Nature  and  form  of  transaction 989 

6.  Sufficiency  of  transfer  of  possession  to  vendee 990 

7.  Nature,  source,  and  sufficiency  of  consideration 991 

8.  Indebtedness  and  insolvency    993 

9.  Knowledge  and  participation  of  grantee 994 


xxii  Table  of  Contents- 

page 

Section  10.  Existence    of    creditors. — Secrecy. — Preferences. — ^Withhold- 
ing instrument  from  record 995 

11.  Submission  of  case  to  jury 995 

12.  Instructions. — Province  of  court  and  jury 997 

13.  Form  and  sufficiency  of  instructions 999 

14.  Requests  for  instruction 1005 

16.  Verdict  and  findings  generally 1006 

16.  Special  interrogatories  and  findings  by  jury 1007 

17.  Findings  by  court    1007 

18.  New  trial 1009 


CHAPTER  XIX. 
Judgment  ob  Decree  and  Enforcement  Thereof. 

Section     1.  Judgement  or  decree. — Requisites  and  validity  ip  general. .  1001 

2.  Nature  of  relief  granted 1012 

3.  Conformity  of  judgment  to  pleadings 1017 

4.  Judgment  under  prayer  for  general  relief 1018 

6.  Amount  of  recovery   1019 

6.  Setting  aside  conveyance  1020 

7.  Ordering  sale  of  property 1021 

8.  Personal  judgment 1023 

9.  Operation  and  effect  1025 

10.  Persons  entitled  to  claim  benefit 1026 

11.  Enforcement  of  judgment  or  decree 1027 

12.  Sales  and  conveyances  under  order  of  court 1028 

13.  Disposition  of  property  and  proceeds. — Subjection  to  claims 

of  creditors  .  ', 1030 

14.  Costs  and  attorney's  fees  1032 

15.  Mortgages  and  other  liens 1033 

16.  Liens  and  priorities  of  creditors 1033 

17.  Eights  of  grantee  or  purchaser  as  creditor 1036 

18.  Rights  of  creditors  of  grantee 1037 

19.  Application  of  payments  to  judgment  or  execution 103S 

20.  Right  to  surplus   1038 

21.  Discovery 1039 

22.  Injunction  to  restrain  fraudulent  conveyance  by  debtor. . . .  1041 

23.  Injunction  to  restrain  disposition  of  property  by  fraudu- 

lent grantee 1043 

24.  Injunction  to  restrain  sale  imder  fraudulent  judgment  or 

mortgage 1045 

26.  Violation  of  injunction  and  punishment 1046 

26.  Appointment  of  receiver   1046 

27.  Appeal  and  review   1050 


Table  of  Contents.  xxiii 

CHAPTER  XX. 
Penal  Actions  and  Criminal  Proseoutions. 

PAGE 

SacnoN     1.  Penalties    and    actions    therefor. — ^Nature    and    extent    of 

liability  in  general 1054 

2.  What  constitutes  a  fraudulent  transfer 1056 

3.  Persons  liable  to  penalty 1056 

4.  Fraudulent  intent  necessary    1056 

6.  Persons  entitled  to  enforce  penalty 1057 

6.  Conditions  precedent  to  action  to  enforce 1058 

7.  Limitation. — Jurisdiction  and  venue. — Parties 1058 

8.  Pleading. — Defenses. — Evidence 1059 

9.  Criminal  prosecutions 1061 

10.  Offenses. — Fraudulent  transfers 1061 

11.  Preliminary  affidavit  on  application 1062 

12.  Indictment 1063 

13.  Befenses 1064 

14.  Evidence 1064 

15.  Trial  and  review  1065 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

Feaitditlbnt  Conveyances  Under  the  Bankruptcy  Law — 

Acts  of  Bankruptcy. 

Sbction     1.  General  nature  and  effect  of  the  bankruptcy  law 1067 

2.  Effect  of  bankruptcy  law  upon  State  insolvent  law 1070 

3.  Interpretation  or  construction  of  statute 1072 

4.  Important  statutory   definitions. — ^Insolvency 1073 

5.  Definition  of  conceal    i 1075 

6.  Definition  of  transfer    1076 

7.  Definition  of  preference    1077 

8.  Definition  of  property   1078 

9.  Acts  of  bankruptcy,  statutory  provision 1078 

10.  Acts  of  bankruptcy  in  general 1080 

11.  Who  may  commit  acts  of  bankruptcy 1080 

12.  First  act  of  bankruptcy;  a  fraudulent  transfer.    Subs.  a(l)  1081 

13.  Intent 1083 

14.  Insolvency 1085 

15.  Meaning  of  words  and  phrases 1087 

16.  Concealment  and  removal    1087 

17.  Second  act  of  bankruptcy;  a  preferential  transfer.     Subs. 

a(2) 1088 

18.  Intent  to  prefer    1090 


xxiv  Table  of  Contents. 

PAGE 

Section  19.  Transfer  of  property   1093 

20.  Third   act   of   bankruptcy;    preference   through   legal    pro- 

ceedings.    Subs.  a(3) 1094 

21.  Meaning  of  words  1096 

22.  Provision  liberally  construed   1097 

23.  Fourth  act  of  bankruptcy;    a  general  assignment.     Subs. 

a(4) 109» 

24.  What  is  a  general  assignment 1099 

25.  What  is  not  a  general  assignment 1 100 

26.  Amendment  of  1903,  receiver  or  trustee  in  charge  of  prop- 

erty     1101 

27.  Meaning  of  words;    precedents 1103 

28.  Fifth  act  of  bankruptcy ;  a  confession  of  bankruptcy.    Subs. 

a(5) 1104 

29.  Solvency  and  the  first  act  of  bankruptcy 1105 

30.  Solvency  and  the  second  and  third  act  of  bankruptcy. . .      .  1106 

31.  Fraudulent  transfer  as  objection  to  discharge.    Sec.  14b (4)  1107 


CHAPTEE  XXIL 
Fraudulent  Liens  and  Tbansfebs. 

SionoN     1.  Statutory  provision 110^ 

2.  Scope  and  meaning  of  section 1112 

3.  Claims  void  for  want  of  record.    Subs,  a 1113 

4.  Unfiled  chattel  mortgages  and  contracts  of  conditional  sale.  1114 

5.  Subrogation  of  trustee  to  rights  of  creditor.    Subs,  b 1118 

6.  Valid  liens  in  general.     Subs,  d 1119 

7.  Mechanics'  liens 1 120 

8.  Landlords'  liens 1121 

9.  Other  valid  liens  1122 

10.  Fraudulent  transfers.     Subs,  e 1125 

11.  Scope  of  subsection    1129 

12.  Insolvency  not  essential    1 129 

13.  *'  Within  four  months  prior  to  filing  the  petition  " 1129 

14.  "  With  intent  to  hinder,  delay  or  defraud  " 1130 

15.  "Except  purchasers  in  good  faith  and  for  a  present  fair 

consideration  " 1 131 

16.  Transfers  and  inctimbrances  imder  State  laws 1132 

17.  Suits  to  recover  property  1132 

18.  Miscellaneous  invalid  transfers  or  incumbrances 1134 

19.  Mortgages  to  secure  antecedent  debts 1134 

20.  Chattel  mortgages 1135 

21.  Voluntary  transfers 1 138 

22.  General  assignments  for  the  benefit  of  creditors 1139 

23.  Practice 1140 


Table  of  Contents.  xxv 

PAGE 

8BCTION  24.  Liens  through  legal  proceedings.    Subs,  c  and  f 1140 

25.  Invalid  liens  by  judgment  and  execution 1142 

26-  Invalid  liens  by  attachment 1 144 

27.  Invalid  liens  by  creditor's  bill 1145 

28.  Suits  to  annul  liens 1146 

29-  Preserving  liens 1 146 

30.  Saving  clause 1 147 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

Pbefebeed  Cbeditobs. 

SBcnoif     1.  Statutory  provision 1148 

2.  What  is  a  preference;  history  and  comparative  legislation.  1149 

3.  The    present    definition;     the    elements    of    a    preference. 

Subs,  a 1160 

4.  Being  insolvent 1 152 

5.  Within  four  months    1 153 

6.  Running  of  time  where  the  evidence  of  transfer  must  or 

may  be  recorded  1 164 

7.  Procured  or  suffered  a  judgment 1156 

8.  Made  a  transfer  of  his  property 1157 

9.  Effect,  a  greater  percentage 1160 

10.  Creditors  only  may  be  preferred 1161 

11.  What  preferences  are  voidable.    Subd.  b 1163 

12.  Reasonable  cause  to  believe  a  preference  intended 1164 

13.  Belief  or  knowledge  of  agent  or  attorney 1168 

14.  Recovery 1169 

16.  Property  or  its  value;  damages;  costs 1171 

16.  Set-off  of  a  subsequent  credit.     Subs,  c 1172 

17.  Preference  to  bankrupt's  attorney.     Subs,  d 1174 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

POWBBS  AUD  DUTIBS  OF  TbUSTEES  AS  TO  PeOPEBTY  TeANSFEBBED 

IN  Fbatjd  of  Cbeditobs. 

Sbchon     1.  Title  to  property;  statutory  provision 1176 

2.  Scope  of  section    1 177 

3.  When  title  vests.     Subs,  a 1178 

4.  Nature  of  trustee's  title  in  general 1 170 

6.  Property  transferred  in  fraud  of  creditors 1182 

6.  Effect  of  a  general  assignment 1184 

7.  Property  which  might  have  been  transferred  or  levied  upon.  118-1 

8.  Remainders  and  interests  in  trust 118x0 


xxvi  Table  of  Contents. 

PAOV 

Section    9.  Dower  and  curtesy  rights 1188 

10.  Licenses,  franchises,  and  personal  privileges 1189 

11.  Life   insurance  policies   1190 

12.  Property  sold  to  the  bankrupt  on  condition 1192 

13.  Property  affected  by  fraudulent  representations 1194 

14.  Reclamation  proceedings 1195 

15.  Rights  of  action   1198 

16.  Burdensome  property 1 199 

17.  Exempt  property 1200 

18.  Exemptions  in  property  fraudulently   transferred  or  con- 

cealed    1201 

19.  Transfers  fraudulent  under  State  laws  may  be  avoided  by 

trustee.     Subs,  e    1203 

20.  The  saving  clause  1205 

21.  The  amendment  of  1903 1206 

22.  Jurisdiction  of  courts ;  statutory  provision 1206 

23.  Jurisdiction  of  courts  generally 1207 

24.  Jurisdiction  of  suits  to  recover  property 1207 

25.  Jurisdiction  of  the  circuit  courts.    Subs,  a 1208 

26.  Jurisdiction  of  the  district  courts.     Subs,  b 1210 

27.  Amendment  of  1903   , 1211 

28.  Summary  jurisdiction 1213 

29.  Effect  on  auxiliary  remedies 1217 

30.  Jurisdiction  of  State  courts 1220 

31.  Suits  by  and  against  bankrupt;  statutory  provision 1222 

32.  Suits  by  trustees  generally 1222 

33.  Stays  of  suits  begun  after  filing  of  petition 1224 

34.  Stays  of  suits  against  bankrupt 1224 

35.  Of  suits  or  proceedings  in  rem 1226 

36.  To  enforce  a  lien  1227 

37.  General  assignments 1228 

38.  Of  suits  or  proceedings  in  personam 1229 

39.  Practice 1230 

40.  Papers  and  procedure 1231 

41.  Duration  of  stays   1232 

42.  Continuance  of  suits. — Where  bankrupt  is  defendant 1233 

43.  Where  bankrupt  is   plaintiff 1234 

44.  Practice 1234 

45.  Limitation  on  suits  by  trustee  and  when  it  begins  to  run . .  1235 


TABLE   OF  CASES. 


PAOB 

Abbe  y.  Newton,  19  Conn.  20. .     343 
Abbey  y.  Commercial  Bank,  31 

Miss.  434 761,    836 

Abbey  y.  Deyo,'  44  N.  Y.  343 . . 

23,  24,  111,  112,  113,     115 
Abbott  V.  Hurd,  7  Blackf.  (Ind.) 

Abbott  y.  Tenney,  18  N.  H.  109 

99,  274,  340,    636 
Abegg  y.  Bishop,  142  N.  T.  286.    456 
Abegg  y.  Schwab,  9  N.  T.  Supp. 
681 

■ 

Aber  y.  Brant,  36  N.  J.  Eq.  116 

337,    356 
Aberholtzer  y.  Hazen,  92  Iowa, 

602 963 

Afaoey  y.  Kingsland,  10  Ala.  365 

170, 

377,  557,  669,  672,  697,  721,  722 
Aborn  y.  Rathbone  54  Conn.  444  641 
Abrahams  y.  Cole,  5  Rich.  Eq. 

(S.  C.)  336 67,    735 

Acker    y.    Acker,   1   Abb.  Dec. 

(N.  Y.)  1 48 

Acker  .y.  Leland,  96  N.  Y.  383.     881 
Acker  y.  White,  26  Wend.   (N. 

Y.)  614 558 

Ackerman  y.  Arbaugh,    97  111. 

App.  155 970 

Ackerman    y.    Merle,   137   Cal. 

169 692 

Adcerman  y.  Peters,  113  La.  156 

650,    656 
Ackerman  y.  Salmon,  31  How. 

Pr.  (N.  Y.)  259 918 

Acme  Food  Co.  y.  Meier,  18  Am. 

B.  R.  550 

1084,  1086,  1090,  1094,  1095 

xxvii 


PAOI 

Acme  Lumber  Co.  y.  Hoyt,  71 
Miss.  106 555 

Adair  y.  Adair's  Trustee,  30  Ky. 
L.  R.  867 1188 

Adair  y.  Feder,  133  Ala.  620. .     964 

Adam,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Stewart,  157 
Ind.  678 313 

Adames  y.  Hallett,  L.  R.  6  Eq. 
468 181 

Adam  Roth  Grocery  Co.  y.  Ash- 
ton,  69  Mo.  App.  463 574,     706 

Adam  Roth  Grocery  Co.  y. 
Lewis,  69  Mo.  App.  463 256 

Adams  v.  Branch,  3  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
178.. 344,  387,  620,  677,  707,     722 

Adams  y.  Broughton  13  Ala.  731 

13,    423 

Adams  y.  Bniske,  135  Mich.  339 

403,    953 

Adams  y.  Coons,  37  La.  Ann.  305  1026 

Adams  v.  Curtis,  137  Ind.  175. .     508 

Adams  v.  l>empsey,  35  Wash.  80 

435,  436,     063 

Adams  y.  Dempsey,  29  Wash. 
155. 947,  1000 

Adams   y.    Dempsey,    22  Wash. 

284 951,  987,  998,     999 

Adams  y.  Uoloombe,  Harp.  £q. 

(S.  C.)  202 675 

Adams  y.  Irwin,  44  W.  Va.  740 

263,    280,    347,     955 

Adams  y.  Kellogg,  63  Mich.  105     571 

Adams  y.  Laugel  144  Ind.  608 

227,   238,    317 

Adams  y.  Miller,  4  Neb.    (Un- 

off.)  464 1041 

Adams  v.   Niemann,    46  Mich. 

135 303,  333,  473,     482 

Adams  y  O'Rear,  80  Ky.  129.. 

36,  38,     363 


XXVlll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAQB 

Adams  v.  (VBear,  3  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

606 683 

Adams     y    Palets    (Tenn   Ch. 

App.),43S.  W.  133 741 

Adams  v.  Pease,  113  111.  App. 

366 226,  317,     674 

Adams  v.  Riley,  122  U.  S.  38^.     191 
Adams  v.  Ryan,  61  Iowa,  733. . 

392,  396,  604,  610,  892 
Adams  v.  Collier  122  U.  S.  382  1139 
Adams  y.  Merchants'    Bank,  2 

Fed.  174 1138,  1168 

Adams  y.  Meyers,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

62 1193 

Adams  y  Storey,   1   Paine   (U. 

S.),  79,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  66..  1069 
Adams  y.  Stete,  87  Ind.  673...  901 
Adams  y.  Weayer,  117  Cal.  42. .  686 
Adams  y.  Wheeler,  27  Mass.  199 

301,  621,  662 
Adee  y.  Biger,  81  N.  Y.  349. .  842 
Adkins  y.  Adkins,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

686 631 

Adkins  y.  Bynum,  109  Ala.  281.  91 
Adkins  y.  Loucks,  107  Wis.  587  823 
Adlard  y.  Rogers,  105  Cttl.  327 .     638 

Adler  y.  Apt,  31  Minn.  348 916 

Adler  y.  Fenton,  66  U.  S.  407 . . 

199,     766 
Adler  y.  Hellman,  66  Neb.  266     986 
Adler,  etc.,  Clothing  Co.  y.  Hell- 
man,  66  Neb.  266. .  .240,  358,     369 
Adler-Gold'man  Commission  Co. 

y.  Hathoock,  66  Ark.  679 

255,  269,  620 
Adoue  y.  Spencer,  62  N  J.  Eq. 

782 443,     897 

Adoue  y.  Spencer,  69  N.  J.  Eq. 

231 310,     790 

Adsit  V.  Butler,  87  N.  Y.  586 . . 

772,  786,  792,  796,  802,  803,  842 
Aetna  Nat.  Bank  y.  Manhattan 

Life  Ins.  Co.  24  Fed.  769 

20,  98,  119,     791 
Aetna  Nat.  Bank  y.  U.  S.  Life 


PAQB 

Ins.  Co.,  24  Fed.  770 

123,  124,  127 
Ager  y.  Murray,  106  U.  S.  126  117 
Agricultural    Bank   y.    Dorsey, 

1  Freem.  Ch.    (Miss.)    338.. 

81,   306,   462,   466,   718,     721 
Ahlering  y.  Speckman,  30  Ky. 

L.  Rep.   940... 179,    369 

Ahl  y.  Thorner,  Fed.  Cas.  Now 

103 1164 

Ahlhauser  y.  Doud,  74  Wis.  400 

763,  798,  1047 
Ahl's  Appeal,  129  Pa.  49.. 669,  638 
Aigeltinger     y.     Einstein,     143 

Cal.  609 186,  783,     784 

Aikin  y.  Ballard,  Rice  Eq.   (S. 

C.)   13 676 

Aiken  y.  Bnien,  21  Ind.*  137 . . 

219,     728 
Aiken  y.  Edringer,  1  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  HI 848 

Aiken  y.  Kilburne.  27  Me.  262. 

32,  1066,  1068,  1060 
Aiken  y.  Peck,  22  Vt.  266 ... .  1060 
^nsworth   y.    Roubal    (Neb.), 

106  N.  W.  248 783,     838 

Alabama  Iron,  etc,  Co.  y.  Aus- 
tin, 94  Fed.  897 886 

Alabama  Iron,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Mc- 

Keever,  112  Ala.  134 778 

Alabama  L.   Ins.   &   T.   Co.   y. 

Pettway,  24  Ala.  644 

228,  229,  489,  670,  693,     606 
Alabama     Warehouse     Co.     y. 

Jones,  62  Ala.  650 810 

Alamo  Cement  Co.  y.  San  An- 
tonio, 23  S.  W.   (Tex.)   449..     304 
A.  Landreth  &  Co.  y.  Scheyenel, 

102  Tenn.  486 181 

Albee  y.  Webster,  16  N.  H.  362 

299, 

332,  384,  414,  426,  427,  446,     463 
Alberger  y.  National    Bank  of 

Commerce  123  Mo.  313.. 314,     460 
Alberger  v.  White,  117  Mo.  347 

460,  680,  694,  599,  1000 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Albert  t.  Besel,  88  Mo.  150... 

482,  567,  910 
Albert  y.  Lindau,  46  Md.  334. .  63 
Albert  ▼.  Winn,  5  Md.  66.. 322,  327 
Albert  t.  Wynn,  7  Gill    (Md.), 

446 71 

Albertoli  y.  Branham,   80   Cal. 

631 852,     865 

Albrecht    v.    Cudihee    (Waah.), 

79  Pac  628   175 

Aldelberg  v.  Horowita,  32  App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    408 726,    727 

Alden  ir,  Gibaon,  63  N.  H.  12 . . 

768,  848,  857,  862 
Alden  ▼.  Marsh,  97  Mass.  160.  268 
Alderson    v.    Temple,    4    Burr. 

2235 1150 

Aldons  V.  Olverson,    17    S.    D. 

190 193,     849 

Aldridge  v.  Muirhead,    101    U. 

S.  397 113 

Alexander  v.  Dulaney,    16    So. 

(Mias.)    365   999 

Alexander    ▼.    Gould,    1    Mass. 

166 198 

Alexander  v.  Hemrich,  4  Wash. 

727 56,     963 

Alexander  v.  Quiglcy,    63    Ky. 

399 846,  847,     966 

Alexander  ▼.  Tarns,  13  111.  221.     866 
Alexander  v.  Todd,  1  Bond  (U. 

8.),   175.. 296,  342,  664,  626,     913 
Alexander  ▼.  Young,  23  Ga.  616. 

478,  481,     482 
Alexandria  Sav.  Int.  ▼.  Thomas, 

29  Gratt.    (Va.)    483.... 301,     302 
Alford  V.  Baker,  53  Ind.  279.. 

809,     849 
Alkire   Grocery   Co.    v.   Ballan- 
ger, 137  Mo.  369 405 

Alkire  Grocery  Co.  v.  Richesin, 

91   Fed.  79   832 

Allaire  v.  Day,  30  N.  J.  Eq.  231     188 
Allan  ▼.  McTJavish,  8  Ont.  App. 

440 582,     595 

AUee  T.  Slane,  26  App.  Div.  (N. 


PAOR 

Y.)   455 397 

Allein  v.   Sharp,   7   Gill.   &  J. 

(Md.)  96 339,    758 

Allen  V.  Allen,  41  N.  C.  293.. 

148,     361 
Allen    y.    Antisdale,    38    Mich. 

229 513,     975 

Allen  y.  Berry,  50  Mo.  90.. 688,    696 

Allen  y.  Berry,  40  Mo.  282 977 

Allen  y.  Caldwell,  Ward  &  Co. 

(Ala.),  42  So.  855 347,     519 

Allen  y.  Carpenter,  66  Tex.  138    603 

Allen  y.  Carr,  85  111.  388 

526,  528,  534 
Allen  y.  Cowan,  23  N.  Y.  502. .  669 
Allen  y.  Edgerton,  3  Vt.  442..  531 
Allen  y.  Erie  City  Bank,  57  Pa. 

St.  129 747 

Allen  y.  French,  178  Mass.  539  57 
Allen   y.   Gilliland,    5    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  320 680 

Allen  y.  Hall,  1  Tex.  App.  Ciy. 

Cas.,  Section  1279    164 

Alton  y.  Harrison,  L.  R.,  4  Ch. 

622 463,  472,  488,     601 

Allen  y.  Grant,   14  Am.   B.  R. 

349 1199 

Allen     y.     Holland,     3     Yerg. 

(Tenn.)    343 138 

Allen  y.  Hollander,   11  Am.  B. 

R.  763 1126,  1186 

Allen  y.  Johnson,  27  Ky.  235 . .  557 
Allen  y.  Kennedy,  49  Wis.  549.  463 
Allen  y.  Kinyon,  41  Mich.  281.  576 
Allen  y.  Kirk,  81  Iowa,  658... 

939,  1003,  1004 
Allen  y.  Knowlton,  47  Vt.  612.  840 
Allen  y.  McLendon,   113  N.  C. 

321 611,  938,  1050 

Allen  y.  McMannes,  19  Am.  B. 

R.  276 1171 

Allen  y.  McRae,  91   Wis.  226. 

753,     857 
Allen  V.  Massey,  84  U.  8.  361. 

17,     530 


Table  of  Cases* 


PAGE 

Allen  V.  Merriwether,  9  S.  W. 

(Ky.)    807 370,  373,  661,    663 

Allen  V.  Montgomery  R.  Co.,  11 

Ala.  437 823,    870 

Allen  V.  Mower,  17  Vt.  61 671 

Allen  V.  Perry,  56  Wis.  178... 

163,  360,  398,     899 
Allen  y.  Riddle    (Ala.),  37  So. 

680 907,  952,     978 

Allen  V.  Rundle,  50  Conn.  9 . . 

16,    576 
Allen  ▼.  Smith,  129  U.  S.  465. 

43,  892,  963,  967 
Allen  y.  Smith,  10  Mass.  308..  641 
Allen  y.  Stingel,  95  Mich.  195. 

507,    603 
Allen  y.  Tritch,  5  Colo.  222... 

764,     820 
Allen    y.    Trustees    of    Ashley 

School  Fund,  102  Mass.  262.   1038 
Allen  y.  Vestal,  60  Ind.  245... 

821,     850 

Allen  y.  White,  17  Vt.  69 671 

Allen  y.  Wheeler,  70  Mass.  123. 

521,     996 
AUentown  Bank  y.  Beck,  49  Pa. 

St.  394 563 

Alley  y.  Connell,  40  Tenn.  578. 

691,     696 
Alley  y.  Daniel,  75  Ala.  403.-.. 

151,     157 
Allgear  y.  Walsh,  24  Mo.  App. 

134 652 

Alliance  Trust  Co.  y.  O'Brien, 

32  Or.  333    709,     720 

Allis  y.  Newman,  33  Neb.  597.     806 
Allison  y.  Hagan,  12  Ney.  38.. 

632,  639,  668,  727,     728 
Allison  y.   Weller,   3  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  608 819 

AUyn  V.  Thurston,  53  N.  Y.  622. 

790,  792,     842 
Almond    y.    Gairdner,    76    Ga. 

699 1001 

Almond  y.  Wilson,  75  Va.  613.     870 
Almy  y.  Piatt,  16  Wis.  169... 


PAGE 

1041,  1044 
Alnutt  y.  Leper,  48  Mo.  319. . .  774 
Alsop  y.  Catlett»  97  Va.  364... 

538,    979 
Alston  y.  Rowles,  13  Fla.  117.. 

36,  38,     363 
Alt  y.   Lafayette  Bank,  9  Mo. 

App.  91 157 

Alton  y.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4  Ch. 

622 6,    239 

Altschuler  y.   Coburn,   38   Neb. 

881 947 

Alyarez  y.  Bowden,  39  Fla.  450.  977 
Amaker  y.  New,  33  S.  C.  28. . .  835 
American  Academy  of  Music  y. 

Smith,  54  Pa.  St.  130 28 

American    Agricultural    Chemi- 
cal Co.  y.  Huntington,  99  Me. 

361 179,  817,  1016 

American    Brewing    Co.  y.  Mc- 

Cruder,  17  Ky.  L,  Rep.  762.     580 
American  Forcite  Powder  Mfg. 

Co.  y.  Hanna,   31   App.   Diy. 

(N.  Y.)   317...  117,  284,  287,     902 
American  Freehold    Land,    etc., 

Co.  y.  Maxwell,  39  Fla.  489. 

142,  148,  660,  897,    969 
American    Hoist,    etc.,    Co.    y. 

Hall,  208  111.  597 .. .  895,  951,     979 
American  Lumber,   etc.,   Co.   y. 

Taylor,  14  Am.  B.  R.  231...   1167 
American  Nat.  Bank  y.  Thorn- 
burrow,   109  Mo.  App.  639.. 

284,  340,  342,     903 
American  Nat.  Bank  y.  Viterbo, 

46  La.  Ann.  1313 396 

American     Net.,    etc.,     Co.     y. 

Mayo,  97  Va.   182.. 225,  867,     894 
American   Trust   Co.   y.   Wallis 

(C.  C.  A.),  11  Am.  B.  R.  360.   1178 
American  Varnish  Co.  v.  Reed, 

154  Ind.  88 892,  907,     962 

Ames  V.  Dorroh,  76  Miss.  187. 

206,  266,  311,  341,  669,  680,     902 
Amos  y.  Gilman,  51  Mass.  239. 

1234,  1235 


Table  of  Cases. 


XXXI 


PAOB 

Ames  T.  Gilmore,  59  Mo.  637 . . 

231,  232,     355 
Ames    T.    Sheehan,    161    Mass. 

274 760 

Ames  Iron  Works    v.    Warren, 

76  Ind.  612    86 

Ammcmdson  v.  Ryan,    111    HI. 

506 162 

Amoes  v.  Robinson,  -2  Har.  &  J. 

(Md.)  320 303 

Amsden  v.   Fitch,  67  Vt.  522..     245 
Amsden      v.      Manchester,      40 

Barb.    (N.  Y.)    158 

924,  939,     942 
Amsinck  v.  Bean,  22  Wall.   (U. 

S.)   395 1159 

Amundson  v.  Wilson,  11  N.  D. 

193 774 

Amy  V.  Ramsey,  4  Mo.  505 665 

Anbic  V.  Gil,  2  La.  Ann.  342..     652 
Anders  v.  Barton,  3  Colo.  App. 

324 75 

Anderson  v.  Anderson,  64  Ala. 

403.  .12,  13,  16,  177,  182,  343,     585 
Anderson  v.   Anderson,   80  Ky. 

638.   361 

Anderson  v.  Anderson,  4  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  579. 373,     811 

Anderson    v.    Bachs,    59    Mass. 

Ill 466 

Anderson  v.  Belcher,  1  Hill  (S. 

C),  246 732 

Anderson  v.  Blood,    152   N.    Y. 

285 614 

Anderson   v.   Bradford,   28  Ky. 

69 69,   177,   787,     804 

Anderson  t.  Brooks,  11  Ala.  953     557 
Anderson  ▼.  Brown,  72  Ga.  713. 

69,  209,^  641,     765 
Anderson  y.  Dunn,  19  Ark.  650. 

209,  635,     765 
Anderson  v.  Etter,  102  Ind.  115. 

15,  69,  218,     635 
Anderson   v.    Fuller,    1   McMul. 

Eq.   (S.  C.)    27 

432,  563,  691,  692,     694 


PAGE 

Anderson    v.    Green,    7    J.   J. 

Marsh    (Ky.),  448 219 

Anderson  v.  Hooks,  9  Ala.  704. 

13,  333,     598 
Anderson  v.  Hunn,  5  Hun,   79 

(N.  Y.) 199,     785 

Anderson  v.  Kinley,    90    Iowa, 

554 1005 

Anderson     v.     Lassen     County 

Bank,  140  Cal.  695... 42,  44,     856 
Anderson  v.  Lindberg,  64  Minn. 

476 850,     857 

Anderson  v.  McNeal,   82   Miss. 

542 810 

Anderson      v.      Mossy      Creek 

Woolen    Mills    Co.,    100    Va. 

420 613,  816,     827 

Anderson  v.  Mundo  &  McGraw, 

25  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1644 150 

Anderson  v.  Odell,  51  Mich.  492     152 
Anderson  v.  Pilgram,  41   S.  C. 

423 583 

Anderson     v.     Provident     Life, 

etc.,  Co.,  25  Wash.  20... 763,     764 
Anderson  t.  Rhodus,    12    Rich. 

Eq.    (S.   C.)    104... 641,     654 

Anderson  v.  Roberts,  18  Johns. 

(N.  Y.)    515 191,  720,     723 

Anderson  v.  Smith,   '5    Blackf. 

(Ind.)    395 305,  459,  476,     477 

Anderson   v.   Temple,    4    Burr. 

2235 K 1150 

Anderson   v.   Tuttle,   26   N.    J. 

Eq.  144 640 

Anderson  v.  Tydings,  3  Md.  Ch. 

167 460,    471 

Anderson  v.  Warner,  5  111.  App. 

416 593,  1000 

Andreae    v.    Bourke,    33    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)   638... 231,  233,     353 
Andress  v.  Lewis,  1  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 

293 351 

Andrews  v.  Donnerstag,  171  HI. 

329 843,   856,   861,   794,  1018 

Andrews  v.  Durant,    18    N.  Y. 

496 775,     785 


i^XXll 


Table  of  Cases* 


PAOI 

Andrews  v.    Filmore^  46   Mich. 

316 683 

Andrews  v.  Jones,  10  Ala.  400. 

29,  266,  322,  329,     906 
Andrews  v.   Kaufmans,   60  Ga. 

669 478 

Andrews   v.   Lewis^    1    Pa.   Co. 

Ot.  293 418,     422 

Andrews  v.   Marshall,    48    Me. 

46 636 

Andrews  v.  Marshall,    43    Me. 

272 660,     735 

Andrus  v.  Burke,  61  N.  J.  Eq. 

297 253,  562 

Angell  V.  Draper,   1   Vem.  Ch. 

(Eng.)   399 186 

Angell    v.    Pickard,    61    Mich. 

661 290 

667,  910,  915,  918,  929,     946 
Anglin  v.  Conley,  114  Ky.  741. 

201,  240,     563 
Anglin  v.  Conley,    27    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  1177 680 

Anglo-American    Packing,    etc., 

Co.  T.  Baier,  31  111.  App.  653.    914 
Angrave  v.  Stone,  26  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)  167. . .  .572,  924,  968,    971 
Anheuser-Busch     Brew.     Assoc. 

T.    McGowan,    49    La.    Ann. 

630 42,      43 

Annett  ▼.  Coffey,  1   Colo.  App. 

34 866 

Annin  v.  Annin,  24  N.  J.  Eq. 

184 337,   376,   696,   700,     816 

Annis  v.  Bonar,  86  111.  128 299 

Annis    v.    Butterfield,    99    Me. 

181 204,  1183 

Anniston  Iron  Co.  ▼.  Anniston 

Rolling  Mill  Co.,  11   Am.  B. 

R.  200 1094,  1101 

Anonymous,  2  Desaus.  Eq.    (S. 

C.)   304 969,  961,     971 

Ansell   V.    Cox,   50    S.   E.    (W. 

Va.)   806 336 

Ansorge  v.  Barth,  88  Wis.  653.       62 
Anthes    v.    Schroeder,    3    Neb. 


PACHB 

(Unoff.)  604 178 

Anthony  v.  Boyd,  16  R.  I.  495.  718 
Anthony  v.  Wade,  64  Ky.  110.  162 
Anthony  v.  Wheatons,  7  R.  I. 

490 623,     544 

Anthony  v.  Wood,  96  N.  Y.  180. 

742,  743,    762 
Anthracite    Ins.    Co.   v.   Sears, 

109  Mass.  383 98,     120 

Antrim  y.  Kelly,    1    Fed.  Cas. 

No.  494 1138 

Antram  y.  Burch,  84  Mo.  App. 

266 669 

Appeal    of    Bardwell,    1    Lane. 

Bar  (Pa.)   Dec.  18.. 969,  960,    972 
Appeal  of  Blakley,    7    Pa.    St 

449 474 

Appeal  of  Brown,    86    Pa.    St. 

624 110,     381 

Appeal    of    Byrod,    31    Pa.    St 

241 68,  211,  1034 

Appeal  of  Candee,  193  Pa.  St. 

644 464,    474 

Appeal  of  Craig,  77  Pa.  St.  448  667 
Appeal  of  Dungan,  88  Pa.  St. 

414 1029 

Appeal  of  Fowler,    87    Pa.    St 

449 1044,  1045 

Appeal  of  Frank,    69    Pa.    St 

190 322,    324 

Appeal  of  Haak,  100  Pa.  St  59. 

85,  1031 

Appeal  of  Henderson,  133  Pa. 

St.  399 1032 

Appeal  of  Hoffman,  44  Pa.  St. 

96 1034 

Appeal  of  Jones,  62  Pa.  St.  324.  322 
Appeal  of  Kelly,  77  Pa.  St  232.  340 
Appeal  of  Kisteryock,    61    Pa. 

St  483 573 

Appeal  of  Lenning.  93  Pa.  St 

301 334 

Appeal  of  Mackason,  42  Pa.  St 

330. 418,  422,  423,     424 

Appeal  of  Mead,  46  Conn.  417.     442 


Table  of  Cases. 


ZXXlll 


Appeal  of  Meeidey,  102  Pa.  8t 

536 238,     370 

Appeal  of  Morgan,  20  Pa.  St. 

162 475 

Appeal  of  Nippes,    76    Pa.    St. 

472 268 

Appeal  of  NuBbanm,  1  Pa.  Gas. 

109 1037 

Appeal  of  Second    Nat.    Bank, 

85  Pa.  St.  628 334 

Appeal    of   Sharpless,    140    Pa. 

St.  63 205 

Appeal  of  Winch,    61    Pa.    St. 

424. 71,     763 

Appeal  of  Woolston,  61  Pa.  St. 

452 362,    903 

Appenon  ▼.  Bnigett,    33    Ark. 

328 231,  620,  663,  1021 

Apperaon  ▼.  Ford,  23  Ark.  746.  708 
Apple  y.  Ghmong,  47  Miss.  189.  106 
Applebj    y.    Lehman,    61     La. 

Ann.  473 468 

Applegarth  ▼.  Wagner,  86  Md. 

468 260 

Applegate     y.     Applegate,    107 

Iowa,   312    726,   834,    840 

Applegate    y.    Dowell,    16    Or. 

613 1026 

Appleton  y.  Bancroft,  61  Mass. 

231 644 

Appoloe  y.  Bradj,   1   C.  C.  A. 

299. 1099 

Apponang  Bleaching,    etc.^    Co. 

y.  RawBon,  22  R.  I.  123 664 

Apthorpe    y.    Oomstoek,    Hopk. 

(N.  Y.)   143 876 

Arbertoli  y.  Branham,  80  Gal. 

631 862 

Arlmekle    Bros.    Coffee    Co.    y. 

Werner,  77  Tex.  43 774,    805 

Arehenhold  y.  B.  C.  Eyans  Co., 

11  Tex.  Ciy.  App.'  138 823 

Archer  y.  Long,  38  S.  C.  272. . 

884,  941,  1004 
Archer  v.  O'Brien,  7  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  146 466,  495,  496 

e 


'      PAQS 

Ardis  y.  Theos,  47  La.  Ann. 

1436 371 

Arete  y.  Klooe,  89  Minn.  432 . .     962 
ArgBnti  y.  San  Francisoo,  6  Cal. 

677 620 

Argo  V.  Fox,  96  111.  App.  610 , .       45 
Arkansas  City  Bank  y.  Camidy, 

71  Mo.  App.  186 87 

Arkanau  Nat.  Bank  y.  Sparks 

(Ark.),  103  N.  W.  626 1166 

Armfield  v.  ^rmfield,  1  Freem. 

Ch.   (Miss.)   311   ...180,  322,    707 
Armington  y.  Ran,  100  Pa.  St. 

106 184 

Armour  Packing  Co.  y.  London, 

63  S.  C.  639... 690,  693,  697,  1033 
Armstrong  v.  Bailey,  43  W.  Va. 

778 438 

Armstrong  y.   Croft,   71    Tenn. 

1»1 789 

Armstrong  y.  Dunn,    143    Ind. 

438 816,     861 

Armstrong  y.   Elliott,   20   Tex. 

Ciy.  App.  41    611 

Armstrong  y.  Oil  Well  Supply 

Co.,  47  W.  Va.  455 478 

Armstrmig    y.    Tuttle,    34    Mo. 

432 418,    421 

Armstrong    Co.    y.    Elbert,    14 

Tex.  Ciy.  App.   141 

210,  212,  618,  744 
Am  y.  Hoersman,  26  Kan.  413.  459 
Amdt  y.  Harshaw,  53  Wis.  269  899 
Amett  y.  Coffey,  1   Colo.  App. 

34 187,  351,     933 

Arnett  y.  Wanett,  28  N.  C.  41 

178,  279 
Amholt  y.  Hartwig,  73  Mo.  485 

609,  705 
Arnold  y.  Eastin,  116  Ky.  686  977 
Arnold  y.  Estis,  92  N.  C.  162 . . 

163,  162 
Arnold  y.  Hagerman,  45  N.  J. 

Eq.   186 303 

Arnold  y.  Harris   (Mich.),  105 

N.  W.  744 920 


XXXIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

Arnold  v.  Hoschildt,  69  Minn. 

101 693,     716 

Arnold  v.   Maynard,   Fed'.  Cas. 

No.  661 1092 

Arnold  v.  Peoples,  13. Tex.  Civ. 

App.  26 670,     662 

Arnold  V.  Smith,  80  Ind.  417 . .  727 
Arnold  ▼.  Wilda,  77  Iowa,  693.  512 
Arnold!  v.   Stewart,   17   Quebec 

Super.  Ct.  262 114 

Arnot  V.  Beadle,  Lalor  (N.  Y.) 

181 762 

Amwine  v.  Carroll,  8  N.  J.  Eq. 

620 134 

Arper  v.  Baze,  9  Minn.  108 

734,     742 
Arthur     ▼.     Commercial,     etc.. 

Bank,    17   Miss.   394 

301,  413,  672 
Arthur  v.  Wallace,  8  Kan.  267  162 
Artman  v.   Giles,   166   Pa.   St. 

409 1046,  1046 

Arundell  v.  Phipps,  10  Ves.  Jr. 

139 262,     618 

Arzbacher   v.   Mayer,    63    Wis. 

380 B60 

AsbiU   V.    Standley    (Cal.),   31 

Pac.  738 »61 

Aflbuxy    Park   Bldg.,   etc.,    Aa^ 

Boc.  V.  Shepherd,  60  Atl.  (N. 

J.)   66 263 

Ashcroft  V.  Simmons,  163  Mass. 

437 621 

Ashcroft  V.   Walworth,  2  Fed. 

Cas.    No.    580 118 

Ashland   Coal,   etc.,   R.    Co.   ▼. 

McKenzie,  14  Ky.  L.  Rep.  636    972 
Asland  Sav.  Bank  ▼.  Mead,  63 

N.  H.  436 716 

Ashley  v.  Brown,  17  Ont.  App. 

600 4«3 

Ashmead  v.   Baylor,  69   N.   J. 

Eq.  469 310 

Ashmead   v.  Hean,   13   Pa.   St. 

684 688 

Ashurst  V.  Given,  6  Watts  &  S. 


PAGB 

(Pa.)    323 138 

Ashworth  v.  Outram,  6  Ch.  Div. 

923 108 

Askew  V.    Reynolds,   18   N.   C. 

367 049 

Aspden  v.  Nixon,  4  How.    (U. 

S.)  467 781 

Aspinall  y.  Jones,   17  Mo.  209 

678,  679,    787 
Astor  V.  Wells,  4  Wheat.    (U. 

S.)  466 678 

A  T.  Albro  &  Co.  v.  Fountain, 

162  N.  Y.  498 968 

Atchison,  etc.,  R.  Co.  v.  Hurley 

(C.  C.  A.),  18  Am.  B.  R.  396  1180 
Athey    v.    Knotts,  6    B.   Mon. 

(Ky.)  24 130^ 

Atkins  y.  Hoeberlin,  19  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  1547 469 

Atkins  y.  Spear,  49  Mass.  490.  1163 
Atkinson   v.    McNider,    106   N. 

W.    (Iowa)    604 

469,  561,  569,  679,     907 
Atkinson  v.  Phillips,  1  Md.  Ch. 

507 8,  69, 

249,  265,  295,  328,  339,  632,     902 
Atlanta  Nat.  Bank  y.  Fletcher, 

80  Ga.  »27 1046 

Atlantic  Nat.  Bank  y.  Travener, 

130  Mass.  407 369,  460,     613 

Atlas     Nat.     Bank    y.    Abram 

French   Sons  Co.,     134    Fed. 

746 671,    977 

Atlas  Nat.  Bank  y.  John  Moran 

Packing  Co.,   138  Mo.  59...     770 
Atlas  Nat.   Bank  y.  More,  152 

111.  528 43,  45,     756 

Attorney    General    y.    Harmer, 

16  Grant  Cb.  533 963 

Atwater     y.     American     Exch. 

Nat.  Bank,  152  111.  606 1036 

Atwater     y.     Manchester  Say. 

Bank,   46   Minn.   341 47,      49 

Atwell  y.  Miller,  6  Md.  10..  541 
Atwater  y.  Seeley,  2  Fed.  133. .  645 
Atwill  y.  Belden,  1  La.  504...   1028 


Table  of  Cases. 


Atwood  V.   Dolan.   34  W.   Va. 


563 


Atwood  Y.  Holcomb,    39  Conn. 

270 110, 

Atwood  v.  Irnpson,  20  N.  J.  £q. 

150 575,  581,  588,  613, 

Att7.-Q€n.  ▼.  Harmer,  16  Grant 

Cr.  (U.  C.)  533 

463,  464,  466, 
Atty.-Gen.     v.     Newcombe,     14 

V«.  Jr.   1 

Auburgh   t.   Lydston,    117    111. 

App.  674 

Auburn  Exch.   Baidi:  v.   Fitch, 

48  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  344. . .  .456, 

487,  489,  401,  492,  495,  497, 
Augiiat  y.   Seeskind,   42   Tenn. 

166 

Augusta   Say.    Bank  y.    Croas- 

man    (Me.),  7  Atl.  396 

36,  136,  694,  758,  895, 
Augusta  8ay.  Bank  y.  Stelling, 

31  S.  C.  360 

Aulick  V.  Reed,  104  Ky.  465. . 
Aulman  y.    Aulman,   71    Iowa, 

124  .  . 459,  487,  492, 

Ault  y.  Eller,  38  Mo.  App.  698 

91,  146, 
Aultman  y.  Booth,  95  Mo.  383 
Anltmao  y.  George,  12  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.  467 141, 

Aultman  y.   Heiney,    59    Iowa, 

654 

Aultmaji  y.   Hudleston,  31   111. 

App.  556 

Aultman  y.  Obermeyer,  6  Neb. 

260. 

Aultman  y.   Salinas,  48  S.   C. 

299 161, 

Aultman  y.  Utsey,  34  S.  C.  559 
Aultman   &   Oo.    y.    Pikop,   56 

Minn.  531 

Aultman  &  Co.   y.  Witcik,  60 

lowa^  762  .  .  

Anltman  &  Taylor  Co.  y.  Dalen, 

56  3^Iinn.  631 


PAGB  PAQB 

Aultman,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Syme,  23 

111  App.    Div.    (N.   Y.)    344....     278 

Aultman  &  Taylor  Co.  y.  Weir, 

379  34  111.  App.  615 583,     593 

Aurand  y.  Shaffer,  43  Pa.  St. 

618  363 898 

Aufitin  y.    A.    &    W.   Sprague 

Mfg.  Co.,   14  R.  I.  464 918 

495      Austin    y.    Barrows,    41    Conn. 

287 756 

864      Austin  y.  Bell,  20  Johns.    (N. 

Y.)   442 71,    412 

357      Austin  y.    Bowman,   81    Iowa, 

277 395 

Austin  y.  Bruner,  169  111.   178 

510  773,  775,     790 

Austin  y.  Bruner,  65  111.  App. 

778  301 776 

Austin  y.  Figueira^  7  Paige  ( N. 

Y.),  56 771 

973      Austin  y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  47 

ni.  App.  224 

814  799,  344,  387,     799 

876      Austin  y.  Johnson,  26  Tenn.  191 

414,  416,     428 
593      Austin  y.  Morris,   23  S.  O.  393 

778,  797 
147  Austin  y.  Soule,  36  Vt.  645...  557 
139      Austin  y.  Winton,  1  Hen.  &  M. 

(Va.)  33 644,    660 

146      Autrey  y.  Bowen,  7  Colo.  App. 

408 553 

593      Ayart  y.  His  Creditors,  8  Mart. 

N.  S.    (La.)    528 835 

339      Ayerill  y.  Loucks,  6  Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   70 638 

397      Ayery  y.  Eastes,  18  Kan.  505.     459 

Ayery  y.  Johann,  27  Wis.  246 
166  269,     611 

994      Ayery  y.  Mead,  12  St.  Kep.  (N. 

Y.)   293 884 

91      Ayery  y.  Street,  6  Watts  (Pa.), 

247 240,  247,  254,  563,     986 

703      Avery  y.  Wilson,  47  S.  C.  78.. . 

16,     94 
95      Ayer  y.  Bartlett,  23  Mass.  71. .       34 


XXXYl 


Table  of  Caus. 


I 


PAGB 

AyerB  v.  AdanM,  82  Ind.  109..     473 
Ayers  v.  Harreil,  111  Ga.  864 

268,  283,  285 
Ayers  ▼.  Hulated,  15  Conn.  504  307 
Ayers  t.   McCandless,   147   Pa. 

St.   49 543,    550 

Ayers  ▼.  Wolcott,  66  Neb.  712 

190,  193,  348,  885,  886,  895,    910 
Ayen  v.  Woloott,  62  Neb.  805 

352,    586 
Axtell   ▼.   CuUeB,    3    HI.  App. 

627 597 

B 
Babbett  v.   Burgess,   Fed.   Gas. 

No.  693 1179 

Babbitt  ▼.  Kelly,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

335 1168 

Baby  ▼.   RoBe»  Ont.   Pr.  440.. 

112,     114 
Baboock   v.    Ecklcr,    24   N.    Y. 

623 7,9,  179, 

264,  281,  346,  573,  928,  985,  1138 
Babcock  v.  Hamilton,  64  Iowa, 

658 179 

Bach  V.  Leopold,  8  La.  Ann.  386    777 
Bacbman  v.  Packard,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  709 ,. . . .   1208 

Bacbman  y.  Sepulveda,  39  Gal. 

688 821,  1014 

Baebs  y.  Tomlinson,  1  St.  Kep. 

(N.  Y.)  484 130,     139 

Backer  y.  Meyer,  43  Fed.  702.     168 
Backhouae  y.  Jett,  2  Fed.  Gas. 

No.  710  .  .646,  674,  685,  688,    690 
Backman  y.  Secrest,  2  Rich.  £q. 

54 344 

Bacon  y.  Bonham,  27  N.  J.  Eq. 

212   548 

Bacon  y.  Harris,  62  Fed.  99. . .  212 
Bacon  y.  P.  Brockman  Commis- 
sion Co.,  48  Neb.  365.. 436,  445 
Bacon  v.  Raybould.  4  Utah,  367  49 
Bacon  y.  Scannell,  9  Cal.  271.  534 
Baden     v.     Bertenshaw    (Kan. 

Sup.  a.),  11  Am.  B.  R.  308.   1164 
Badger  v.  Story,  16  N.  H.   168 

251,  441,  581,  922,  923,     930 


PAOB 

Badlam'    y.    Tucker,  18    liass. 

389 35,  521,  540,    541 

Badtian  y.  Dougherty,  3  Phila. 

(Pa.)   30 961 

Baer  y.  Lisman,    85  Mo.  App. 

317 574 

Baer  y.  Pfaff,  44  Mo.  App.  35 

107,  114 
Baer  y.  Rooks,  50  Fed.  898. . . .  1004 
Baer  Sons  Grocer  Go>.  y.  Will- 
iams, 43  W.  Va.  323.. 582,.  583 
Bagg  y.  Jerome,  7  MSch.  145. .  986 
Bailey  y.  American  Nat.  Bank 

(Colo.  App.),  54  Pac.  912.. 

760,  761 
Bailey  y.  Bailey,  61  Me.  361 . .  202 
Bail^  y.  Burton,  8  Wend.  (N. 

Y.)  339 

82,  198,  303,  782,  812,    815 
Bailey  y.  Chase,    18  La.  Ann. 

732 443 

Bailey  y.  Cheatham,  4  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  351 229,  606,    658 

Bailey    y.    Crittenden,    3  Tex. 

Ciy.  App.  Cas.  Sec.  179  ... .     682 
Bailey  y.  Fransioli,    101   App. 

Diy.  (N.  Y.)   140 

407,  614,  906,  909,    971 
Bailey  y.  Gardner,  31  W.  Va. 

94 106,     108 

Bailey  y.  Gloyer,  21  Wall.   (U. 

S.)  342 864,  1225,  1235 

Baily  y.  Hornthal,    154   N.   Y. 

648 1023 

Bailey  y.  Kansas  Mfg.  Co.,  32 

Kan.  73 368 

Bailey  y.  Johnson,  9  Colo.  365  552 
Bailey  y.  Leyy,  115  Ala.  665..  904 
Bailey  y.  littell,  24  Ner.  294. . 

163,  160 
Bailey  y.  Loeb,   Fed.  Cas.  No. 

739 1122 

Bailey  y.  Nallou,  69  N.  H.  414  280 
Bailey  y.  Roes,  20  N.  H.  302 . . 

697,  745 
Bailey  y.  Ryder,  10  N.  Y.  363.  867 
Baker  y.  Bartol,  6  Cal.  483..     815 


Table  of  Casbb. 


xxxvii 


PAQB 

V.  BliM,  3&  K.  Y.  70. . . . 

615,  715 
Baker  y.  Chandler,  51  Ind.  85  98 
Baker  ▼.   D0I7118,  34  Ky.  220 

380,  759 
Baker  ir.  Drake   (Ala.),  41  So. 

845 61 

Baker   t.  Georgi,  10  Aipp,  J>tv, 

(N.  T.)  249 512,     514 

Baker  t.  Oilman,  52  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)   26 180,     195 

Baker  ▼.  Harvey,  133  Mo.  453.  305 
Baker  ▼.  Hines,  102  Ky.  329.. .  160 
Baker  ▼.  HoUia,  84  Iowa,  682  356 
Baker  t.  Humphrey,  101  U.  8. 

404 13 

Baker  t.  Kinnaird,  94  Ky.  5. .  815 
Baker  ▼.  Lyman,  53  Oa.  339. .  282 
Baker  y.  Naglee,  82  Va.  876. .  1043 
Baker  y.  Pottie,  48  ICinn.  479 

521,  560 
Baker  y.   Potts^  73  A^.  Div. 

O^.  Y.)  29 801,800,     902 

Baker  y.  WatU,  101  Va.  702. .  898 
Baker,  etc..  Go.    y.    Schneider, 

85  Mo.  Ai^  412 538,    997 

Balcom  y.  New  York  Life  Ina., 

etc.,  Oo.,  11  P&ige   (N.  Y.), 

454  . 877 

Baldwin  y.  Bond,  45  La.  Ann. 

1012 567,    910 

Baldwin  y.  Bucklaad,  11  meh. 

389 571 

Baldwin  y.  Burt,  43  Neb.  245. 

69,     177 
Baldwin  y.  Oawthome,  19  Vee. 

Jr.  16« 654 

Baldwin  y.  Dayia,  118  Iowa»  36  656 
Baldwin  y.  Fiaah,  58  Miss.  593 

472,  480,    928 

Baldwin  y.  Harron,  19  Pa.  Go. 

Ct  634 318 

Baldwin  y.  Heil,  155  Ind.  682.  358 
Baldwin  y.  J<din0on,  8  Ark.  260  363 
Baldwin  y.  June^  68  Hun  (N. 


PAGE 

Y.),  284 696,  697,  1037 

Baldwin  y.   McDonald,  48   La. 

Ann.  1460 91,      94 

Baldwin  y.  Feet,  22  Tex.  708. . 

414,  417,  428,     435 
Baldwin  v.  Rogers,    28    Minn. 

544 95,  162,     166 

Baldwin  y.  Ryan,  3  Thompa.  & 

C.  (N.  Y.)  251 140 

Baldwin  v.   Short,    125    N.  Y. 

553 

71,  229,  331,  695,  924,  925,     943 
Baldwin  y.   Thayer,  71   N.   H. 

257 ...629,     541 

Baldwin   y.   Tattle,    23    Iowa, 

66 212,     898 

Balke  y.  Lowe,  3  Desausa   (S. 

C.),  263 662 

Ball  V.  Ballantyne,    11    Grant 

Gh.   (Can.)   199 294 

Ball  y.   Gallahan,  95  111.  App. 

615  .. 579,    593 

BaU  y.   Campbell,  134  Pa.  St. 

602 839 

Ball  y.  Loomis,  29  N.  Y.  412. .     519 
Ball  v.   OTieal,   64   Mo.    App. 

388 230 

Ball  y.  Phenide,  94  Mich.  355     706 
Ballard  y.  Ghewning,  49  W.  Va. 

508 436,     965 

Ballard  y.  Eckman,  20  Fla.  661 

250,  271 
Ballard  y.  Jonea,  25  Tenn.  455 

655,  661 
Ballard  y.  Winter,  39  Conn.  179  86 
Ballentine  y.  Beall,  4  IlL  203. 

782,  815,  1023 
Ballou  y.  Andrews    Bank  Co., 

128  Gal.  562 

100,  101,  711,  058,  1001,  1002 
Ballou  y.  Jones,   13  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  629 78$ 

Ballou  y.   Minard,    2    Brewst. 

(Pa.)  560 47 

Balls  y.  Balls,  69  Md.  388...   1041 


XXXVllI 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Baltimore  y.   Williams,   6  Md. 

235 15 

Baltimore  City    Com.    Bank  ▼. 

Keams  (Md.),  59  AU.  1010.     459 
Baltimore,  etc.,  R.  Co.  v.  Glenn, 

28  Md.  287    87 

Baltimore,  etc.,  R.  Co.  v.  Hoge, 

34  Pa.  8t.  214.  .916,  930,  937,     996 
Baltimore,  etc.,  R.  Co.  v.  Ken- 
sington Land  Co.,  175  Pa.  St. 

95 745 

Baltimore    High    Grade    Brick 

Co.  V.  Amos,  95  Md.  571 

184,  954,     976 
Balz  V.  Nelscm,  171  Mo.  682.. 

161,    373 
Bamberger    v.    Schoolfield,    160 

U.  S.  149 430,  438,    439 

448,  451,  467,  471,  482,  492 
495,  592,  909,  912 
Banoord  v.   Kuhn,  36  Pa.  St. 

383 138,  402 

Bancroft  v.  Curtis,    108    Mass. 

47 141 

Bancroft  ▼.   Blizzard,   13  Ohio, 

30 86,  576,     681 

Banfield  v.   Whipple,   96  Mass. 

13 460,  492,  494,     594 

Bangert  v.  Bangert,  13  Mo. 

App.  144 141 

Bangs  Milling  Co.  y.  Bums,  152 

Mo.  350 416,  460,     464 

Bangs  y.  Edwards,  88  Ala.  382. 

105,  106,    399 
Bank  y.  Durant,  22  N.  J.  Eq. 

35 231 

Bank   y.    Eames,    4    Abb.    Dec. 

(N.  Y.)    83    1025 

Bank  y.  Foster,  74  Tex.  516...  586 
Bank  y.  Irons,  28  N.  J.  Eq.  43.  581 
Bank  y.  Jones,  4  N.  Y.  497. . . .  1218 
Bank  y.  Leyy,  60  8.  E.  667  (N. 

C.) 1127 

Bank   y.   Marchand,    T.   U.   P. 

Charlt.    (Ga.)    247    183,    268 

Bank   of   Alabama  y.  McDade, 


PAGE 
4  Port  252 307,     651 

Bank  of  Alexandria  y.  Patton, 

1   Rob.    (Va.)    499 195,     328 

Bank    of    Atchison    County    y. 

Shackelford,     67     Mo.     App. 

475 449 

Bk.  of   British   North   America 

V.  Rattenbury,    7    Grant  Ch. 

(U.   C.)    383    190 

Bank  of  British  North  America 

y.   Suydam,   6  How.   Pr.    (N. 

Y.)   379 823,     874 

Bank  of  California    y.    Cowan, 

61   Fed.  871   845 

Bank  of  Conunerce    y.    Elliott, 

6  Am.  B.  R.  409 1113,  1235 

Bank  of   Commerce  y.    Eureka 

Brick,  etc.,  Co.,  108  Ala.  89. 

985,  997,    999 
Bank  of  Commerce  y.   Fowler, 

93  Wis.  241 

161,  167,  172,  685,     696 
Bank  of  Commerce    y.    Scholt- 

feldt,  40  Neb.   212 594,    602 

Bank  of  Georgia  y.  Higginbot- 

ton,  34  U.  S.  48 295 

Bank  of  Kentucky  y.   Allen,   7 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  596 1032 

Bank  of  Kinderhook  y.  Jenison, 

15  How.  Pr.   (N.  Y.)   41....       48 
Banks    Milling    Co.    y.    Bums, 

152  Mo.  350   596,    973 

Bank  of  Mobile  y.  Harris,  6  La. 

Ann.  811 413,    695 

Bank  of  Mobile  y.  Tishomingo 
.     Say.  Inst.,  62  Miss.  250.251,    443 
Bank  of  Montreal  y.  Condon,  11 

Manitoba,  366 582 

Bank     of     New     Hanoyer     y. 

Adrian,  116  N.  C.  537 657 

Bank  of  Sayannah  y.  Planters' 

Bank,  22  Ga.  466 478 

Bank  of  South  Carolina  y.  Bal- 
lard, 12  Rich.   (S.  C.)   259..     195 
Bank  of  South  Carolina  y.  Mit- 
chell, Rice  Eq.   (S.  C.)   389..     326 


Table  of  Cases. 


xxxix 


PACK 

Bank  of  Tipton  ▼.   Adair,   172 

Mo.  156 146 

Bank  of  U.  S.  ▼.  Brown,  2  Hill 

Eq.  (S.  C.)  131.... 328,  361,  362 
Bank  of  United  States  v.  Burke, 

4  Blackf.  (Ind.)  141...  1031,  1036 
Bank  of  U.  S.  v.  Ennis,  Wright 

(Ohio),  604 328 

Back  of  the  United   States  v. 

Lee,  Fed.  Gas.  No.  922 226 

Bank  of  Versailles  v.  Gutthrey, 
127   Mo.   189    166 

Bank  of  Wilk>WB  y.  Small,  144 
Ckl.  709 286,    407 

Bankard  y.  Shaw,   23   Pa.   Co. 
Ct.  661 340,    410 

Banner  t.  May^  2  Wash.  221.. 

525,    960 

Banner      y.      Robinson      (Ciy. 
App.),  34  S.  W.  355 253 

Banning  y.  Armstrong;  7  Minn. 

40 843 

Banning  y.  Marleau,    121    Oal. 

240 1004 

Banning  y.  Marleau,    133    Cal. 

485 192,    977 

Banning  y.  Marleau,   101   Gal. 

238 549,  550,    955 

Banning  y.  Purinton,  105  Iowa, 

642 285,  287,  853,     970 

Bannister  y.   Phelps,    81    Wis. 

266 582 

Banks  y.  GUpp,  12  G«t.  514...  314 
Bankea  y.    Lindemuth,   23   Pa. 

Co.  Gt  459   766 

Banks  y.  McCandless,   119  Qa. 

793 182,  205,  731,  953,     958 

Banta  y.  Terry,  2  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

202 329 

Banton  y.  &nith,  113  111.  481. 

311,    480 
Barber  y.  Goit,  144  Fed.  381 . . 

467,  572,  1205 
Barber  y.  Franklin,  8  Am.  B. 

R.  468 1223 

Barker  y.  Phillips.  11  Bob.  199    695 


PAQK 

Barber     y.     Phillips,    11    Rob. 

(La.)  190 588 

Barber  y.  Terrell,  54  Ga.  146. . 

240,     921 
Barbour  y.  Connecticut  Mut.  L. 
Ins.  Co.,  61   Conn.  240... 90,      94 
119,    121,    187.    191,  340,     347 

348,  350 
Barclay  y.  Plant,  50  Ala.  509.  366 
Barclay  y.  Smith,  107  111.  349.  117 
Bardes  y.  Bank,  178  U.  S.  524.  1133 
1167,  1170,  1207,  1208,  1210 
1211,  1220,  1227,  1228 
Bardy  y.  Ellison,  3  N.  G.  533. .  242 
Barger  y.  Buckland,  28  Gratt. 

(Va.)    850 1021 

Barhydt  y.  Perry,  57  Iowa,  416. 

195,  244,  270 
Barker  y.  Archer,  49  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  80  483 

Barker    y.    Battey,     62     Kan. 

584 767,    813 

Barker  y.  Bankers'  Assoc.,  Fed. 

Gas.   No.   986    1223 

Barker  y.  Barker,  2  Woods  (U. 

8.),  87 1118,  1139 

Barker  y.  Boyd,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1389 621 

Barker  y.  Dayton,  28  Wis.  367. 

163,  165 
Barker  y.   Franklin,    37    Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)    292 

47,  292,  244,     596 
Baricer  y.  French,  18  Vt.  460. . 

443,  445 
Barker  y.  Lynch,  75  Wis.  624.  989 
Barker  y.  Woods,  1  Sandf.  Gh. 

(N.  Y.)    129 387 

Barkley  y.  Tapp,  87  Ind.  25. . .     283 
Barkow  y.  Sanger,  47  Wis.  500. 

228,  238,  317,  985,  1005 
Barkworth  y.  Palmer,  118  Mich. 

50 187,    348 

Barling   y.    Bishopp,    29    Beay. 

(Eng.)   417 190,  201,    240 

Barlow  y.  Fox,  203  Pa.  St.  114.    527 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Barnard  ▼.  Brown,  112  Ind.  53.    162 
Barnard  ▼.  Davis,  54  Ala.  555. 

407,    409 
Barnard    ▼.    Life    Ins.    Co.,    4 

Mackey    (D.  C),  63 458 

Barnard  v.   Norwich,  etc.,   Co., 

Fed.  Gas.   1,007    1122 

Bamcord  v.  Kuhn,  36  Pa.  St 

383 226 

Barnes  y.  Blacky    193    Pa.  St. 

447 327 

Barnes  t.  Kranse     (Tex.    OIt. 

App.),  53  S.  W.  92 937 

Barnes  y.  Morgan,  8  Hun   (K. 

Y.),  703 ;.117,    764 

Barnes   y.    Sammons,    128   Ind. 

596 205 

Barnes  y.   Vetterlein    (D.   C), 

16  FW..  218 280 

Barnes  Mfg.  Co.  y.  Norden,  7 

Am.  B.  R.  553 1118 

Bamett  y.  Fergus,  51  111.  352.     437 
Bamett  y.   Kinney,   147  U.   S. 

476 88 

Bamett  y.  Knight,  7  Colo.  365 .     159 
Bamett  y.  Vincent^  69  Tex.  685. 

382,  386,    938 
Barney     y.     Cutler,      1     Boot 

(Conn.),  489 85,    178 

Bamej  y.  Griffin,  2  K.  Y.  365. 

420,  429,    472 
Bamhart  y.  Grantham,  197  Pa. 

St.  502 ,..     925 

Baratley  y.  West,  27  Ala.  542.     668 
Bamum  y.   Farthing;  40  How. 

Pr.  25 347 

Bamum  y.  Haekett,  35  Vt.  77. 

1057,  1060 
Bamum  y.  Hempstead,  7  Paige 

(N.  Y.),  568   302,  479,    507 

Barr  y.  Bartram,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co., 

41  Conn.  502 1068 

Baron  y.  Brummer,  100  N.  Y. 

372 124,  127,    128 

Barr  y.  Bf^les,  96  Pa.  St.  31 . . 

986,    990 


PA6S 

Barr  y.  Church,  82  Wia.  882.. 

408,  510,    595 
Barr  y.  Hatch,  3  Ohio,  527. . . . 

207,  240,  432,  447,  461,    466 
500,  501,  563,     769 
Barr  y.  Reitz,  14  Pittsb.  L.  J. 

(Pa.)   421 542 

Barr  y.  Belte,  53  Pa.  St.  256. . 

527,  534,    990 
Barrack   y.   McCuUooh,   3   Jur. 

N.  S.   180   100,    101 

BarreU  y.  Adams,  26  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  635 184 

Barrett  y.  Cole,  49  N.  C.  40 . . .     536 
Barrett  y.  His  Creditors,  4  Rob. 

508 272,     580 

Barrett   y.    Lowrey,    77    Mich. 

668 840 

Barrett  y.  Kealon,  119  Pa.  St. 

171 576 

Barrett       y.       Reed,       Wright 

(Ohio),  700 817,  1032 

Barrineau     y.     McMurray,      3 

Brey.    (S.  C.)    204 219 

Barrow  y.  Bailey,  5  Fla.  9 

231,  250,  330,   354,  395,    697 

773,  1041 
Barrow  y.  Barrow«  2  Dick. 

(Eng.)  504 323 

Barrow    y.    Barrow,    108    Ind. 

345 188,  350,     640 

Barrow  y.  Pazton,  5  Johns.  (N. 

Y.)   258 519 

Barron  y.  Williams,  68  S.  C. 

280 154,     161 

Bartee  y.  Tompkins,   36  Tenn. 

623 870 

Ba'rtholow  y.   Bean,    18    Wall. 

(U.  8.)  635 1164 

Barth  y.  Heider,  7  D.  C.  71 . . . 

243,  800 
Bartles  y.  Dodd,  56  W.  Va.  383.  469 
Bartles  y.  Gibson,  17  Fed.  293. 

232,  354 
Bartlett  y.   Bartlett,    15    Neb. 

593 552 


Tabls  of  Cases. 


xli 


PACK 

BarUeit  t.  BarUett^    13    Keb. 

456 658 

Bartlett    t.    Behrena,    M    Mo. 

630 107 

Bartlett  t.   QeaTeni^r,  35   W. 

Va.  718 227,    Ml 

Barttett     y.     CheeebTongfa,     23 

Neb.  767 611,  804,    896 

Bartlett    ▼.    Decreet^  70  Mass. 

Ill 668 

Bartlet  t.  Teah  (C.  C),  1  Fed. 

768 1090 

BarUe^    v.    Umlried,    94    Mo. 

530 39 

Bartlett  ▼.  WiUiams,  18  Man. 

288 521,     552 

Barton  t.  Bartxm,  80  Ky.  218. 

874,  1050 
Bartxm  ▼.  Bnai,  87  Va^  385.. 

365,  462 
Barton  ▼.  Brown,  68  Oal.  11. .  157 
Barton  ▼.  Bryant,  2  Ind.  189. .  815 
Barton  ▼.  Morris,  15  Ohio,  408. 

632,  634 
Barton  ▼.  Sitlington,    128    Mo. 

164 428 

Bartcm    ▼•    Vanheythnyaen,    11 

Hare,  126 02,  133,  135,     136 

Bartcm  y.  White,  144  Maaa.  281     118 
Bartowr    y.  Vaaheythnyaen,    11 

Hare    (Eng.),   126 200 

Bartram  y.   Boma,   19  Ey.  L. 

Kep.  1295 988,  698,    701 

Bama  y.  Bidwell,  23  La.  Ann. 

163 871 

Barwiok    y.    Moyae,    74    Miaa. 

415 637 

Baaye  y.  Daniel,  1  Ind.  378...     392 
Baahineki  y.  Talbott,  9  Am.  B. 

R.  513 1202 

Baaey  y.  Daniel,  Smith  (Ind.), 

252 6,  587 

Base  y.  Citiaena'  Tniat  Go.,  32 

Ind.  App.  683   861 

Baaa  y.  Welsh,  39  Mo.  192. .. .  552 

Bass  y.  Wool!,  88  Ga.  427 43 


PAQB 

Bassett  y.  McKenna,  52  G(mn. 

437 192,    270 

Bassett  y.  St.  Albans  Hotel  Co., 

47  Vt.  313    774,    792 

Bastian  y.  Christesen,    34    La. 

Ann.  883 580 

Bastin  y.   Don^erty,   3   Phila. 

(Pa.)  30 965 

Baasinger  y.  Spangler,  9  Colo. 

175 525,  530,  531,    550 

Batayia   y.    Wallace,    102    Fed. 

240 607,  614,  914,     996 

Batchelder    &    Lincoln    Go.    y. 

Whitmore,  10  Am.  B.  R.  641.  122S^ 
Batchelder  y.  Garter,  2  Vt.  168.  557 
Bateman  y.  Ramsey,  San.  ft  Sc. 

459 42,       45 

Bates  Gbunly  Bank  y.  Gailey, 

177  Mo.  181... 238^  333,  973,    976 

Batea  y.  Garter,  5  Vt.  602 557 

Bates  y.  Gobb,  29  S.  G.  395.75,    801 
Bates  y.  Drake,  28  Wash.  447. 
13,  200,  204,  851,  854,  898,  959,    966 
Bates    y.    McGonnell,    31    Fed. 

558 697 

Batea  y.  Morris,  101  Ala.  282. 

105,    106 
Bates  y.  Flonsky,  28  Hun   (N. 

T.).  112 742,  1046 

Batea  y.  Van  Diyer,  102  Ala. 

249 465,  471,    492 

Batteraby     y.     Farrington,      1 

Swanst.    (Eng.)    106 326 

Battle  y.  Mayo,  102  K.  G.  413.     683 
Battle  y.  Reld,  68  Ala.  149. . . . 

789,  879,  1035 
Battle  y.  Street,  85  Tenn.  282.  634 
Baner    Qrocer    Go.    y.    McKee 

l^oe  Go.,  87  HI.  App.  434.. 

484,     685 

Bauer  Grocery  Ck).  y.  Smith,  1 
Mo.  App.  Repr.  439 70 

Bauer  Grocery  Go.  y.  Smith,  74 
Mo.  App.  419    348 

Baudue  y.  Hia  Greditora,  4  La. 
247 272,    680 


xlii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Baugh  y.  Barrett,  69  Iowa,  496.  155 
Baugh  ▼.  Boles,  35  Ind.  524. . .  806 
Baughman    v.    Penn,    33    Kan. 

504 617 

Bauknight   v.    Sloan,   etc.,    Co., 

17  Fla.  284 823,    870 

Baum  V.  BoBworth,  68  Wia.  196  32 
Baum  V.  Sauer,  117  Mo.  460...  965 
Baur  y.  Beall,  14  Colo.  383 .. .  526 
Bauskett  y.  Holsonback,  2  Rich. 

L.    (S.   C.)    624 70,     763 

Bayouset  y.  York,  18  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.  428 193 

Baxley   y.    Simmons,    132    Ala. 

117 488 

Baxter  y.  Hebberd,  6  St.  Rep. 

(N.  y.)    854   930 

Baxter  y.  Howell,  7  Tex.   CSv. 

App.  198 1000 

Baxter    y.    Meyers,    47    N.    W. 

(Iowa),  879 588 

Baxter  y.  Moses,  77  Me.  465 . . 

762,  774,  794,  796,  798,  842,     844 
Baxter  y.  Pritchard,   113  Iowa, 

422 970 

Baxter  y.  Sewell,  3  Md.  334 

265,  274,  279,  339,  676,     717 
Baxter     y.     Wheeler,    9    Pick. 

(Mass.)   21 481 

Bay  y.  CJook,  31  111.  336 

232,  267,  351,  854,    626 
Bayard    y.    Hoffman,  4  Johns. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)   450    ....20,  98,     101 
Bay  State  Iron  Go.  y.  Qoodall, 

39  N.  H.  223 1040 

Bay  y.  Sulliyan,  30  Mo.  191 . .  402 
Bayley  y.  Bayley,  66  N.  J.  Eq. 

84 777,    867 

Bayley  y.   Greenleaf,  7  Wheat. 

(U.  S.)    46 1115 

Bayless     y.     Elcan,    1    Cbldw. 

(Tenn.)   96 70,     177 

Bayne  y.  Miller,  103  111.  442 . . 

358,    360 
Baylor  y.   Brown,   3  Tex.   Ciy. 

App.  177 75,    314 

Baylor    y.    Smithers,     1     Litt. 


PACK 

(Ky.)    105 526 

Baze  y.  Arper,  6  Minn.  220. . .  940 
B.  C.  Eyans  &  Co.  y.  Guipel,  35 

S.  W.    (Tex.)   940 636,     676 

B.   C.  Eyans  Co.  y.  Reeyes,    6 

Tex.  Ciy.  App.  254 616 

Beach  y.  Atkinson,  87  Ga.  288 

42,  479 
Beach  y.  Baldwin,  14  Mo.  597 . .  107 
Beach  y.  Bestor,  45  HI.  341..  796 
Beach  y.  Bestor,  47  111.  521..  428 
Beach  y.  Boynton,  26  Vt.  725. .  1058 
Beach  y.  Catlin,  4  Day  (Conn.), 

284 675,    676 

Beach  y.  Hodgdbn,  66  Col.  187  814 
Beach  y.  Miller,  130  HI.  162 . .  272 
Beach  y.  White,  Walk.  (Mich.) 

495 , 279,     341 

Beadle  y.  Beadle,  40  Fed.  315 . . 

66,  639 
Beadlea  y.  Jonev,  9  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

986 796 

Beadles  y.  Miller,  51  Ky.  32. . .  580 
Beakley  y.  Nelson,  66  N.  J.  Eq. 

674 667 

Beal     y.      Warren,      2     Gray 

(Mass.),  447 221 

Beale  y.  Delaney,  6  Mart.  N.  S. 

(La.)  641 392 

Beale  y.  Hall,  22  Ga.  431.  .639,  652 
Beall  y.  Lehman  Dorr  Co.,  110 

Ala.  446 807,  863,  856,     860 

Beall  y.  Silyer,  2  Rand.   (Va.) 

401 1019 

Reals  y.    Guernsey,    8    Johns. 

(N.  Y.)  446  ..  .519,  583,  589,  693 
Beals  y.  Quinn,  101  Mass.  262.  1152 
Beaman  y.   Stewart,    19    Oolo. 

App.  226 311 

Beamish  y.   Pomeroy,  6  Grant 

Ch.  (U.  C.)   586  436 

Bean  y.  Brackett,  34  N.  H.  102  85 
Bean    y.    Hubbard,     4     Cush. 

(Mass.)  85 152 

Bean  y.  Patterscm,  12  Fed.  739 

865,    366 


Table  of  Cases. 


xliii 


PAcn 
Bean  ▼.  Pattenon,     122  U.  S. 

496 278,  472,     616 

Bean  ▼.  Smith,  2  FecL  Cas.  Xo. 

1,174 695,     721 

Bean   y.   Smith,   2   Mason    (U. 

S.),  252  .  .    ..769,  760,  794,  1019 
Bean,   etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v.   Spoke, 

etc.,  Co.,  12  Am.  B.  R.  610.. 

1084,  1086 
Bear  v.  Chase,  3  Am.  B.  R.  746 

1227,  1233 

Beard  ▼.  Blum,  64  Tex.  69 162 

Beard  ▼.  Runyan,  6  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

514 469 

Beards  ▼.  Wheeler,  11  Hnn  (N. 

Y.),  639 474,     492 

Beardaley  Scythe  Co.  y.  Foster, 

36  N.  Y.  661 771,  819,     842 

Beaaley  y.  Bray,  98  N.  C.  266. 

266,  681,  696,  986 
Beaaley  y.  Coggins,   12  Am.  B. 

R.  365 1204 

Beattie  y.  Pool,  13  S.  C.  379.. 

46,  46,    627 
Beattie  y.  Wenger,  24  Ont.  App. 

72 819 

Beatty  y.  Anderson  Coal  Min. 

Co.    (O.   C.  A.),    17  Am.  B. 

R.  738 1102 

Beatty  y.  Dudley,  80  Ky.  381 . .     482 
Beatty  y.  Dudl^,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

212 303 

Beatty  y.  Thompson,  23  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  1850 346 

Beaty  y.  Swarthout,    32  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  293 884 

Beaubien  y.  Perrault,  17  Quebec 

Super.  Ct.  410   698 

Beaumont  y.   Crane,   14   Mass. 

400 660 

Beattm<»it  y.   Thorpe,     1     Ves. 

(Eng.)   27 337 

Beayan  y.  Oxford,  6  DeG.   M. 

ft  6.  607 217 

Beayan  y.  Wheat,  14  U.  C.  C. 

P.  51    43 


PAOB 

Beayer  y.  Bare,  104  Pa.  St.  58 . 

109,  110 
Beayer   y.   Danyill    Shirt    Cb., 

69  111.  App.  320   297 

Beayers  y.  McKinley,  50  Kan. 

602 386 

Beayis  y.  Maguire,  7  Ont.  App. 

704 358 

Bank  y.  Brady,  7  La.  Ann.  124    391 
Beck  y.  Connell,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

500 1165 

Beck   y.    Parker,    65    Pa.     St. 

262 1071 

Beck  y.  Schultz  (N.  J.),  32  Atl. 

695 141 

Btecker   y.   Hammes,    2    Kulp. 

(Pa.)    404 638,    640 

Beckman  y.  Drake,  8  Mees.  ft 

W.  845 1198 

Beckham  y.  Secrest,  2  Rich.  £q. 

(S.  C.)  64  686 

Beckmau  y.    Noble,    115   Mich. 

523 460 

Beckwith  y.  Burrough,  14  R.  I. 

366 20,  100,    101 

Beddow  y.    Sheppard,  118  Ala. 

474 496,     513 

Bedell  y.  C»iase,  34  N.  Y.  386. . 

319,  476,  477,  569,  926,    945 
Bedford  y.  Penny,  58  Mich.  424 

690,  940,  946,     986 
Beebe  y.  De  Baum,  8  Ark.  510 

232,  364 
Beebe  y.  Saulter,  87  111.  518..  815 
Beecher  y.  Clark,    3  Fed.  Gas. 

Na  1223 

262,  338,  375,  586,  1118,  1139 
Beeckman    y.    Montgomery,   14 

N.  J.  Eq.  106 188,     361 

Beeler's      Heirs      y.      Bullitt's 

Heirs,  3  A.  K.  Marsh   (Ky.) 

280 31 

Beels  y.  Flynn,  28  Neb.  575 . . 

246,  622 
Beeman  y.  Cooper,  64  Vt.  306. .  1051 
Beers  y.  Aykworth,  41  Or.  261.     971 


zliv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Beers  v.  Dawioii,  8  Ga.  656..     520 
Beers  t.  Hsnliiiy  8  Am.  B.  R. 

745   1081,  1089 

Beers  t.  Lyon,  21  Conn.  604..     526 
Beeson  y.  Wiley,  28  Ala.  575. . 

272,  930 
BeethoTSD  Piano  Organ  Go.  ▼. 

C.  C.  Mc£wen  Co.,  69  N.  Y. 

Super  Ct.  7  856 

Behan  v.  Warfield,  90  Ky.  151 

231,   240,  247,   260,     773 
Beidier    y.     Qrane,    19   N.    E. 

(m.)  714 309 

Beidier  y.  Crane,  22  IlL  App. 

638 625,    626 

Beidier  y.  Crane^  135  111.  92.. 

170,  251,  413,  434,  441,  444,    695 
Beidier   y.    Douglass^     35     IlL 

App.  124 773,    796 

Beith  y.  Porter,  119  Mich.  365 

209,  766 
Belcher  y.  Arnold,  14  R.  I.  613  207 
Belcher  y.  BUck,  68  Ga.  93..  400 
Belden    y.    Younger,    76  Iowa, 

667   164,    966 

Belding  Say.  Bank    y.    Moore^ 

118  Mich.  160 460,    493 

Beliord  y.  Orane^  16  N.  J.  Eq. 

265 8,827,678,    683 

Belgard  y.  McLaughlin,  44  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  557 1012 

Beloit    Second    Nat    Bank    y. 

Merrill,  etc.,  Iron  Works,  81 

WU.  151 320 

Belknap  y.  Grooyer,  66  S.  W. 

(Tex.)   249 313 

Belknap  &  Go.  y.  Lyell  (Miss.), 

42  So.  799 1168 

Belknap  y.  Wendell,  21  N.  H. 

176 904 

Bell    y.    Beasl^,  18  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.  639 168 

B4dl  y.  Blaney,  6  N.  C.  171.. 

532,  533 
Bell  y.  Before,  96  111.  217.... 

162,  166,     572 


Bell  y.  Greenwood,  21  Ark.  249 

179,    668 
Bell     y.     HoUenbach,     Wright 

(Ohio),  751 109,    337 

Bell  y.  Mcaoskey,  155  Pa.  St 

319 539 

Bell    y.    Merrifleld,   109  N.  Y. 

202 866,  867,  1024 

Bell  y.  Thompson,  3  Mo.  84 . . 

460,  472,    490 
Bell  y.  Throop,  140  Pa.  St  641 

43,  596,  917 
Bell  y.  Wils<Hi,  52  Ark.  171..  631 
Bellany  y.  Bellany,  6  Fla.  62. .  631 
BeUows  y.  WeUs,  86  Vt  599. .     566 

Belt  y.  Bagust,  27  Tex.  471 

686,   676,   920,   024,    939 
Bender    y.    Kingman,  64   N^. 

766 610,  615,  944,    986 

Bender  y.  Kingman,  62  Neb. 

469 987 

Bendetaon  y.  Moody,  100  Mich. 

553    226,  255,  257,  620,     943 

Benedict  y.  Deshel,  177  N.  Y.  1 

618,    1166,  1167 
Benedict  y.  Market  Nat.  Bank, 

4  Ohio  N.  Y.  231 813 

Benedict  y.  Renfro,  75  Ala.  121 

236,    418 
Bener   y.   Edgington,  76  Iowa, 

105 110,  1052 

Benford   y.    Schell,  55  Pa.  8t 

893 541,     548 

Benham  y.  Ham,  5  Wash.  128. . 

783,    797 
Benjamin  y.  Chandler,  15  Am. 
B.  R.  439  ..1152,  1164,  1170,  1191 
jamin  y.  Madden,  94  Va.  66 

538,    656 
y.    McBlwaine-Bich- 
ards  Go.,  10  Ind.  App.  76  .. 

940,    950 
Benne  y.  Schnecko,  100  Mo.  250 

45,  76,  77,  227,  245,  361 
Bennett    y.    Bedford  Bank,   11 
Mass.  421 279 


Table  of  Cassb. 


xlv 


PAQC 

Bennett  t.     Boeliold,    123   lU. 

311 396 

Bennett  t.  Bennett,  37  W.  Va. 

396 368,    514 

Bennett  ▼.  Huteon,  33  Ark.  762 

36,  161,     169 
Bennett  ▼.  McDcHiald,  60  Neb. 

47   916 

Bennett   t.   McDonald,  59  Neb. 

234 461,    488 

Bennett   t.    MeOuire,  58  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  625  .  .204,  765,  985,  1053 
Bennett    t.    McGuire,  5  LanB. 

(N.  Y.)   183 375,    376 

Bennett  ▼.  Minott,  28  Or.  339 

57,    783 
Bennett  V.  MuegroTe,  2  Vee.  51 

(Eng.)    131 

Bennett  t.  Stout,  98  111.  47.. 

773,  796 
Bennett  ▼.  Sweet,  171  Maas.  600  102 
Bennett    t.    Union    Bank,     24 

Ttenn.  612 32,    462 

Benson  ▼.  Benson,  70  Md.  253. 

344,    378 

Benson  ▼.  Maxwell,  106  Pa.  St. 

274 514,  584,     595 

Benson  y.  Nash,  76  Minn.  341 

947,  976,  980 
Bent  ▼.  Bent,  50  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

602 384 

Bentail  ▼.  Bum,  3  B.  ft  C.  423.  546 
Bently  v.  Dillard,  6  Ark,  79. . .  769 
Bentley  y.  Dunkle,  57  Ind.  374 

177,  178,  848,    860 
Bentley  y.  Goodwin,  38  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    633 783 

Bently    y.     Harris,     2     Gratt. 

(Va.)    357    323 

Bentley  y.  Wells,  61  HI.  59. . . .  618 
Benton  y.  Allen,  2  Fed.  448 .. .  820 
Benton  y.  Ck>llins,  125  N.  G.  83 

814,  1029 
Benton  y.  Jones,  8  Conn.  186. .     347 
Benton   y.   Minneapolis  Tailor- 
ing?, etc.,  Co.,  73  Minn.  498 . .       57 


PAGE 

Benton  y.  Snyder,  22  Minn.  247 

93,     521 
Bentz  y.  Roekey,  69  Pa.  St.  71 

6,  414,  415,  418,  436,  448,  462,  491 
Berens  y.  Dupre,  6  La.  Ann.  494  178 
Bergen    y.    Carman,    79    N.    Y. 

146,   153    

66,  68,  69,  206,  734,  735,     737 
Bergen  y.  Farmers',  etc..  Bank, 

8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  613 459 

Bergen  y.  Porpoise  Fishing  Co., 

42  N.  J.  Eq.  397 575 

Bergen    y.    Producers'    Marble 

Co.,  72  Tex.  53 727 

Bergin  y.  Pindar,  3  U.  C.  Q.  B. 

O.  S.  574 45 

Berkley  y.  Tootle,  46  Kan.  335    241 
^Berla  y.  Meisel,  52  AU.  (N.  J.) 

999 366 

Berlin    y.   Van    de   Vanter,    25 

Wash.  465    997 

Bemal  y.  Hoyious,  17  Cal.  541 

649,     565 
Bernard    y.    Barney    Myroleum 

Co.,    147   Mass.    356 1032 

Bernard  y.  Douglass,   10  Iowa 

370 49 

Bernard  y.  Guidry,  109  La.  451  947 
Bernhardt  y.  Brown,  122  N.  C. 

587 261,  441,     930 

Bemheim  y.  Beer,  56  Miss.  149 

38,  136,  172,    364 
Bemheim  y.  Dayitt,  9  Ky.  L. 

Rep.    229    170 

Bemheim  y.   Dibrell,   66   Miss. 

199 924,  580,  751,     924 

Berry  y.  Berk,  62  Neb.  535...  306 
Berry  y.  Berry,  84  Me.  541 .  .38,  364 
Berry  y.  Ewen,  27  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

467 152,     966 

Berry  y.  Frantz,   113  Ky.  888 

668,  669 
Berry  y.  Gates,  175  Mass.  373.  737 
Berry  y.  Haas,  12  Ohio  Cir.  Ct. 

189 423 

Berry   y.   Hanks,   28   III.   App. 


xlvi 


Tabi^  of  Cases. 


51 15i 

Berry  t.  O'Connor,  33  Hin.  29 

228,  301,  317,  4«0,  499,    474 
Berry     t.     Sofge,     49     8L     W. 

(TeoB.)    456   958,    991 

Berrymui      t.      SnlliTui,      21 

MiM.  95    781,879,    957 

Berthelon  t.  Betta,  4  HiU    (N. 

Y.),  677   1071 

Bertrmnd  y.  Elder,  23  Ark.  494 

277,  281,    338 
Bertrand  t.  Parkes,  8  Manitoba, 

176 253 

Beaser  y.  Joyce,  9  Or.  310 

91,  149,  147 
Beaaman  t.  Cronan,  95  Gm.  559  780 
Beaaey  y.  Windham,  6  Q.  B.  166  938 
Beat  y.  Fuller  k  Fuller  Co.,  185 

ni.   43    434,   441,     448 

Best  y.  Smith,  193  Pa.  St.  89 

188,  349 
Beat  y.  SUple,  61  N.  Y.  71 . . .  769 
Bethel     Steam     Mill     Co.     y. 

Brown,  69  Me.  9 542 

Betta  y.  Nichols,  84  AUu  278. .     769 
Betts  y.  Union  Bank,   1   Harr. 

A  G.   (Md.)    175 822 

Betz  y.  Conner,  7  Daly  (N.Y.), 

560 519 

Beuerlein  v.  OT^eary,  149  N.  Y. 

33. .  .8,  9,  882,  914,  923,  924,    926 
Benrmann    y.    Van    Buren,    44 

Mich.  496    683,    909 

Beyina    y.    Dunham,    1    Speers 

(Ga.),   39    474,    600 

Beyins   y.   Eisman,   21    Ky.   L. 

Rep.   1772    819,    849 

Beyer    y.    Thoeming,    81    Iowa, 

617 162 

Bibh  y.  Barker,  56  Ky.  292 

260,   396,   642,     646 
Bibb  y.  Freeman,  59  Ala.  612. . 

182,  337 
Bice  y.  Rogers,  62  Kan.  207 .. .  927 
Bickerstafr  y.  Doub,  19  Cal.  109 

634,  773,    804 


y.  Cteiannn,  76  Ta.  678    346 
Bickler    y.    Keodal],    96    Iowa, 

703 231,  1000 

Bickley  y.  Xorria,  2  Bnr.    (S. 

C.)    252    52 

BickneD  r.  Maliett,  160  Maaa. 

328 945 

Bieoeehi    y.    Caacy-Swaaey    Co., 

91  Tex.  259. . .  .138,  143,  953,    699 
Biddinger    y.    Wiland,    67    Md. 

359 588 

Bier  y.  Kibbe,  52  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

612 939,    996 

Bier  y.  Kibbe,  43  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

174 418,  421,    428 

Bierbower  y.  Polk,  17  Neb.  268 

75,  76,      78 
Bierbower    y.    Singer,    27    Neb. 

414 1052 

Biering  y.  Flett,  7  S.  W.  (Tex.) 

229 946 

Bieme  y.  Bay,  37  W.  Va.  571 

233,  353,  394,    921 
Bigby  y.  Wamock,  115  Ga.  385 

497,  696,  670,  680,    687 
Bigelow  y.  Andreas,  31  111.  322 

783,  1041,  1044 
Bigelow   y.    Ayrault,    46    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    143.... 20,  102,  330,    690 
Bigelow     Blue     Stone     Co.     y. 

Magee,  27  N.  J.  Eq.  392 845 

Bigelow   y.   Doolittle,   36    Wis. 

116 245 

Bigelow  y.  Stringer,  40  Mo.  195 

414,  418,  422,  428,     987 
Bigelow  y.  Topliff,  25  Vt  273 

261,  443,     444 
Biggins  y.  Lambert,  213  111.  626 

71,  670,    696 
Bilafsky      y.      Abraham,      183 

Mass.  401   1236 

Bill  y.  Cureton,  4  L.  J.  Ch.  98 

(Eng.) 200 

Billgery    v.    Ferguson,    30    La. 

Ann.   34    290 


Table  of  Cases. 


xlvii 


PAGS 

Billgery  v.  Schnell,  26  La.  Ann. 

467 680,    971 

Billings    ▼.    Billings,    31    Hun 

(N.   Y.)    66    497,     601 

Billings  V.  Billings,  2  Cal.  107 .     987 
BiUings  ▼.  Russell,   101  N.  Y. 

226 6,  19,  71,  262,  331,     487 

497,  498,  698,  602,  603,  626,     627 
BiUingsley  v.   ClelUnd,   41   W. 

Va.   234    335,     361 

Billingsley    v.    Menear,    44    W. 

Va.  651 640 

Billingsley  y.  White,  59  Pa.  St. 

464 638 

Billington  v.  Sweeting,  172  Pa. 

St    161    397,    897 

Bills  V.  Bills,  41  Ohio  St.  196. .     162 
BUls  ▼.  Schliep,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

607 1193 

Bindley  ▼.  Martin,  28  W.  Va. 

773 523 

Bindaeil    ▼.    Smith    (N.   J.),   5 

Am.  B.  R.  40 1220 

Bingham  ▼.  Sheldon,  101  App. 

DiT.   (N.  Y.)   48 644 

Binnie  ▼.  Walker,  25  111.  App. 

82 794,     843 

Binson  ▼.  Maxwell,  105  Pa.  St. 

274 974 

Bird  ▼.  Aitkin,  Rice  Eq.  (S.  C.) 

73 462,    474 

Bird  V.  Bolduc,  1  Mo.  701 863 

Birdsale  v.  Lakey,  9  La.   Ann. 

646 395 

Birdsall  v.  Welch,  6  D.  C.  316 

235,  241,  815,  579,  628,  721,     880 

892,    992 
Birdsall,     etc.,     Mfg.     Co.     v. 

Schwartz,  26  App.  Div.    (N. 

Y.)    343    974 

Birdwell  ▼.  Butler,  13  Tex.  338     819 
Birely  ▼.   Staley,   5  Gill  k  J. 

(Md.)    432 28,  808,  815,     821 

864,  903,  1031,  1050 
Birge  v.  Edgerton,  28  Vt.  291 . .  642 
Birge  v.  Nock,  34  Conn.  166..  728 


PAQB 

Birmingham  Dry  Goods  Co.  v. 

Roden,  110  Ala.  511 430,     448 

Birmingham      Nat.      Bank      v. 

Steele,  98  Ala.  85 878 

Birmingham   Shoe   Co.   v.   Tor- 

rey,   121   Ala.   89 171 

Birnhisel   v.   Firman,   22  Wall. 

(U.  S.)    70 1093,  1158 

Bishoff   V.    Hartley,   9    W.   Va. 

100 570,     582 

Bishop  V.  Cook,  13  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)  326  985i 

Bishop  v.  Curphey,  60  Miss.  22  123 
Bishop  Y.  John  H.  Hibbon  Dry 
Goods  Co.  (Ky.),  99  S.  W. 

644 403 

Bishop   V.   Jones,   28   Kan.   680 

459,     476 
Bishop  ▼.  CConnell,  56  Mo.  158 

628,  534,     552 
Bishop  y.  Redmond,  83  Ind.  157 

187,  188,  201,     587 
Bishop  V.   State,  83   Ind.  67  .. 

278,  286,  557,  891,  902,     986 
Bishop  V.  Stebbins,  41  Hun  (N. 

Y.),   243    456,     489 

Bissell  ▼.  Hopkins,  3  Cow.   (N. 

Y.)    166    519 

Bittinger  v.  Kasten,  111  111.  260 

249,  264,  275,  278,     339 
Bixby  T.  Carskaddon,  70  Iowa, 

726 925,     983 

Bixby  V.  Carskaddon,  55  Iowa, 

533 694,     961 

Balnkenship  v.  Turner,  3  Tex. 

App.  Civ.  Cas.  Sec.  427 689 

Black  V.  Bordelon,  38  La.  Ann. 

696 819 

Black  ▼.  Caldwell,  49  N.  C.  150  992 
Black  V.  Coldwell,  49  N.  C.  150  344 
Black    V.    Fountain,    23    Grant 

Ch.    174    359 

Black  V.  Fuller,  4  Neb.  (Unoff.) 

303 555 

Black  v.  Nease,  37  Pa.  St  433  190 


xlviii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Black  ▼.  Sanders,  46  N.  C.  67 

280,  281,     284 
Black  ▼.  Vanghan,  70  Tex.  47 

462,     604 
Blackburn  ▼.  ThompBon,  23  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  1723   116 

Black   Hills   Mercantile   Co.   v. 

Gardiner,  6  8.  D.  246 

236,  237,    316 
Blackley  ▼.  Kenny,  16  Ont.  App. 

(Can.)    622    211 

Blackman    v.    Preston,    24    111. 

App.   237    262 

Blackman      v.      Wheaton,      13 

Minn.  326 14,  94,  521,    976 

Blackmore   v.    Crutcher,   46    S. 

W.    (Tenn.)   310 366 

Blackmore   v.    Parkes,  81    Fed. 

899 477,    967 

Blackshire  v.  Pettit,  35  W.  Va. 

547 410,  523,  589,   723,     861 

906,  908,    971 
Blackwell    v.    Hatch,    13    Okla. 

169 838 

Blaechinska  v.  Howard  Mission, 

130  N.   Y.  497 363 

Blair  ▼.  Alston,  26  Ark.  41 ... .     751 
Blair  v.  Bass,  4  Blaokf.   (Ind.) 

639 ■ 722 

Blair  ▼.  Brown,  116  N.  C.  631 

70,    338 
Blair  y.  Finlay,  75  Tex.  210.. 

333,  941,  1000 
Blair  ▼.  Smith,  114  Ind.  114.. 

40,  93,  101,  130,  160,  171,  680 
Blaisdell  v.  Cowell,  14  Me.  370  892 
Blair  State  Bank  ▼.  Bunn,  61 

Neb.   464    393,461,488,     491 

509,  511,  694,  968 
Blake  v.  Blake,  53  Miss.  182..  209 
Blake  v.  Corbett,  120  N.  Y.  327..  1218 
Blake  v.  Boisjoli,  61  Minn.  296 

36,  38,  91,  95,  160,     339 
Blake  v.  Francis-Valentine  Co., 

1  Am.  B.  R.  372 1072 

Blake  v.  Graves,  18  Iowa,  312..     562 


PACK 

Blake  t.  Howard,  11  Me.  202. .     926 
Blake   ▼.   Jones,    1    Bailey   Eq. 

141 344,     349 

Blake     v.     Sawin,     10     Allen 

(Mass.),  340   277 

Blake  ▼.  Sawin,  92  Mass.  340 

203,  344,     586 
Blake  ▼.  White,  13  N.  H.  267. . 

584,  695,  915,  924,  925,     950 
Blake  ▼.  Williams,  36  N.  H.  39 

85,  184,  637,  639,     667 
Blake  v.  Van  Tilborg,  21  Wis.* 

672 870 

Blakely  Printing  Co.  t.  Pease, 

95  111.  App.  341 192,  260,     538 

Blakely  y.  Gould,  24  Ont.  App. 

163 91,       99 

Blakley's    Appeal,     7     Pa.    St. 

449 462 

Blakeney  y.  Kirkley,  2  Nott.  ft 

M.  544    338 

Blakeslee  y.  Rossman,  43  Wis. 

1161 227,  566,     884 

Blakey  y.  Boonyille  Nat.  Bank, 

2  Am.  B.  R.  Rep.  459 1129 

Blanc  y.  Paymaster  Min.   Co., 

95   Cal  524 797,  820,    824 

Blanchard  y.  Cooke,  144  Mass. 

207 34 

Blanchard  y.  Glasier,  64  Iowa, 

675 973 

Blanchard  y.  McKey,  125  Mass. 

124 215 

Blanchard   y.   Moors,  86   Mich. 

380 941 

Blanchard  y.  Paschal,  68  Ga.  32     169 
Blanchet   y.   Hellebrant,   4   La. 

439 979 

Blanik  y.  Barta,  130  Wis.  121.     296 
Blanik    y.    Barta,    109    N.    W. 

(Wis.)  980 332 

Blankenship,  etc.,  O).  y.  Willis, 

1  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  667. . .  .946,    998 
Blantin  y.  Whitaker,  30  Tenn. 

313 649 


Table  of  Cases. 


3dix 


PA<» 

BUuDton  ▼.  Taylor,  Gilm.  (Va.) 

209 368,     350 

Blaas  ▼.  Anderson,  57  Ark.  483.    226 
Blaut  ▼.  Gabler,  77  N.  Y.  461 

519,  534,  944,  969,     960 
Blish  y.  €k>Uin8,  68  Mich.  642 

28,    802 
Blish    ▼.   McCk>mick,    16    Utah, 

188 ,     634 

Blisa  ▼.  BaU,  9  Johns.   (N.  Y.) 

162 839 

Bleiler   ▼.  Moore,  88  Wis.   438 

392,  408,     409 
BleQer  t.  Moore,  94  Wis.  385 

682,     695 
Bleiler  ▼.  Moore,  99  Wis.  486 

978,  1003 
Blenldnaopp   v.   Blenkinsopp,   1 

DeG.  M.  &  Q.  495 203,    240 

Blennerhassett  ▼.  Sherman,  105 

U.  8.  100 

6,  19,  31,  32,  263,  255,    560 
Bliss  ▼.  Couch,  46  Kan.  400. . . 

8,  469,  609,  908,     953 
Bliss  y.  Crosier,  169  Mass.  498 

29,  33,  268,  609 
Bloek  ▼.  Chase,  16  Mo.  344...  724 
Block  ▼.  Darling,  140  U.  S.  234  662 
Blocker  ▼.  Bnmess,  2  Ala.  364 

619,    910 
Blodgett    ▼.    Chaplin,    48    Me. 

322 260,    583 

Bloedom    ▼.    Jewell,    34    Neb. 

649 163 

Blom-Collier  Co.  t.  Martin,  98 

Mo.  App.  696 997 

Bloodgood  ▼.  Meissner,  84  Wis. 

462.... 42,  46,  166,  376,  765,     766 
Bloom  T.  Moy,  43  Minn.  397.. 

193,  900,     966 
Bloomingdale  v.  Chittenden,  75 

Mich.   306    662,     663 

Bloomingdale   v.    Empire    Rub- 
ber Mfg.  Co.,  8  Am.  B.  R.  74.  1197 
Bloomingdale  v.  Stein,  42  Ohio 

St.   168 38,  46,    778 

d 


PAGE 

Blossman    v.    Friske,    33    Tez. 

Civ.   App.    191 968,     960 

Blossom    y.    Negus,    182    Mass. 

616 402 

Blount  y.  Costen,  47  Ga.  534. .  642 
Blount  y.  Blount,  3  Atk.(Eng.) 

481 233,  363 

Blow  y.  Gage,  44  111.  208 226 

Blow    y.     Maynard,    2     Laigh 

(Va.)    29  688,  1023 

Blubaugh  y.  Loomis,  48  W.  Va. 

666 : 909 

Blue  y.  Penniston,  27  Mo.  272 

916,  926,  933,  960 
Blue  y.  Schurtz,  116  Mich.  690.  376 
Blum  y.  Goldman,  66  Tex.  621 .  756 
Blum  y.  Jones,  86  Tenn.  492 . .     389 

Blum  y.  Light,  81  Tex.  414 

164,  1062 
Blum  y.  McBride,  69  Tex.  60. .  256 
Blum  y.  Boss,  116  Pa.  St.  163. .  113 
Blum  y.  Simpson,  66  Tex.  84.. 

269,  619 
Blum   y.    Wyly,    111   La.    1092 

825,  869,     861 
Blumberg  y.  Brysn,  6  Am.  B. 

R.  20  1216 

Blumenthal  y.  Magnus,  97  Ala. 

630 430,  448,     973 

Blumenthal  y.  Michol,  33  App. 

Diy.   (N.  Y.)   636... 365,  637,    604 
Blumer  y.  Bennett,  44  Neb.  873 

681,  007 
Blystone  y.  Blystone,  61  Pa.  St. 

273 638,     640 

Blystone  y.  Burgett,  10  ind.  28    520 
Blythe  y.  Thomas,  45  Fed.  784    436 
Board  of  Education  y.  Mitch- 
ell, 40  W.  Va.  431 114 

Boardman  y.  Halliday,  10  Paige 

(N.  Y.),  223    479,     507 

Boardman     y.     Keeler,    1    Aik. 

(Vt)   158 527,     567 

Boatman's  Say.  Bank  y.  Over- 
all, 16  Mo.  App.  610 

348,  361,     375 


1 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Bobb  ▼.  Bobb,  8  Mo.  App.  257 

868,  870 
Bobb  V.  Woodward,  50  Mo.  95 

048,  839 
Bobo  y.  Bryson,  21  Ark.  387..  110 
Boehm  y.  Calisch    (Tex.),  3  S. 

W.  293 926 

Bodine    y.    Edwards,   10  Paige 

(N.  y.).  604    885,     886 

Bodine  y.   bimmonB,    38  Mich. 

082 85,  178,     180 

Boehme  y.   Rail,   51  N.  J.   Eq. 

641 88 

Bodkin  y.  Kerr,  97  Minn.  301     966 
Boeee  y.  King,  108  U.  S.  379. 

1071,  1140 
Boeatmeck    v.    Gbhn,   7    N.   Y. 

Supp.  620 236,     316 

Boessneck  y.  Edelson,  45  App. 

Diy.  631 669 

Bogan  y.    Gleyeland,    52    Ark. 

101 163 

Bogard    y.    Gardley,    12    Miss. 

302 621 

Bogen  &  Trummel    y.    Potter, 

(C.  C.  A.),  12  Am.  B.  R.  288 

1007,  1106 
Bogert  y.  Haight^  9  Paige   (N. 

Y.),  297 859 

Bogert  y.   Hess,   50  App.   Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  253 578,     946 

Bogert  y.    Phelpa,    14   Wis.   88 

900,  944 
Boynton  y.   McNeal,  31   Gratt. 

(Va.)   456 162 

Boggesa  y.  Richards,  39  W.  Va. 

667 112,  115,  323,     833 

Bogess  y.  Scott,  48  W.  Va.  316.  1025 
^88^    ^'    I>ouglaB8,  100  Iowa, 

385 702 

Boggs  y.  McCoy,  15  W.  Va.  344     821 
^Sfi>B  ^*   Thompson,     13    Neb. 

403 153 

Bohaker  y.  Morris,  20  Noya  Sootia, 

212 108 

Bohannon  y.  Combs,  76  Mo.  286 


PAOr 

265,  267,  341,  344,  586 
Bohn  y.  Headley,  7  Hairr.  k  J. 

(Md.)  257 16,     348 

Bohn  y.  Weeks,  50  111.  App.  236 

153,   157,  281,     649 
Boice  y.  Conoyer,  54  N.  J.  Eq. 

531 15,  16,  217,    220 

Boid  y.  Dean,  48  N.  J.  Eq.  193 

200,     23» 
Boies  y.  Henney,  32  111.  130.. 

225,  587,  612,  626,  1004 
Boies  y.  Johnson,  25  Ohio  Cir. 

Ct.  331 836 

Boies  y.  Johnson,  25  Ohio  dr. 

Ct  331 279 

Bokel,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Costello,  22 

App.  Cto.  (D.  C.)  81 996 

Bokhoof    y.    Stewart*    2    Neb. 

(Unoff.)  714 977 

Boland  y.  Ross,  120  Mo.  208.. 

72,  229,  331,     333 
Bolander  y.  Gentry,  36  C*l.  106 

208,  749,     784 
Boldrick    y.    Aiills,   29  Ky.   L. 

Rep.  852 187 

Boldt  y.   First  Nat.   Bank,   69 

Neb.  283 895,     986 

Boiling  y.  Harrison,  2  Patt.  & 

H.    (Va.)    632   684 

Boiling  y.  Jones,  67  Ala.  608. . 

142,  148,  371,  904,  941 
Bollman  y.  Lucas,  22  Neb.  796  613 
Bollinger  y.  Gallagher,  170  Pa. 

St.  84 39,  400,     897 

Bolt  y.  Rogers,  Paige  (N.  Y.), 

154 639 

BoiUm  y.  Jacks,  29  N.  Y.  Su- 
per. Ct.  166 905 

Bolton  V.  Pitney,  46  N.  J.  Eq. 

610 669 

Bomar  y.  Means,  53  S.  C.  232. . 

386,  473,  511,  758,  816,  824,     917 

Bomberger  y.  Turner,    13  Ohio 

St.  263 698,  701,  844,  876 

Bond  y.  Bronson,  80  Pa.  St.  360 

535,  541 


Table  of  Cases. 


li 


PAOE 

Bond   ▼.    Endieott,    149   Mass. 
282 208,     749 

Bond     y.     Seynkour,     2     Puuu 
(Wis.)    105 153,  523,     987 

Bonds  T.  Eagle,  etc.,  Mfg.  Go., 

44  S.  W.    (Tex.)   539 366 

Bonesteel  y.  Sullivan,   104  Pa. 

St.  9 69,  632,    637 

Bongard  y.  Block,  81  111.  186..  200 
Bonnell  y.  Henry,  13  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)  142 48 

Bonney  v.  Taylor,  90  Mo.  63. . 

216,  220,  863 
Bonney  v.  TiU^,  109  Cal.  346  458 
Bonnie  v.  Porry,  117  Ky.  459.  1132 
Bonslcugh  Y.  Bonslough,  68  Pa. 

St.  495 202 

Bcmaer  y.  Miller,  5  Or.  110. . . . 

322,  324,  581,     684 
Bonslough  v.  Bonslough,  68  Pa. 

St.  495 351 

Booher  v.  Worrill,  57  Ga.  235 . . 

275,    366,    974,     992 
Bookottt   v.   Anderson,     2    La. 

Ann.  246 709 

Books  Y.  Caughran,  40  Tenn. 

464 696 

Books  Y.  Wilson,    53  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  173 74 

Boone    County    Nat.    Bank    v. 

Newkiik,  114  Mo.  472 

183,  252,     951 

Boon  ▼.  Shaw,  29  Pa.  St.  288 . .  541 

Boone  y.  Hardie,  83  N.  C.  470 

522,  572 

Boonyille    Bank    y.    Blakey,    6 
Am.  B.  R.  13   1212 

Booth  Y.  Bunoe,  24  N.  Y.  592 . . 

4,  27,  56,  59,  1037 

Booth  Y.  Oarstarphen,  107  N. 
C.  395 572 

Booth  Y.  Keloe,  71  N.  Y.  341 

548,  564 

Booth    Y.    Moret,    1    Brev.    (S. 

C.)    216 53,       63 

Booth  Y.  Wiley,  102  111.  84...     688 

Boothby  y.  Brown,  40  Iowa,  104 


PAGK 

518,  525,  533,  961 
Booto  Y.  Griffith,  89  Ind.  246.  106 
Borden   y.   Doughty,   42   N.  J. 

Eq.  314  .   373,     701 

BorUnd  y.  Mayo,  8  Ala.  104.. 

82,  233,  355,  395, 

433,  457,   519,  579,   908,   939,   940 
Borland  v.  Walker,  7  Ala.  269 

433,  519,  256,  695 
Bom  V.  Shaw,  29  Pa.  »t.  288.  527 
Borneman  y.  Sidlinger,  15  Me. 

429 339 

Bornheim  y.  Beer,  56  Miss.  149     119 
Borror  y.  Carrier,  34  Ind.  App. 

353 585,    851 

Borwick  y.  Moyse,  74  Miss.  415     657 
Bossart's  Estate,  11  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  100 355 

Bosse  Y.   Thomas,   3  Mo.   App. 

472 526 

Bosteck  V.  Jordan,  54  Tenn,  370  1188 
Boston  Mar.  Ins.  Co.  v.  Proctor, 

168   Mass.   498    305 

Boswell  Y.  Green,  25  N.  J.  L. 

390 297 

Bostwick  Y.  Benjamin,  63  Mich. 

289 303 

Bostwick   Y.  Blake,   145  111.  85 

435,  437,  450 
Bostwick  Y.  Gasquet,  11  La.  534  899 
Bostwick  Y.   Menck,   40   N.   Y. 

383 204,  205,     633 

Bostwick  Y.  Scott,  40  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  212 203,     792 

Botcher  y.  Berry,  6  Mont.  448. 

525,  750,  884 
Botsford  Y.  Beers,  11  Conn.  369 

86,   753,   763,     807 
Bott  Y.  Smith,  21  Beay.  511.. 

589,     627 

Bottorff  y.  Covert,  90  Ind.  508 

852,  1031 

Botts  Y.  Botts,  25  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

300 691 

Botts  y.  Cozine,  1  Hoff.  Ch.  ( N. 

Y.)  79 179 


lii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAQB 

Botts  V.  Hammond,  3  Am.  B.  R. 

776 

Boulton  y.  Hahn,  58  Iowa,  618 

36,  142,  148,     376 
Bouquet  r.  Heyman,  60  N.  J. 

Eq.  114 344,  349,  670,     686 

Bourquin  v.  Bourquin,  120  Ga. 

115 728 

Bourgeat  v.  Dumoulin,    12  La. 

Ann.  204 426 

Bours  T.  Webster,  6  Cal.  661 . .     666 
Boustead   t.    Shaw,    27    Grant 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   280 285 

Bouton  V.  Beera,  78  Oonn.  414 

69,  631,  633 
Bouton  V.  Smith,  113  111.  481  687 
Boutwiell    ▼.    McCfLuro,    30    Vt. 

674 177,     637 

Bowden  t.  Bowden,  75  111.  143 

669,  671,    976 
Bowden  r.  Johnson,  107  U.  S. 

261 879 

Bowden  v.    Spellman,   69   Ark. 

261 84,  810,     940 

Bowdiah    v.    Page,    163   N.   Y. 

108 81,    454 

Bowe  V.  Arnold,   31   Him    (N. 

Y.),  266 783,  784,  796,  1046 

Bowen  v.   State,   121   Ind.   263 

182,    267 
Bowers  v.  Huntingdon  Bank,  97 

Ky.  294 1018 

Bowers   v.   Keesecher,   9   Iowa, 

422 870 

Bowie  V.   Hedrick     (Tex.   Civ. 

App.),  36  S.  W.  317 462 

Bowles  Live  Stock   Ckimmission 

Co.   V.  Hunter,  91  Mo.  App. 

418   62e 

Bowling  V.  Armourdale    Bank, 

57  Kan.  174 75,  78,     228 

Bowling  V.  Searles,  57  Kan.  174 

-     238,  316,    989 
Bowling     V.     Winslow,     6     B. 

Mon.  (Ky.)  29 149 

Bowls  V.   Tompkins,    18    Hun 


PAGE 

(N.  Y.),  219 198 

Bowlus  V.  Shanabarger,  19  Ohio 

Cir.  Ct.  137....  137,  181,  189, 

279,  351,  382,  427,  436,  449,     818 
Bowman   v.    Alpha   Farms,    18 

Am.  B.  R.  700 1211 

Bowman  v.  Ash,  143  111.  649.  .36, 

39,    106,    106,   363,   364,   892,     962 
Bowman  v.   Handlette,   18   Me. 

245 378 

Bowman  v.  Herring,    4    Harr. 

(Del.)    468 626 

Bowman  v.  McKleroy,   114  La. 

Ann.  587 666,     657 

Bowm«ui  V.  Victor  Min.  Co.,  78 

Mo.  App.  676 229 

Bownes  v.   Weld,    3   Daly    (N. 

Y.),  253 770 

Bowyer  v.  Martin,  27   W.  Va. 

442 613 

Boyce  v.  Waller,  41  Ky.  91  . .  580 
Boyd   V.   Bamett,  24   111.   App. 

199 169 

Boyd  V.  Brown,  34  Mass.  453. . 

75,  82,  83,  713,     986 
Boyd  V.  De  la  Montaignie,  73 

N.  Y.  498 662 

Boyd  V.  Dunlap,   1   Johns.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)  478 71,  330,    331 

Boyd  V.  Ellis,   11  Iowa,  97... 

231,    234,     366 
Boyd  V.  Lemon-Gkle  Co.,  8  Am. 

B.  R.  81 1094,  1163 

Boyd  V.  Pottle,  66  Mo.  App.  374 

622,  819,  870,    874 
Boyd  V.  Turpin,  94  N.  C.  137 

68,  632,  754 
Boyd  V.  Vickrey,  138  Ind.  276  283 
Boyer  v.  Tucker,  70  Mo.  467 . . 

969,  961,    971 
Boyer  v.  Weimer,  204  Pa.  St. 

296 720,     723 

Boyle  V.  Boyle,  6  Mo.  App.  694  340 
Boyle  V.  Maroney,  73  Iowa,  70.  1036 
Boyle  V.  Thomas,  1  d^est.  Co. 

Rep.    117    85,    184,   761,  1032 


TaBI^  of   CaS£8. 


liii 


PAca 
Boylen  y.   Jjuaoaa&,     2     Allen 

(Mum.),  407 104,  1060 

Boylston   t.   Ct^rvw,    11    Mass. 

516 44 

BoyntoQ  v.  Rees,  26  Masa.  329    904 
Boynton  y.  Veasie,  24  Me.  286 

641,    542 
Bocmaa  ▼.  Draughaa,    3  Stew. 

(Ala.)    243   .   232,   364,  626,    687 
Braoo  ▼.  Berdan,  104  Mich.  366 

238,  301,    904 
Brace  ▼.  Gould,   1   Thomps.   & 

C.    (N.  Y.)    226 986 

Biaoem  ▼.  Johnston,   Fed.    Cas. 

1,761 1113 

Bracken  ▼.  Milner,  99  Mo.  App. 

187 193,    348 

Brackett    v.     Hanrey,    91    N. 

Y.  214 448,  654,    665 

^ackett  ▼.  Waite,  6  Vt.  411.     228 
BraduBtt  t.  Waite^  4  Vt  389. . 

78,  80,  279,  284,    376 
Braden  ▼.  CNeiU,  183  Pa.  St. 

462 

48,  302,  303,  461,  463,  474,  482 
Bradford  ▼.  Goldsborougb,  15 

Ala.  311 142,  149,  360 

Bradl^  v.  Buford,  2  Ky.  12.. 

244,  691,  064,     967 
Bradlflty  v.   Coolbaugh,  91    111. 

148 996 

Bradley  v.  Fuller,    118    Mass. 

239 756 

Bndley  ▼.  Ctotdan,  12  Wash. 

71 169,    486 

Bradley  ▼.  Laxkin,  6  Kan.  App. 

11 178 

Bradl^  t.  Luoe,  99  111.  234. . 

724,    727 
Bradley   v.   Bagsdale,   64   Ala. 

558 394,    679 

Bradley  Clark  Go.  v.  Benson,  13 

Am.  B.  R.  170 1165 

Bradley   Co.   y.   Paul,  94  Wis. 

488 230,  238,     318 

Bradley  y.  Saddler,  54  Oa.  681     322 


Bradley  Timber  Co.  v.  White, 

10  Am.   B.   R.   329 1096 

Bradshaw  v.  Ualpin,    180  Mo. 

666 829,  958,  1053 

Bradt     y.     Hartson,     4     Neb. 

(Unoff.)   889 220 

Bradfeldt  t.  Cooke,  27  Or.  194. 

632,  667 
Brady  y.  Briscoe,  26  Ky.  212..  385 
Brady  y.  Huber,  197  111.  291 .. . 

639,  660,    668 
Braem     y.      Mercbanta'      Nat. 

Bank,  127  N.  Y.  508 766 

Braffman  y.    Glover,   36    S.   C. 

431. 393,     394 

Bragg  y.  Gaynor,  86  Wis.  468. 

100,   101,    240 
Bragg  y.  Patterson,  86  Ala.  233. 

182,  203 
Bragg  y.  Stanford,  82  Ind.  234.  613 
Braiuard  y.  Dunning,  30  N.  Y. 

211 298 

Brainard  v.  bimmons,  67  Iowa, 

646 162 

Brainard     v.     Van    Kuran,    22 

Iowa,  261.. 67,  734,  735,  796,    799 
Brake  y.   Callison,   11   Am.   B. 

R.  797 1081.  1089 

Braley  y.  Byrnes,  20  Minn.  435. 

626,  900,  931,    956 
Bramhall    y.    Flood,    41    Conn. 

68 317 

Brandenburgh  y.  Louisyille  Tin, 

etc.,  Co.,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep.  297.    648 
Brandies  y.  Cochrane,  112  U.  S. 

344 144 

Brandt  y.  Shamburgh,  2  Mart. 

(N.  S.)   329 276 

Brannon    y.    Brannon,    2   Disn. 

(Ohio)  224 86,     470 

Brannon  y.  Purcell,  8  Ohio  Dec. 

159 178,    672 

Brantley  v.  West,  27  Ala.  642.     664 
Branton  y.  Grifflts,  2  C.  P.  D. 

212 565 

Brasher    y.    Jamison,    76    Tex. 


liv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOK 

139 72,     334 

Brasheer  v.  West,  7   Pet.    (U. 

S.)   608 463 

Brasie    ▼.    Minneapolis     Brew. 

Co.,  87  Minn.  456.. 646,  671,    676 
737,  738,  776,  833,  835,     836 
Brassae  v.  Ducros,  4  Rob.  (La.) 

335 899 

Brat  V.  Harston,  4  Neb.  889. . .     656 
Bratt  ▼.   Catlin,  47   Barb.    (N. 

Y.)  404 926 

Brawn  ▼.  |Celler,  43  Pa.  St.  104    531 
Braxton  v.  Gaines,  4  Hen.  &  M. 

(Va.)   151 378 

Bray  ▼.  Cobb,  1  Am.  B.  R.  153.  1106 

Bray  ▼.  Ely,  105  Ala.  553 

457,  465,  471,     492 
Bray  y.  Hnssey,  24  Ind.  228. . . 

603,     851 
Bray  v.  Wheeler,  29  Vt.  514...     110 
Breauz-Renoudt      Cypress-Lum- 
ber Co.  T.  Shadel,  52  La.  Ann. 

2094 613 

Breckenridge  v.  Anderson,  3  J. 

J.  Marsh   (Ky.)    710 531 

Breckons  ▼.  Snyder,  15  Am.  B. 

R.  112 1133,  1204,  1206,  1220 

Bredin  v.  Bredin,  3  Pa.  St.  81. 

896,  946,     994 
Breen  ▼.  Henry,  34  Misc.  Rep. 

232 381 

Breitkreutz     v.     Holton     Nat. 

Bank   (Kan.),  79  Pac.  686..     853 
Bremer   v.   Fleckenstein,    9   Or. 

266 678 

Bremmerman  r.   Jennings,    101 

Ind.  253 96,     138 

Brenan  v.   Burke,   6  Rich.  Eq. 

(S.  C.)    200  101 

Brereton  v.   Bennett,     15    Colo. 

254 856 

Breach  eimer  v.  Houston 

(Iowa),  96  N.  W.  756 1131 

Bresee  v.  Bradfield,  99  Va.  331.     968 
Breslauer  v.   Geilfuss,   65   Wis. 

377 783,     964 


PAGC 

Biesnihan  ▼.  Nugent»  92  Mich. 

76 162,  172,    885 

Bresnihan      v.      Sheehan,     125 

Mass.  11 36,     136 

Brett  V.   Brett»   5   So.    (Miss.) 

105 632 

Brett  V.  Catlin,  47  Barb.    (N. 

T.)   404 456,     495 

Brett  V.  Carter,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

1,844 1122 

Brevard's  Ex'r  ▼.  Jones,  50  Ala. 

221 371 

Brewer  v.  Cosby,  71  Ky.  388..  473 
Biewster  ▼.  Bours,  8  Cal.  501 . .  64 
Brewster  v.  Hodges,    8    N.    Y. 

Super.  Ct.  609   1042,  1043 

Brewster  ▼.   Power,     10    Paige 

(N.  Y.),  562 70,     752 

Brian  v.  Thomas,  63  Md.  476. 

811,     824 

Brioe  ▼.  Myers,  5  Ohio,  121 

14,  16,  266,     299 
Brick  T.  Campbell,  8  St.   Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    98    124 

Brickley    v.    Walker,    68    Wis. 

563 514,  898,  899,     939 

Bridenbecker  ▼.  Mason,  16  How. 

Pr.    (N.  Y.)    203 840 

Bridge  ▼.   Eggleston,   14  Mass. 

245 584,  594,    922 

Bridgford   ▼.    Reddell,    55     111. 

261..  148,  187,  278,  348,  351,     360 
Bridgeford  v.  Simonds^   18  La. 

Ann.  121 892,     951 

Bridges  v.  Bidwell,  20  Neb.  185.  682 
Bridgers  v.  Howell,    27    S.    C. 

425 106,     153 

Bridges    ▼.     Miles,    152    Mass. 

249 258 

Briggs  ▼.  Austin,  129  N.  Y.  208  772 
Briggs  y.  Brown,  23  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  163 894 

Briggs  y.  Coffin,  91  Iowa,  329.  660 
Briggs  yfl  Davis,  20  N.  Y.  15. .  818 
Briggs  v.  French,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

1,871 64 


Tabus  of  Cases. 


Iv 


PAGB 

BriggB    ▼.    Mitchell,    66    Barb. 

<N.  Y.)    288  373,    673 

BriggB  ▼.  OliTer,  68  N.  T.  336.  772 
BriggB  ▼.  Parkman,    43    Mass. 

258 621 

BriggB  y.  Weston,  36  Fla.  629.  620 
Brigham  ▼.  Hubbard,  115  Ind. 

474 372,    613 

Bright  ▼.  Bright,  132  Ind.  56 . .  850 
Brink  v.  BladE,  77  N.  C.  60. . . .  924 
Brinkerhoff-Faris     Trust,     etc., 

C6.  ▼.  Horn,  83  Mo.  App.  114    184 
Brinkerhoff  v.   Brinkerhoff,    23 

N.  J.  Eq.  477 212 

Brinkerhoff  v.  Brown,  6  Johns. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    139 815,    870 

Brinkerhoff  ▼.  Brown,  4  Johns. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    671 

185,  775,  793,    804 
Brinkerhoff  ▼.  Lansing,  4  Johns. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    332 863,    877 

Brinkerhoff  v.  Tracy,    55    Ohio 

St.  658 236 

Brinkly  ▼.  Smithwick,  11  Am. 

B.  R.  500  1106 

Brinlej  t.  Spring,  7  Me.  241 . .  639 
Brinson    ▼.    Edwards,    94    Ala. 

447 151,  604,  605,     603 

Brinton  ▼.  Gerry,    7    III.    App. 

238 446 

Brinton  ▼.  Hook,  3  Md.  Ch.  477.  424 
Brisooe    T.     Bronaugh,    1    Tex. 

326 954,     987 

Briscoe  ▼.  Clark,  1  Rand.  (Va.) 

213 29 

Briscoe   V.   Norris,    112    N.    C. 

671 140,  141,     576 

Brister     ▼.      Moore,      16      So. 

(Mass.)   596 594 

Bristol  Bank,  etc.,  Co.  ▼.  Jones- 

boro  Banking  Trust  Co.,  101 

Tenn.  545 68,      59 

Bristol    County    Sav.    Bank    t. 

Keavy,  128  Mass.  298 936 

Bristol  ▼.  Hull,  166  K.  Y.  59. . 

407,  985,  990,    991 


PAGE 

Brite  ▼.  Guy,  28  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

67 588,    979 

British,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  ▼.  Nor- 
ton, 125  Ala.  522 311,     876 

Britt  V.  Aylett>  11  Ark.  475...     649 
Brittain  ▼.  Crowther,    64    Fed, 

295 376,  461,  467,  612,     914 

920,    923 
Brittain  Dry  Goods  Co.  v.  Ber- 

tenshaw,  11  Am.  B.  R.  629..   1161 
Broadfoot     ▼.     Dyer,    3    Munf. 

(Va.)  350 290 

Broadway  Nat.  Bank  v.  Adams, 

133  Mass.  170  134 

Broadwell  v.  Howard,    77    111. 

305 545 

Brock    ▼.    Bowman,    Rich.    Eq. 

Cas.  186 349,  821,     839 

Brock  y.  Hudson  County  Bank, 

48  N.  J.  Eq.  615 314,    514 

Brock  ▼.  Rich,  76  Mich.  640 .. .     806 
Brock  V.  Terrell,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

1,W4 1172 

Brockenbrough       t.       Brocken- 

brough,  31  Gratt.   (Va.)   580. 

415,    432 
Brockman  v.  Bowman,    1    Hill 

Eq.    (S.  C.)   338.... 194,  821,  1031 
Bromberg  v.  Heyer,  69  Ala.  22. 

778,    873 
Bromley    v.    Smith,    Fed.    Cas. 

1,922 1198 

Bronsema  ▼.  Rind,  2  La.   Ann. 

959 817 

Bronson  ▼.  Thompson,  77  Conn. 

214 390 

Bronson  v.  Vaughn,  44  W.  Va. 

406 349 

Brooklyn    v.    Lamon,    56    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  647 369 

Brookbank  ▼.  Kennard,  41  Ind. 

339 278 

Brooks  v.  Applegate,  37  W.  Va. 

373 966 

Brooks  ▼.  Clayes,  10  Vt.  37 

1054,  1056,  1057,  1060 


Ivi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Brooks  T.  Dalrymple,  12  Allen 

<Ma88.),  102 360 

Brooks  V.  Davis,    4    Fed.    Cas. 

No.  1950 268,  1168 

Brooks  y.  Dent^  1  Md.  Gh.  623.  434 
Brooks  ▼.  Qibson,  76  Tenn.  271.  1036 
Brooks  V.  Jones   (Iowa),  82  N. 

W.  434 609,     836 

Brooks  V.  Jones,  114  Iowa,  386. 

679,    723 
Brooks  V.  Lowenstein,  124  Ala. 

168 816,    818 

Brooks  T.  O'Hara,  8  Fed.  629..  867 
Brooks  V.  Powers,  16  Mass.  244.  621 
Brooks   v.    Stone,  19  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    396   786,  1041 

Brooks     ▼.     Todd,     1     Handy 

(Ohio),  169 611,  600,    602 

Brooks  T.  Wilson,  63  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  173 81 

Brooks- Waterfield   Co.   ▼.   Fris- 

bie,   99  Ky.    126 116,     130 

Brookville  Nai.  Bank  v.   Kim- 
ble.  76  Ind,   196 148,    373 

Brou^  V.  Greist^  1  Dauph.  Go. 

Rep.    (Pa.)    243    1044 

Broughton     ▼.     Biongfaton,     4 

Rich.  491 633,  646,    668 

Broughton  ▼.  Mitchell,  64  Ala. 

210 815 

Broughton  ▼.  Vaaques,  73  Gal. 

326 442 

Brower  v.  Fass,  60  N«b.  690, 273  669 
Brower  ft  Go.   ▼.   Hill    (G.   G. 

A.),  14  Am.  B.  R.  619 1124 

Brown    v.    Atkinson,    9    Kulp. 

164 188 

Brown  v.  Austin,  35  Barb.  341.  376 
Brown  v.  Barker,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

450 1187 

Brown  v.  Barter,  18  Miss.  268.  904 
Brown  v.  Bates,  10  Ala.  432 .. .  781 
Brown  ▼.   Bradford,   103  Iowa, 

378... ,....260,  262,  436,  442  661 
Brown  t.  Brown,  91  Ky.  639..  836 
Brown  v.   Brown,  22  La..  Ann. 


476 736 

Brown  ▼.  Brown,  30  La.  Ann. 

966 228,     230 

Brown  ▼.  Burke,  22  6a.  674... 

216,  912 
Brown  ▼.  Gampbell    (Neb.),  93 

N.  W.   1007    160,     166 

Brown   v.    Gampbell,    100    Gal. 

636 780 

Brown  y.  Case,  6  Am.  B.  R.  744.  1141 

Brown  v.  Ga«e,  41  Or.  221.231,    233 

277,  330,  342,  363,  364,     896 

970,  971 
Brown  ▼.  Ghubb,  135  N.  Y.  174. 

693,  694,  702,  1036 
Brown  v.  Gline,  109  Gal.  166.. 

69,  177,  955 
Brown  v.  Gonnell,  86  Ky.  403..  708 
Brown  ▼.  Davidson,  9  Qrant  Ch. 

(U.  G.)    439    903 

Brown  v.  Dickerson,    2    Manr. 

(Del.)    119 311,    953 

Brown  y.  Early,  2  Duy.    (Ky.) 

369 86,     470 

Brown  y.  Easton,  112  Fed.  692. 

262,  562^ 
Brown  v.  Ferguscm,  4  La.  267. 

187,  397 
Brown  y.  Fickle,  135  Mo.  405. .  1051 
Brown  y.  Force,  46  Ky.  357.. 

580,  994 
Brown  y.  Fuller,  13  K.  J.  Eq. 

271 770 

Brown  y.  Glathary,  4  La.  Ann. 

124 521,    562 

Brown  y.  Guichard,  7  Am.  B. 

R.  615 1151,  1171 

Brown  y.  Harmon,  29  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)    31    637 

Brown     y.     Jefferson     Gounty 

Bank,  9  F^  258 1169 

Brown  y.  John  V.  Farwell  Go., 

74  Fed.  764   ..         849 

Brown  y.  J.  Wayland  Kimball 

Co.,  84  Me.  492 760,    762 


Table  of  Casecu 


Ivii 


PAGS 

Brown  ▼.   Keller,    43    Pa.    St. 

104 o30 

Brown  t.  Kenner,  3  Mart.  ( La. ) 

370 332 

Brown  v.  Kiefer,  71  N.  Y.  610.     654 

Brown  ▼.  Lee,  7  Ga.  287 472 

Brown  v.  Leasing,  70  Tex.  544. 

607,  927 
Brown  y.  Lcmg,  36  N.  C.  190. .  777 
Brown  ▼.  Lyon,  17  Ala.  659...  428 
Brown  v.  Macgill,  87  Md.  161. 

422,  423 
Brown  ▼.   Matthaus,    14   Minn. 

206 170 

Brown  ▼.  McDonald,  1  Hill  Eq. 

(S.  G.)  297 37,  269,  423,    436 

691,  789,  791,     866 
Brown  t.  MitcheU,   102  N.  C. 

347.  ..225,  522,  532,  581,  943,  1003 
Brown    ▼.    Moore     (Tex.     Civ. 

App.),  64  S.  W.  781 161 

Brown  y.  Moore,  21  Ey.  L.  Rep. 

664 299 

Brown    y.    Morristown    Co-Op- 

eratiye  Stoye  Co.,  42  8.  W. 

(Tenn.)   161   696 

Brown  y.  Nilea,   16   111.  385.. 

702,  711 
Brown  y.  Osgood,  25  Me.  505..  1000 
Brown  y.  Pendleton,  60  Pa.  St. 

419 107 

Brown  y.  Perault,  5  Ida.  729..     420 
Brown  y.  Potter,  13  Colo.  App. 

512 927,    946 

Brown  y.  Rawlings,  72  Ind.  505 

358,  579 
Brown  y.  Reilly,  72  Md.  489 . .  654 
Brown    y.    Riclcette,    3    Jolms. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    553 863 

Brown  y.  Riley,  22  111.  45 

260,  535,  537,  538,  579 
Brown  y.  Seheffer,  72  Minn.  27..  713 
Brown  y.  Scott,  51  Pa.  St.  357.  177 
Brown  y.  Sloan,  61  Neb.  237..  613 
Brown  y.  Smith,  46  Ky.  361 . . 

580,     594 


PAGE. 

Brown  y.  Snell,  46  Me.  490 . .  67,    737 
Brown  y.  Spiyey,  53  Ga.  155 . . 

85,  192,  195,  276,  278,    399 
Brown  y.  State  Bank,  31  Miss. 

454 845,     873 

Brown    v.    Atkinson^    9    Sulp. 

(Pa.) 898 

Brown   v.    Sweet,    7    Ont,   App. 

725 488,    582 

Brown  y.  Texas  Cactos  Hedge 

Co.,  64  Tex.  396 231,     586 

Brown  y.  Thayer,  78  Maes.  1 . . 

652,    667 
Brown    y.    Townsend,    55    Hun 

(N.    Y.)    605 698,     699^ 

Brown  y.  Wayland-Kimball  Co., 

84  Me.   492 761 

Brown  y.  Webb,  20  Ohio,  389 

68,  588,  632,  714,  755 
Brown  y.  White,  16  Fed.  900 . .  1207 
Brown  y.  Williamson,  36  Pa.  St. 

883 135,  138,     461 

Brown  y.  Wilmerding,  5  Duer 

(N.   Y.)    220 519 

Brown  y.  Wilmerding,  12  N.  Y. 

Super.  Ct.  220 558,    912 

Brown  y.  Work,   1  Neb.  L.  J. 

437 468 

Brown  y.  Work,  30  Neb.  800. . 

237,  316,     319 
Brownell   y.    Curtis,    10    Paige 

(N.  Y.)    210 638 

Brownell  y.  Dixon,  37  III.  197.     116 
Brownell  y.  Stoddard,  42  Neb. 

177 373,    972 

Browning  y.  DeFord,  178  U.  S. 

196 994 

Browning  y.  Hart,  6  Barb.  91 

244,     303 
Bruce  y.  Kelly,  39  N.  Y.  Super. 

Ct.   27    675,  1015 

Bruce  y.  Koch,  58  S.  W.  (Tex.) 

189 953,  1003,  1005 

Bruen  y.  Dunn,  87  Iowa,  483 . .     624 
Bruggerman  y.  Hoerr,  7  Minn. 

337 ...193,  198,     956- 


Iviii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Bruggermann    ▼.    Wagener,    72 

Minn.  329   638 

Broker  y.  Kelsey,  72  Ind.  51. .     848 
Brumbaugh  v.  Jones  (Neb.)f  08 

N.   W.   64 777,  1041 

Brumbaugh    y.    Richcreek,    127 

Ind.  240 178,  806,     862 

Brumley  y.  Grolden,  27  Mo.  App. 

160 816 

Brumley  y.  Jones,   16  Am.  B. 

R.  678  1213 

Brummel   y.   Stockton,   3  Dana 

(Ky.)    134   626 

Brummer  y.  Ck>hn,  86  N.  Y.  11 

124,   126,     126 
Brundage    y.    Cheneworth,    101 

Iowa,  266   192,  434,     840 

Brundage  y.   Munger,   64  App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)   549 399 

Brunet  y.  Duyergis,  6  La.  124 

187,    348 
Brunsden  y.  Stratton,  Prec.  Gh. 

620 326 

Brunswick   v.    McClay,    7   Neb. 

137 629 

Bryan  y.  Bernheimer,  181  U.  S. 

188 1184,  1215,  1228,  1232 

Bryan   y.    Bernheimer,    176   U. 

8.  274 1227 

Bryan  y.  Madden,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

388 1221 

Bryan  y.  Miller,  28  Mo.  32 49 

Bryan  y.  Spruill,  67  N.  C.  27 

866,    868 
Bryan  y.   University  Pub.   Co., 

112  N.  Y.   382 118 

Bryans      y.      Taylor,      Wright 

(Ohio)    246    99 

Bryant-Brown      Shoe      CJo.      y. 

Block,  62  Ark-  458 

171,  213,  961,  966 
Bryant  y.  Fink,  76  Iowa,  616..  599 
Bryant  v.  Kelton,  1  Tex.  415.. 

232,  366,     623 
Bryant    y.    Mansfield,    22    Me. 

360 639 


PAOB 

Bryant  y.  Young,  21  Ala.  264 

171,  440,  669,  672,  678,  722 
Bryer  y.  Foerster,  14  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  316 1018,  1048 

Byrnes  y.  Volz,  63  Minn.   110 

696,  697 
Bryns  y.  Shaw,  46  111.  App.  281 

693,  694 
Bueh,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Helbing,  134 

Cal.  676    347 

Buchanan      y.      Campbell,      14 

Grant  Ch.   (U.  C.)   163 216 

Buchanan  y.  Clark,  28  Vt.  799.  383 
Buchanan  y.  Cunningham,  10 

Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  613 876 

Buchanan  y.  Dinsley,  11  Grant 

Ch.    132    712 

Buchanan  y.  Lee,  69  Ind.  117..  148 
Buchanan  v.  Marsh,  17  Iowa, 

494 773,  781 

Buchanan  v.  McNinch,  3  S.  C. 

498 178,  279,  284 

Buchanan   y.    Smith,    16    Wall. 

(U.   S.)    277 276,   1142,  1166 

Bucher  v.  Ream,l08  Pa.  St.  421 

107,  364 
Buck  y.  Gilson,  37  Vt.  663.  .70,  763 
Buck    y.    Sherman,    2    Dougl. 

(Mich.)    176    672 

Buck  y.  Voreis,  89  Ind.  116... 

26,  63,  64,  66,  687,  626,    678 
Buckingham  y.  Tyler,  74  Mich. 

101 922,    934 

Buckingham     y.     Walker,     61 

Miss.   491    816,     816 

Buckingham     y.     Wesson,     64 

Miss.  626    588 

Buckle  y.  Mitchell,  18  Ves.  Jr. 

(Eng.)    100    337 

Buckler    y.    Brewer,    9    Ky.    L. 

Rep.   1013    699 

Buckley   y.   Duff,    114   Pa.   St. 

696 193,   361,   362,  627,     641 

Buckley  v.  Dunn,  67  Miss.  710.  114 
Buckley  v.  Wells,  33  N.  Y.  618..  113 
Buckley  y.  Wheeler,  52  Mich.  1.     162 


Tabi«b  of  Oabss. 


lix 


PAGB 

Bneklin  ▼.   Roae,  7  Grant  Ch. 

(U.    C.)    440 190 

BuddiB   ▼.   Thompson,   24   Ky. 

223 35 

Buckman  ▼.  Montgomery,  14  N. 

J.  Eq.   106 1020 

Buckner  v.   Stine,   48  Mo.  407 

249,    265 
Bnckwalter  Stove  Co.  v.  Strat- 

ton,    118   App.  IMv.    (N.  Y.) 

915 1181 

Buekwalter  v.  Whipple,  115  Ga. 

484 67,    741 

Bucks   ▼.   Moore,   36  Mo.    App. 

529 936 

Budd  V.  Atkinson,  30  N.  J.  Eq. 

530 337,     668 

Budlong  ▼.  Bndlong,  32  Wash. 

672 959,    967 

Bndlong  ▼.  Kent,  28  Fed.  13..  309 
Buehler  ▼.  Gloninger,  2  Watts 

(Pa.)    226    634 

Bnell       ▼.       Buckingham,       16 

Iowa,  284   459 

Buell  V.  Rope,  6  App.  Div.   (N. 

Y.)     113    574 

Buffalo  Hardware  Go.  v.  Hacken- 

herg,  144  Pa.  St.  107 990 

BufSngton   ▼.  Curtis,   15  Mass. 

528 540 

Buffington  v.  Harvey,  95  U.  S. 

99 820 

Buffington  v.  Mosby,  17  Ky.  L. 

Rep.   1307    183,     196 

Buffnm  V.  Green,  5  N.  H.  71..  461 
Buffnm  ▼.  Jones,  144  Mass.  29.  258 
Buford  T.  Cook,  36  Fed.  21 . . 

389,     508 
Buford  V.  Shannon,  95  Ala.  205 

78,  618,     973 
Buggert  V.  Borchert,  59  Mo.  80.    574 

Buhl  y.  Peck,  70  Mich.  44 

39,  308,     404 
Buhl  Iron  Works  t.  Teuton,  67 
BCich.  623 621,  544,  545,     560 


PAGE 

Buie  V.  Kelly,  27  N.  C.  169 

138,     378 
Building  Assoc,  t.  O'Connor,  3 

Phila.  (Pa.)  453.  .43,  45,  334,     755 
Bulger  V.  Rosa,  119  N.  Y.  459 

987,     996 

Bull  V.  Bray,  89  Cal.  286 

569,  571,  985,  993,  1007 
Bull  T.  Ford,  66  Cal.  176.. 738,  1018 
Bull  V.  Griswold,  19  111.  631 .. .     565 

Bull  V.  Haris,  57  Ky.   195 212 

Bullard    y.    Briggs,    24    Mass. 

533 358 

Bullard  y.  Wait,  82  Mass.  55. .     544 
Bullett  y.  Worthington,  3  Md. 

.Ch.  99   

109,  226,  283,  378,  380,  977 
Bullis  y.  Borden,  21  Wis.  136.  .  523 
Bullit  y.  Taylor,  34  Miss.   708 

328,  351,  532,  533,  632,     781 
Bullock    y.    Gordon,    4    Minf. 

(Va.)    450 242,    790,     818 

Bulmer  y.  Hunter,  38  L.  J.  Ch. 

543    30,    324,     589 

Bumgardner  y.  Harris,  92  Va. 

Xoo  ■•... <5jS^,  wa<5,      o39 

Burnley    y.    Lambert,    1    Wash. 

(Va.)    308 768 

Bumpas  y.  Dotson,  26  Tenn.  310 

317,     392 
Bunce  y.  Bailey,  39  Mich.  192..     212 

Bunch  y.  Hart,  138  Ind.  1 

366,  599,  695 
Bunch  y.  Schaer,  66  Ark.  98 . .  660 
Bungard   y.    Seabrook,    1   F.  & 

F.    (Eng.)    321 306 

Bunn  y.  Ahl,  29  Pa.  St.  390.. 

2,  7,  45,       46 
Bunn  y.  Ahl,  29  Pa.  St.  387.. 

82,  495,  577,  600 
Bunn  y.  Cheney,  36  Iowa,  697.  378 
Bunn  y.  Winthrop,  1  Johns.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)    329 635,     659 

Bunnell  y.  Bronson,  63  Atl.  396.  1126 
Bunnel    y.    Wihterow,    29    Ind. 
123 324 


Ix 


Table  of  Casbs. 


PAOC 

Buongiemo  v.  Shiller,  112  App. 

Div.   916   678 

Burbank  v.  Bigelow,  92  U.   S. 

179 1213,  1219 

Burbank  ▼.  Hammond,  3  Dunn 

(U.    8.),    429 413,     433 

Burbridge  v.  Higgins,  0  Gratt. 

<Va.)    119    172 

Burbridge     ▼.     Seely,     Wright 

(Ohio),  369   622 

Burch  ▼.  Brantley,  20  S.  C.  603.  844 
Burch  V.  Smith,  16  Tex.  219..  964 
Burchinell   v.    Smidle,    6    Colo. 

App.  417    666 

Burchinell     v.     Weinberger,     4 

Colo.  App.  6 660 

Burekmyer  v.  Main,  Riley   (S. 

C),  208    989 

Burdge  v.  Bolin,  106  Ind.  176..     162 

Burdick  v.  Gill,  7  Fed.  668 

76,  79,  186,  190,  347,  360 
Burdin  v.  Burgin,  23  N.  C.  160 .  737 
Burdsall  v.  Waggoner,  4  Colo. 

266 346,   844,   862,  866,     869 

Burford  v.  Steele,  80  Ala.  147 . .  870 
Burg  V.  Rivera,  106  La.  144..  727 
Burge  V.  Cone,  87  Mass.  412..  648 
Burgert  v.  Borchert,  69  Mo.  80 

628,  690,  964,  976,  1006 
Burget  V.  Borchert,  69  Mo.  8d..  671 
Burgett  V.  Burgett»  1  Ohio,  469 

177,  632,    666 
Burgett    V.    Fancher,    36    Hun 

(N.  Y.),   647 164,     166 

Burgess    v.    McLean,     86    Mo. 

678 1»3 

Burgess  t.  Simonson,  46  N.  Y. 

225 396 

Burgin    v.    Burgin,    23    N.    C. 

160 67 

Burgin  v.  Burgin,  23  N.  C.  463 

236,  236,  316,     428 
Burgroff  v.   Bagby,    17  Ky.   L. 

Rep.   820  297 

Burke  v.  Adams,  80  Mo.  504..     179 


PA0ft 

Burke  y.  Burke,  12  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

662 669 

Burke  v.  Floumoy,  4  Mo.  116. .  817 
Burke  ▼.  Koch,  76  Cal.  366...  69& 
Burke  v.  Murphy,  27  Miss.  167 

63,  72 
Burkey  y.  Self,  36  Tenn.  121 . .  178 
Burkey     v.      Self,      3      Sneed. 

(Tenn.)    121    279 

Burleigh  y.  Foreman  (0.  C.  A.), 

12  Am.  B.  R.  88 1190 

Burleigh  v.  White,  64  Me.  23..  668 
Burlingame   v.   Bell,    16   Masa. 

318 744 

Burlington  Nat.  Bank  v.  Beard, 

66  Kan.  773    922 

Burlington  Protestant  Hospital 

Assoc,  y.  Golinger,  111  Iowa, 

293 286,  311,  863,     901 

Bume  y.  Kunzman,  19  Atl.  (N. 

J.)   667   188,  349,     806 

Bume   v.   Partridge,   61    N.   J. 

£q.  434... 660,  698,  699,  840,  1034 
Bumell    y.    Johnson,    9    Johns. 

(N.  Y.)    343 62 

Bumes  y.  Cade,  73  Ky.  261 .. .  lOO 
Burnett  v.  Gould,  27  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  366   772 

Bumham    y.    Boyd,     167    Mo. 

186 866,    962 

Bumham  v.  Brennan,  42  N.  Y. 

Super.   Ct.  49 630 

Bumham  v.  McMichael,  6  Tex. 

Civ.   App.   496 360,     887 

Bumham  v.  Pidcock,  6  Am.  B. 

R.   690    1232 

Bumham  v.  Waddell,  28  U.  C. 

C.   P.   263 634 

Bumhisel  v.  Firman,  22   Wall 

(U.  S.),   170    1093 

Bums  y.  Bangert,  16  Mo.  App. 

22 1026 

Bums  y.  Brown,  16  Va.  174...  1056 
Bums  v.  Davidson,  21  Ont.  647.  812 
Bums   V.   Morse,   6   Paige    (N. 

Y.),   108    44 


Ta-ble  of  Cases. 


1X1 


PAOB 

Bums  ▼.  Thompaon,  39  La.  Ann. 

377 371 

Bums  V.  Wilson,  28  Can.  Sup. 

Ct.  207    626 

Burpee  ▼.  Bunn,  22  Cal.  194 .. .     274 

Burr  y.  Clement,  9  Colo.  1 468 

Burr  V.  Davis  (Tex.  Civ.  App.), 

36  S.  W.   137 867 

BnrriU    v.    Kimball,    66    Mich. 

217 948 

Burrow  v.  Smith,  34  Tenn.  666..     769 
Burrows  v.  Stebbins,  26  Vt.  669 

633,  649,  990 
Burt  V.  Agassiz,  6  Wash.  242. .  1062 
Burt  V.  Gotzian,  102  Fed.  937 

696,    699 
Burt    ▼.    McKlnstry,    4    Minn. 

204 987 

Burt  V.  Perkins,  76  Mass.  317. .     460 
Burt  V.  Timmons,  29  W.  Va.  441 

37,  40,   130,  364,  394,  399,     637 
893,  898,  964,  964,  1022 
Burtch  V.  Burtch,  14  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 

482 166 

Burtch  V.   Elliott,   3  Ind.  99.. 

344,  387,  636,    660 
Burtis     V.     Humbolt     County 

Bank,  77  Iowa,  103 708,    709 

Burton  ▼.  Boyd,  7  Kan.  17 392 

Burton  v.  Farinholt^  86  N.  C. 

260.  .20,  99,  101, 120, 121, 341,     344 
Burton   v.   Gibson,   32   W.   Va. 

406 692 

Burton  v.  LeRoy,  4   Fed.   Gas. 

No.  2,217 296 

Burton  v.  Mill,  78  Va.  468.199,    418 
Burton  v.  Platter,  63  Fed.  901. 

863,    966 
Burwell's  Ex'r  v.  Lumsden,  24 

GraU.    (Va.)    443    329,    368 

Bush,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Helbing,  134 

Cal.  676... 360,  686,  909,  959,     960 

Bush  V.  Bush,  33  Kan.  666 

228,  238,  317 
Bush  ▼.  Collins,  36  Kan.  636 . . 

610,  703,  706,    706 


PAGE 

Bush  V.  Downey,  196  111.  82 . . .  462 
Bush  V.  Elliott,   15  Am.  B.  R. 

666 1209,  1211,  1212 

Bush  V.  Export  Storage  Co.,  14 

Am.  B.  R.   138 1204 

Bush  V.  Bogan,  66  Ga.  320. .. .  642 
Bushnell  v.  Wood,  85  111.  88 . .  966 
Bussard    v.    Bullitt,    96    Iowa, 

736 226,  317,  693,    938 

Buswell  V.  Lincks,  8  Daly   (N. 

Y.),  518 799,     866 

Butchers',  etc..  Bank  v.  Willis, 

1  Edw.  Ch.   (N.  Y.)   646....     873 
Butler  V.  Baudoine^  16  Am.  B. 

R.  238n 1187 

Butler  V.  Davis,  16  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

273 169 

Butler  v.  Feeder,  130  Ala.  604.  66 
Butler  V.  Howell,  15  Colo.  249. 

950,    961 
Butler  V.  Moore,  73  Me.  161 . . 

13,  643,    663 
Butler  V.  O'Brien,  6  Ala.  316. 

84,  213 
Butler  V.  RidceU,  11  Iowa,  107  328 
Butler   V.   Sanger,   4  Tex.   Civ. 

App.  411.. 462,  472,  481,  482,    484 
Butler  V.  Stoddard,  7  Paige  (N. 

Y.),  163 634 

Butler  V.  Thompson,  46  W.  Va. 

660 240,  394,  893,  906,     942 

Butler  V.  Viele,  44  Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   166 177 

Butler  V.  White,  26  Minn.  432. 

419,  428,    713 
Butler  Paper  Co.    v.    Gtoembel 
(C.  C.  A.),  16  Am.  B.  R.  26. 

1162,  1167 
Butt  V.  King,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1389 621 

Butterfield  v.  Heath,    16   Beav. 

408 219 

Buttlar  V.  Buttlar,  67  N.  J.  Eq. 

136 653 

Button  V.  Metcalf,  80  Wis.  193.  1003 
Butts  V.  Hunter,  33  Neb.  119. .     971 


Ixii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGS 

Butts  V.  Peacock,  23  Wis.  359. 

227,  230,  317 
Butts    V.     Schieffelin,    5     Ciy. 

Proc.  R.  415    48 

Butt»    v.    Swartwood,    2    Cow. 

(N.  Y.)    431    619 

Byers  y.   McEniry,    117    Iowa, 

499 741,     792 

Byers  v.  Surget,  60  U.  S.    (19 

How.)   303 232,     354 

Byler     v.     Adams,     62    S.    W. 

(Tenn.)   21 969,     968 

Byrne  v.  Becker,  42  Mo.  264.. 

681,     583 
Byrne  v.  Hiberia  Bank,  31  La. 

Ann.  81 669 

Byrne  v.  Reed,  75  Gal.  277 

918,  938,  946 
Byrnes  ▼.  Clarke,  57  Wis.  13..  382 
Byrnes  ▼.  Lewis,  83  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  310 881 

Byrnes  v.  Volz,  53  Minn.  110..       93 
Byrd  v.  Perry,  7  Tex.  Civ.  App. 

378 596 

Byxbee    v.    Dewey     (Cal.),    47 

Pac.  62 628,     650 


Cable  y.  Coe,  6  La.  554 323 

Cabill  y.  Hamilton-Brown  Shoe 

Co.,  81  Tex.  104 390 

C.  Aultman  A  Go.  y.  Booth,  96 

Mo.  383 143 

C.  Aultman  ft  Co.  y.  Utsey,  34 

S.  C.  569  221,    943 

Cadbury    y.    Brown,    6    Phila. 

(Pa.)  43 62 

Cadbury'  y.  Nolen,    5    Pa.    St. 

320 527,  529,     998 

Cadell  y.  Bawley,  16  L.  T.  Rep. 

(Eng.)  N.  S.  141   218 

Cadiere  y.  Gaidry,  42  La.  Ann. 

169 392 

Cadogan  y.  Kennett,  2  Cowp. 

432 5,  14,  16,  17,  340 

Cadwallader  y.  Granyille  Alex- 


PAGB 

andrian  Soc.,  11  Ohio,  292..   1089 

Caffal  V.  Hale,  49  Iowa,  63 139 

Caffee  y.  Smith,  101  Mo.  229..     138 
Cagney  y.  Cuson,  77  Ind.  494. 

234,  364,     366 
Cahn  y.   Farmers'    ft    Traders' 

Bank,   1   S.  D.  237 334,     336 

Cahn   y.    Groves^   46   Mo.   App. 

263 604,     610 

Gaboon  y.  Marshall,  26  Cal.  197     990 
Cailland  y.   Extwick,   2    Austr. 

381 463 

Cain  y.  Langston,  99  Ga.  89. . .   1006 
Cain  y.  Mead,  66  Minn.  196. . . 

133,  675,  929,  1001 
Cains  y.  Jones,  13  Tenn.  249..  322 
Cairus  y.  Ingram,  8  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  614 789 

Caldwell    y.    Deposit   Bank,    18 

Ky.  I*  Rep.  166 378,  410,     510 

Caldwell  v.  Dvorak,  70  111.  App. 

547 973 

Caldwell  v.  King,  76  Ala.   149. 

690,     867 
Caldwell  y.  Smith,  88  Mo.  44 . . 

187,  194,  348 
Gale  y.  Shaw,  33  W.  Va.  299. .  514 
Calhoun   y.   Hannan,     87     Ala. 

277 611,     89d 

Calhoun  y.  Burton,  64  Tex.  510 

836,     839 
California   Bank  y.   Cowan,   76 

Fed.  145 968 

California  Bank  y.  Marshall,  1 

Tex.  Ciy.  App.   704 462 

California   Consol.   Min.   Co.  y. 

Manley  (Idaho),  81  Pac.  50.     292 
Calkins  y.  Howard  (Gal.  App.), 

83  Pac.  280. . .  .175,  180,  749,     969 
Call  y.  Perkins,  66  Me.  439... 

38,  364 
Callahan  y.  Ball,  197  111.  318.  985 
Gallan  y.  Statham,  64  U.  S.  477  957 
Callen   y.   Thompson,    3    Yerg. 

(Tenn.)  475 52« 

Caller  v.  McNabb,  4  Fed.  Gas. 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixiii 


PAQB 

No.  2,322 376 

Call6wa7  t.   Peoples  Bank,   54 

Ga.  441 428 

Cambridge  Vallej  Bank  ▼.  De- 
lano, 48  N.  T.  326 616 

Camden   v.    Stuart,    144   U.    S. 

104 , 101 

Cameron  y.  Calberg   (Cal.),  31 

Pac  530 544 

Cameron     ▼.     Hutchinson,     16 

Grant  Gh.  526    625 

Cameron    t.    Penin,    14    Ont. 

App.  565 72 

Cameron  v.  Scudder,  1  Ga.  204. 

418,    458 
Cbmet  y.   Sinmions,   103   Iowa, 

163 395 

Camp   y.    Thompson,   25   Minn. 

175.. 282,  340,  415,  419,  428,  521 
Campbell  y.   Bowles,   30  Gratt. 

(Va.)   652 106,  362,     886 

CampbeU   y.  Campbell,   79  Ky. 

395 141 

Campbell   y.   Campbell,   105   N. 

W.  (Iowa),  583.... 377,  409,  902 
Campbell  y.  Cole,  7  Ont.  127..  113 
Campbell  y.  Colorado  Coal,  etc., 

Co.,   9   Colo.   60 458,    463 

Campbell  y.  Dayis,  85  Ala.  56. 

440,  690,  695,     822 
Campbell    y.    Erie    R.    Co.,    46 

Barb.    (N.  Y.)   540 710,    739 

Campbell     y.     Farmers',     etc., 

Bank,  49  Neb.  143. 986 

CampbeU  y.   Fish,  8  Daly    (N. 

y.),  162 136 

Campbell  y.  Hamilton,  63  Iowa, 

293 644 

Campbell   y.   Heiland,   55   App. 

Diy.   (N.  Y.)   95 815 

Campbell    y.    Holland,   22   Neb. 

687 927,    946 

Campbell  y.  Jones,  52  Ark.  493. 

159,     166 
Campbell    y.    Jones,    25    Minn. 

155 67,  734,    820 


PAGE 

Campbell  y.  Kent,  3  Pen.  A  W. 

(Pa.)   72 45,      46 

Campbell  y.  Mackay,   1  Myl.  ft 

C.  603 868 

Campbell  y.  Patterson,  21  Can. 

S.  C.  645 230,     332 

Campbell  y.  Remaly,  112  Mich. 

214 254,    562 

Campbell  v.   Tompkins,    32    N. 

J.  Eq.  170 188,  349,     637 

Campbell  y.  Trosper,    108    Ky. 

•02 843,  866,     877 

Campbell   y.    Warner,   22   Kan. 

604 469 

Campbell   y.    Whitson,    68     111. 

240 218,     670 

Campbell,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Ross,  187 

lU.  553 179,     322 

Campbell  Printing    Press,    etc., 

Co.  y.  Walker,  22  Fla.  412.. 

34,     560 
Campion  v.  Cotton,  17  Ves.  Jr. 

(Eng.)   263 323,     324 

Campodonioo    y.     Oregon    Imp. 

Co.,  87  Oal.  666 486 

Canaday  y.   Nuttall,   37   N.   C. 

265 806 

Oandee's  Appeal,   191    Pa.    St. 

644 

304,  461,  489,  490,  498,  509,     510 
Candee  y.  Lord,  2  N.  Y.  269 . . 

776,     832 
Candler  y.  Pettit,  1  Paige   (N. 

Y.),  168 873,  1042 

Cannon  y.  Castleman,  164  Ind. 

343 33,  363,     374 

Cannon  y.  Peebles,  26  N.  C.  204    424 
Cannon  y.  Young,  89  N.  C.  264. 

226,     908 
Cansler  v.  Cobb,  77  N.  C.  30.. 

588,    590 
Canton  y.  Dorchester,  8  Cush. 

(Maes.)   525 651 

Capron  y.  Porter,  43  Conn.  383. 

173,  526,     673 
Carbiener        y.        Montgomery 


Ixiv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

(Iowa),  66  N.  W.  900 406 

€arbiener       v.        Montgomery, 

07  Iowa,  659..  193,  201,  348,  367 
Card  v.  Robinson,  2  111.  App.  19     116 

Carey  v.  Dyer,  97  Wis.  554 596 

Carey  t.  Giles,   10  Ga.  9.. 235,    314 
Carew   t.   Matthews,    49   Mich. 

302 916 

Carey-Halidy    lAimber    Co.    v. 

Cain,  70  Miss.  628.. 432,  443,  447 
Cargill  V.  Kountze,  86  Tex.  386  1040 
Carhart  v.  Harshaw,    45    Wis. 

340 153,     168 

Omte  V.  Trotot,  105  U.  S.  751.     400 
Carl  V.   Smith,   8  Phila.    (Pa.) 

569 154,  341,     375 

Carl,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Beal,  etc..  Gro- 
cer Co.,  64  Ark.  373 ... .  309,    608 
Carleton  v.  Rivers,  54  Ala.  467.     106 . 
Carling     v.     Seymour    Lumber 

Co.,  8  Am.  B.  R.  29 

1071,  1100,  1108,  1216 
Carlisle  v.  Gaskill,  4  Ind.  219.  291 
Ou-lisle  y.  Rich,  8  N.  H.  44. . . . 

267,  287,  348,  351,  627,     902 
Carliale  v.  Tindall,  49  Miss.  229 

13,  36,  70,  172,  753 
Carll  y.  Emery,  148  Mass.  32 . .  652 
Carlton  v.  King,  1  Stew,  ft  P. 

(Ala.)   472 997 

Carmack  y.  Loyett,  44  Ark.  180 

162,    942 

Carnahan  y.  McCord,  116  Ind. 

67   722 

Carnahan  v.  Schwab,  127  Ind. 

507 986 

Carney  v.  Carney,  7  Baxt 

(Tonn.)  284 523 

Camy  v.  Palmer,  42  Tenn.  35.     588 
Carpenter  v.  Adickes,  34  Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)   645   856 

Carpenter  v.  Carpenter,  27   N. 

J.  Eq.  502  .  .  .  .188,  349,  351,  910 
Carpenter  y.  Clark,  2  Ney.  243 

525,    534 
Carpenter     y.     Cushman,     121 


PAOB 

Mass.  265 601,     860 

Carpenter  v.  Roe,  10  N.  Y.  227  346 
Carpenter  y.  Franklin,  89  Tenn. 

142 108,  110,     362 

Carpenter  y.  Graham,  42  Mich. 

191 544,     645 

Carpenter    y.    Knapp,     1     Tex. 

App.  Ciy.  Clas.,  sec.  1111...  1024 
Carpenter  y.  McCIure,  39  Vt  9  663 
Carpenter  y.   Muren,  42  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    309   

228,  466,  472,  481,  606,  578,  593 
Carpenter  v.  Osborne,  102  N.  Y. 

552 1034 

Carpenter  v.  Roe,  10  N.  Y.  227 

189,  264,  277,  278 
Carpenter  v.  Scales,  48  S.  W 

(Tenn.)  249 

192,  344,  378,  692,     903 
Carpenter  y.  Simmons,   1   Rob. 

(N.  Y.)  360 769 

Carpenter  y.  Staage,  141  U.  S. 

87 812 

Ckrr  y,  Breese,  18  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

134 352 

Carr  v.  Breeee,  84  N.  Y.  584. . 

191,  277,  346 
Ckrr  y.  Brigg,  166  Mass.  78.. 

259,  494,  979 
Carr  y.  Corfield,  20  Ont  218..  570 
Carr    y.    Glasscock,    3    Gratt. 

(Va.)  343 553,     558 

Carr  v.  Huett^^  73  Ind.  378.. 

..778,    815 
Carr  y.  Johnson,  12  N.  Y.  Supp. 

799 910 

Carr  y.    Parker,    10  Mo.   App. 

364 805 

Carr  y.  Summerfield,  47  W.  Va. 

155 184,    275 

Carradice  y.   Currie,   19  Grant 

Ch.    (U.    C.)    108 232,     354 

Carrigan  y.  Byrd,  23  S.  C.  89.  204 
CarroU  y.  Aldrich,  17  Vt.  569.  1059 
Carroll  y.  Dawson,  103  Ky.  736 

160,     166 


Table  of  Cases. 


1X7 


PA6B 

dknoll  T.  Hajward,  124  Mass. 

120 ..615,  711,  724,  1003 

OiiToll  ▼.  Salisbury,  28  R.  I. 

16 731 

OaiToU  V.  Ward,  15  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

699 963 

Ckrroll  ▼.  Toung,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

643 1122 

OarroUtoii  Bank  ▼.    Cfleveland, 

16  La.  Ann.  616  .      994,  1051 

Garse  ▼.  Retieker,  95  Iowa,  25    107 
Carson  v.  BelilM,    28    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  272 650,    651 

C^son  V.  Byers,  67  Iowa,  606 

237,  301,  009 
Oarson  ▼.  Foley,  1  Iowa,  524. .  339 
Oarson  v.  Golden,  36  Kan.  705.  1001 
OsTson   ▼.   Hawley,    82   Minn. 

204 232,  335,  415,     604 

Carson  ▼.  Johnson,  11  La.  Ann. 

767 973 

Oarson  ▼.  Law,  2  Rich.  Eq.   (S. 

C.)   296 54 

Carson  ▼.  Murphy,  1  Neb.  519 

886,  510 
Oarson  v.  Stevens,  40  Neb.  112  897 
Oarstarphen  Warehouse  Co.  ▼. 

Fried,  124  Ga.  544..  173,  741,  1043 
Carter  ▼.  Acker,    27     S.     W. 

(Tex.)    602 989 

Carter  y.  Baker,  57  Tenn.  640 

225,  240 
Carter  ▼.  Bennett,  4  Fla.  283 

773,  830 
Outer  ▼.  Bowe,  41  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  516 884 

Carter  y.  Carpenter,  70  Ky.  257  1038 
Carter  y.  Carter,  63  N.  J.  Eq. 

726 188 

Carter  y.   Osstleberry,    5   Ala. 

277 217 

Carter  y.  Cocks,  64  N.  C.  239 

414,418,  434 
Carter  y.  Cohen,  84  Ala.  256. .  496 
Carter  y.  Coknaai,  84  Ala.  257 

255, 


PAGK 

457,  487,  495,  496,  498,  506,    592 
Carter  y.  Coleman,  82  Ala.  177 

603,  778 
Carter  y.   Drewery,    4  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  888 107 

Carter  y.  Farrell,  39  La.  Ann. 

102 736 

Carter  y.  Goodykoonts,  2  Am. 

B.  R.  224 1131,  1163 

Carter  y.  Grayes,  7  Miss.  9...  521 
Carter  y.  Grimshaw,  49  N.  H. 

100 79,    586 

Carter  y.  Gunnels,  67  111.  270 

225,  951 
Carter  y.  Happel,  49  Ala.  539.  957 
Carter  v.  Hind,  2  Wkly.     Rep. 

(Eng.)    27   291 

Carter  y.  Hobbs,  1  Am.  B.  R. 

215 1218,  1226 

Carter  y.  Lewis,  29  HI.  500. . 

187,  348 
Carter    y.    Meisch,     18   N.   Y. 

Supp.  804 968,     976 

Carter  y.  Neal,  24  Ga.  346. . . 

458,  489 
Carter  y.  CBryan,     105    Ala. 

305 578 

Carter  y.  Porter,  55  Me.  337 . .  138 
Carter  y.  Rewey,  62  Wis.  552  463 
Carter  y.   Richardson,   22  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  1204 

232,  355,  580,  588,  600,  620,  013 
Carter  y.  Robinson,  22  Ky.  L. 

1204 329 

Carter  y.  Shotwell,  42  Mo.  App. 

663 53 

Carter  y.  Stanldeld,  8  Ga.  49. .  520 
Carter  y.  Strange,   12   Ky.   L. 

Rep.  642 975 

Carter  y.  Willard,  66  Mass.  231 

544,  548 
Carter  y.  Worthington,  82  Ala. 

334 105,  106,     327 

Carter  R.  A  H.  Co.  y.  McDon- 
ald, 94  Wis.  186 600 

Cartwright    1.    Bamberger,    99 


Ixvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PA6B 

Ala.  622 66 

Oartwright   ▼.    Bamberger,    90 

Ala.  406 41,  66,    964 

Ctotright  V.  Gartright,  68  Dl. 

App.  74 613 

Oartwright  v.  Phoenix,  7  Cal. 

281 640,    643 

Carver  v.  Barker,  73  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  416 919,  934,    976 

Carver  v.  Peck,  131  MaBS.  291     118 
Carver  v.  Todd,  48  N.  J.  Eq. 

102 138 

Carville  v.  Stoiit,  10  Ala.  796 

66,  171,  737,    739 
Gary  v.  HotaiUng,  1  Hill    (N. 

Y.),  311 9 

Case  V.  Beauregard,  101  U.  8. 

688  .  .771,  773,  787,  797,  799,  846 
Case  V.  Borrows,  64  Iowa,  679.  644 
Case  V.  Hewitt,  10  Ohio  B.  & 

C.  PI.  Dec.  366    328 

Otoe  V.  McGill    (Ch.),  60  Atl. 

509 231 

Case  y.  Phelps,  39  K.  Y.  164. . 

189,   362,  1139 
Case  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Perkins,  106 

Mich.  349 372 

Case  Plow  Works  y.  Roes,  74 

Mo.  App.  437 718 

CsMy  v.  Cavaroc,  96  U.  S.  467  1138 
Cas^  y.  Leggett^  126  Cal.  664 

311,  727,  907,    917 
Cassaday  v.  Anderson,  63  Tex. 

627 777,  804,  1035 

Cassell  y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  169 

ni.  380 972 

Cassell  y.  Williams,  12  111.  387     164 
Cassilear  y.   Simms,    8    Paige 

(N.  Y.),  273 1048 

Casteel  v.  Baugh,    13    Ky.  L. 

Rep.  916 892 

Oassin  v.  Bozzle,  6  D.  0.  260. .     161 
Castillo  v.  Thompson,    9    Ala. 

937 327 

Castle  v.  Baudler,  23  Cal.  76 . . 

796,  844,  860,    866 


Castle  y.  Lewis,  78  N.  Y.  137     742 
Castle     v.     Palmer,     6    Allen 

(Mass.),  401 160,     162 

Castleman   v.   Mayer,   66   App. 

Div.  (N.  Y.)  515  ..661,953,  977 
Casto  V.  Fry,  33  W.  Va.  449. . 

682,     942 
Caston      y.      Cunningham,      3 

Strobh.    (S.  C.)    69 207 

Caatro  y.  lilies,  22  Tex.  479.. 

376,    626 
Caswell  v.  Caswell,  28  Me.  232 

766,  770,  774,     864 
Caswell   y.     Harris,      13    Bbic. 

(Cal.)    166   1006 

Caswell  v.  Hill,  47   N.  H.  407 

41,   130,   131,   387 
Catchings  v.  Manlove,  39  Miss. 

666 90,  99,  101, 

120,  122,  341,  769,  860,  861,  1013 
Catchings  v.  Hatcrow,  48  Ark. 

20 396,    973 

Cates  y.  Allen,  149  U.  S.  461.. 

773,  776,  779,  797,  806,    846 
Oathcart  v.  Grieve,   104  Iowa, 

330 

232,  364,  442,  469,  473,  476,  1017 
Cathcart    v.    Robinson,    6    Pet. 

(U.  S.)  264  .  12,  15,  216,  219,  327 
Oatlett  v.  Alsop,  99  Va.  680. .  116 
Catlin  v.   Hoffman,   Fed.    Cas. 

2,621    I0\f4 

Cato  v.  Easley,  2  Stew.   (Ala.) 

214  .  .   13 

Cato  y.  Wasley,  2  Stew.  (Ala.) 

214 205 

Caudill  y.  Goeble,  6  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

616 626 

Cavanaugk  v.  Britt>  90  Ky.  273    836 
Cavanaugh  y.  Riley,   94  Iowa, 

639 305 

Cavanaugh   v.   Smith,    84   Ind. 

280 346 

Cavil   V.   Walker,    7   Tex.   Civ. 

App.  306 146 

C.  B.  Rogers  Co.  v.  Meinhardt, 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixvii 


37  Fla.  480 

Oocil  Bank  v.  ^lively,  23  Md. 

263 761, 

Oeclle  v.    St.     Denis,    9    Rob. 

(La.)  231 

Oedar    Rapids     Nat.     Bank    ▼. 

Lavery,  110  Iowa,  576 

Central,   etc.,   R.   Co.   v.   Clay-' 

horn,  Speers  Eq.  (8.  C.)  646 
Central   Nat.   Bank    v.   Doran, 

109  Mo.  40 

Central  Nat.   Bank    v.    Hume, 

128  U.  S.  196  .  .119,  122,  124, 
Central  Nat.  Bank  t.  Seligman, 

138  N.  Y.  436 

Central  Trust  Co.  ▼.  Worcester 

Cycle  Mfg.  Co.,  110  Fed  .491 
Cewna  v.  Nimick,  113  Pa.  St. 

70 641, 

Chadboume  ▼.  Ooe,  51  Fed.  479 

773, 
Chadwick  t.  Devore,  69  Iowa, 

637 

Chafee  ▼.  Blatchford,  6  Mackey 

(D.  C.),459 

Chaffe  ▼.  DeMoss,  37  La.  Ann. 

186 

Chaffe   v.   Gill,     43     La.   Ann. 

1064 680, 

Chaffe  y.  Halpin,  62  Miss.  1 . . 
Chaffe  ▼.  Lisso,  34  La.  Ann.  310 
Chaffe  y.  Scheen,  34  La.  Ann. 

684 

Chaffin  y.  Kimball,  23  ill.  36. . 

Chalmers  y.  Sheehy,   132    Cal. 

469 201,  585,  838, 

Chamberlain     y.     Barnes,     26 

Barb.  (N.  Y.)   160 

Chamberlain    y.    Dorrance,   69 

Ala.  40  .  .  .269,  467,  487,  492, 
Chamberlin  y.  Jones,   114   Ind. 

468 

Chamberlain     y.     O'Brien,     46 

Minn.  80 680, 

Chamberlin  y.  Pillsbury,  36  Vt. 

16 


996 

950 

688 

820 

473 

761 

161 

466 

180^ 

543 

777 

381 

474 

898 

695 
723 
892 

371 
219 

978 
639 
906 
680 
683 
60 


PAGB 

Chamberlain  y.  Stern,  11  Ney. 

268 634 

Chamberlain    y.     Woolsey,    66 

Neb.  141 316 

Chamberlain  Banking  House  y. 

Turner-Frazier        Mercantile 

Co.,  66  Neb.  48 

603,  762,  764,  848,     867 
Chamberlayne     y.     Temple,     2 

Rand.  (Va.)  384 

341,  636,  665,  774,  808,  821,  844 
Chambers  y.  Jones,  72  111.  276  795 
Chambers  y.  Sallie,  29  Ark.  407 

163,  164,  166,  278,  338,     766 
Chambers  y.  Spencer,  6  Watts. 

404 340,     989 

Champlin  y.  Seeber,    56    How. 

Pr.   (N.  Y.)    46   140 

Chandler  y.  Cblcord,  1  Okkk  260 

681,  792,  1002 
Chandler  y.    Fleeman,   50  Mo. 

239 , 628 

Chantler  y  Hubbell,  34  Wash. 

211 660,     668 

Chandler  y.   Jessup,     132  Ind. 

351 163 

Chantland     y.     Midland     Nat. 

Bank,  66  Kan.  649 339 

Chandler  y.  Powers,  9  St.  Rep. 

<N.  Y.)   169 336 

Chandler    y.    Van    Roeder,   24 

How.  224 626 

Chapman  y.  Brewer,  114  U.  S. 

158 1179,  1212 

Chapman  y.  Cbllahan,    66  Mo. 

299  215 

Chapman  y.  Chapman,  13  Ind. 

396 198 

Chapel  y.  Clapp,  29  Iowa,  191  688 
Chappel  y.   Chappel,   12  N.  Y. 

215 , 49 

Chapman  y.  Hughes,  61   Miss. 

339 184 

Chapman   y.   James,    96    Iowa, 

233 884,     947 

Chapman  y.  Mcllwrath,  77  Mo. 

38 121,  128,     962 


Ixviii 


Table  of  Casks. 


PAGE 

Ohapin  v.  Pease,  10  Gdnn.  69 . . 

69,  144,  631,  643,     649 
Chapman  v.  Ransom,  44  Iowa, 

377 696 

Chapman    v.    Summerfield,    36 

Kan.  610 613 

Chapman     v.     White     Sewing 

Mach.  Co.,  76  Miss.  821 660 

Chapman  ▼.  Williams,  79  Mass. 

416 746 

Chapman  t.  Windmiller,  29  III. 

App.  393 693 

ChardaYoyne    v.    Galbraith,    61 

Ala.  621 f63 

Charles  v.  Matney,  24  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  1384  ...   , 961 

Charleston  Bank  ▼.  Dowling,  62 

a  C.  346 397,     840 

Charlotte  Supply  Co.  v.  Britton, 

etc.,  Bank  (Miss.),  23  So.  630 

621,    660 
Charlton  v.  Gardner,  11  Leigh 

(Va.),  281  ..  .   376 

Charlton  v.  Lay,  24  Tenn.  496.  987 
Charter    Oak    L.    Ins.     Co.    v. 

Brant,  47  Mo.  419 124,     126 

Chase  v.  Elkins,  2  Vt.  290  .... 

110,  379,  989 
Cnase  v.  Garrett,  1  Pa.  Cas.  16  662 
Chuae  ▼  McOay,   21    La.   Ann. 

196 282 

Chase  v.  Ralston,  30  Pa.  St.  539  990 
Chase  v.  Redding,  79  Mass.  418  290 
Chase  ▼.  Searles,  45  N.  H.  611. 

811,  824,  870 
Chase   State   Bank  v.   Chatten, 

69  Kan.  436 187 

Chase  v.  Swayne,  88  Tex.  218. 

168,  169,  170 
Chase  ▼.  Walker,  26  Me.  555..  72 
Chase  t.  Walters,  28  Iowa,  460. 

580,    593 
Chattanooga      Nat.      Bank     ▼. 

Rome  Iron  Co.,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

441.. .1113,   1138,   1162,   1180,  1208 
Chatterton  v.  Mason,    86    Md. 


PAGS 

236 

57,  339,  626,  695,  698,  956,  1017 
Chatroop    v.    Borgard,    40    Dl. 

App.  279 745 

Chatz    V.    Kirker,    1    Pa.    Cas. 

332 233 

Chauneey  v.  Dyke  Bros.,  9  Am. 

B.  R.  444  1218 

Chautauqua  Co.  Bank  v.  Risley, 

19  N.  Y.  369 

69,  135,  735,  1013,     160 
Chautauqua     County    Bank    ▼. 

White,  6  N.  Y.  236 1030 

Cheatham  v.  Hawkins,  76  N.  C. 

335 554 

Cheatham  v.  Hawkins,  80  N.  C. 

1«1 522,    572 

Cheatham  v.  Thornton,  79  Tenn. 

295 401 

Cheek  v.  Davis,  26  N.  C.  284. .     461 
Cheek  v.  Waldron,  39  Mo.  App. 

21 609 

Cheely  v.  Wells,  38  Mo.  106..   1020 
Chemical  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Meyer, 

1  Am.  B.  R.  565 1100 

Chemung  Bank  t.  Judson,  8  N. 

Y.  254 1236 

Chemung  Canal  Bank  v.  Payne, 

22  App.  Div.   (N.  Y.)   353...     560 
Cheney  v.   Gleason,    117   Mass. 

557 678 

Chenery  ▼.  Palmer,  6  Cal.  119. 

75,  251,  441,  525,  553,     987 
Chesapeake  Shoe  Co.  v.  Seldner, 

10  Am.  B.  R.  466 1186,  1192 

Chessher  v.  Clamp,  10  Tex.  Civ. 

App.  350 291 

Chester  v.  Bower,  55  Cal.  46..     546 
Chester  v.  Greer,  24  Tenn.  26. 

390,    774 
Chevalier  ▼.  Commins,  106  Cal. 

680 503 

Chicago  Bldg.,  etc.,  Co.  t.  I.  A. 

Taylor  Banking  C6.,  78  Pac. 

(Kan.)   808 185,     773 

Chicago  Coffin  Co.  v.  Maxwell, 


Table  of  Casb8. 


Ixix 


PAOB 

70  Wis.  232    153,    474 

Chicago  Daily  News  Co.  v.  8ie«. 

gel,  212  ni.  617 170,     187 

Chicago,  etc..  Bridge  Co.  v.  An- 
glo-American    Packing,     etc.. 


Co.,  46  Fed.  584. 


707 

Chicago,  etc..  Land  Co.  ▼.  Peck, 

112  ni.   108 816 

Chicago,  etc,  R.  Co.  ▼.  Watson, 

113  lU.  105  ...  .65,  428,  458,    471 
Chicago  Stamping  Co.  v.  Han- 

chett,  25  ni.  App.  108... 458,    474 
Chicago  Tip,  etc.,   Co.  ▼.  Chi- 
cago Nat.  Bank,  75  HI.  App. 

430 48 

Chicago  Title   ft   Trust   Go.   v. 

Roebling's  Sons,  5  Am.  B.  R. 

368 1074,  1152 

Ciiicago  Union  Bank  ▼.  Kansas 

City  Bank,  136  U.  6.  223. . . .     457 
Chickering  ▼.  Hatch,   3   Smnn. 

.      (U.   S.)    474    442 

Chickering    v.    Hatch,    5    Fed. 

Cas.  No.  2,672 251 

Chidcering  t.  White,  42  Minn. 

467 621,    534 

Child  v.  Brace,  4  Paige  (N.  T.), 

400 771 

Child  ▼.  Graliam,  8  Ohio   Dec. 

204 120 

Childs  V.  Carlstein  Co.,  76  Fed. 

86   .    .    .    846 

Childa  T.  Connor,  38  N.  Y.  Su- 
per.  Ct.   471 308 

Childs  T.  Latham,  60  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  578 474 

Chinn   ▼.    Curtis,    24    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  1563 374,    601 

Chipman  ▼.'  Glennon,  08  Ala.  263 

603,  622,     041 
Chipman  v.  Mcdellan,  50  Mass. 

363 276,    060 

Chipman  v.  Peabody,  150  Mass. 

420  ..  .  86,    470 

Chipman  v.  Stem,  80  Ala.  207 

226,  306,  300,  457,  487,  405,     506 


PAGE 

Chisholm    ▼.    Wallace    (Ala.), 

40  So.  210 867 

Chimi   y.  Bank,  5   Am.  B.   R. 

56 1170,  1171,  1223 

Chittenden    v.    Chittenden,   22 

Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  408 202 

Choate  ▼.   McHhenny    Co.,    71 

Tex.  110 670 

Chophard  v.   Bayard,   4  Minn. 

533 087 

Choteau  v.  Jones,    11    111.   300 

182,  205,     343 
Chouteau  r.   Sherman,   11   Mo. 

385 583 

Chrislip  v.  Teter,    43  W.  Va. 

356 1021 

Chronister  v.  Anderson,  73  HI. 

App.  524 47 

Christ   y.    Zehner,   16   Am.    B. 

R.  788 154 

Christian     y.     Greenwood,     23 

Ark,  258 703 

Christian  y.   Klein,    77    Minn. 

116 130,    050 

Christian  y.  Smith,  85  Mo.  App. 

117 588 

Christie  y.  Bridgman,  51  N.  J. 

Eq.  331 240 

Christopher  y.  Christopher,  64 

Md.  583 178,  270,  330,     778 

Christopher  y.  Corington,  2  B. 

(Ky.)  357 653 

Christopher    y.     Coyington,   41 

Ky.  357 520 

Christy  y.  Ashlock,  03  III.  App. 

651 544,     545 

Cbristy  y.  Courtenay,  26  Beay. 

140 02 

Chumar   y.   Wood,  6   N.  J.   L. 

155 , 510 

Church  y.  Chapin,  35  Ct.  223 . . 

188,  234, 

282,  200,  331,  340,  355,  830,  056 
Churcli  y.  Drummond,  7  Ind.  17  086 
Church  y.  Foley,  10  a  D.  74. .  462 
Church  y.  Muir,  33  N.  J.  L.  318    662 


Ixx 


Tabl£  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Churchill  t.  Bennett^    8   How. 

Pr.   (N.  Y.)   309   876 

Churchill  y.  Wells,  8  Coldw.  364 

105,     335 
Chuorchill    v.    Wells,    47    Tenn. 

364 188,  189,  351,  573,     627 

Choteau  v.  Johns,  11  111.  300. .  635 
Cicotte  V.  Gagnier,  2  Mich.  381  342 
Cincinnati  Tobacco    Warehouse 

Co.   V.   ^latthewB,   24  Kj.   L. 

Rep.  2445 

166,  232,  355,  410,  871,  877,     909 
Cincinnati  v.  Hafer,  49  Ohio  St. 

60 102 

Cinningham  v.  Eagan,  102  Wis.. 

272 235 

Cipher  v.  McFall,  69  111.  App. 

228 481,     482 

Cipperly  v.  Rhodes,  53  111.  346 

158,     168 
City  Bank  v.  Wright,  68  Iowa, 

132 319 

City  Nat.  Bank  v.  Bridgers,  114 

N.  C.  383 373 

City  Nat.   Bank    v.     Bruce,   6 

Am.  B.  R.  311 1135 

City  Nat.  Bank  v.  Grardner,  5 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  689 410 

City  Nat.  Bank  v.  Hamilton,  34 

N.  J.  Eq.  158  .  .351,  352,  344,     405 
City     Nat.     Bank    v.     Martin- 
Brown  Co.,  20  Tex.  Civ.  App. 

52 940,  998,     999 

City  of  Baltimore  v.  Williams, 

6  Md.  235  ..  .  .221,  231,  354,  1005 
City  of  Chicago  v.  McGraw,  75 

111.   566 177 

City    of    Davenport    v.    Cum- 

mings,  15  Iowa,  219 317 

City   of  New   Orleans  v.   Mar- 

chand,  35  La.  Ann.  222 716 

City   of   St.    Louis    v.    O'Neill 

Lumber  Co.,  114  Mo.  74  .  . .   1035 
Citizens    Bank,     etc.,     Co.    v. 

Bradt,  50  S.  W.  (Tenn.)   778     669 
Citizens'   Bank    v.    Bolen,   121 


pAoa 
Ind.  301      

152,  358,  569,  571,  986,  1008 

Citizens'    Bank    v.    Buddig,    65 

Miss.   284 807 

Citizens'  Bank  v.  Burrus,    178 

Mo.  716 966 

Citizens'  Bank  v.  DePauw  Cb., 

5  Am.  B.  R.  345 1087,  1094 

Citizens'    Bank   v.    Farwell,   63 

Fed.  117 747 

Citizens   Bank  v.   Rhutasel,   68 

Iowa,  597 597 

Citizens   F.,   etc.,    Ins.    Co.     v. 

WalUs,  23  Md.  173 

45,   474,    755,     964 
Citizens'  Mut.  Ins.  Co.  v.  Fos- 
ter, 64  Miss.  288  .  .    97,     141 

Citizens'  Mut.  Ins.  Co.  v.  Ligon, 

59  Miss.  305 1024,  1036 

Citizens  Nat.  Bank  v.  Fonda,  18 

Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)  114....  182 
Citizens'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Hodges, 

80  Hun  (N.  Y.),  471... 854,  856 
Citizens'  Nat  Bank  v.  Riddell,  2 

N.   Y.   Supp.   331    456 

Citizens'  Nat  Bank  v.  Sturgis 
Nat.  Bank   (Tex.  Civ.  App.), 

81  S.  W.  550 139,  140,     141 

Citizens'  Nat  Bank  v.  Webster, 

76  Iowa,  281 369 

Citizens'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Wehrle, 

18  Ohio  C^r.  Ct.  535  .  .  .234,  355 
Citizens'  State  Bank  v.  Council 

Bluffs  Fuel  Co.,  89  Iowa,  618  745 
Citizens'  State  Bank  v.  Porter, 

4   Neb.    (Unoff.)    73 904 

Citizens  State  Bank  v.  Weston, 

103  Iowa,  736 381 

Claeke  v.  Black,  78  C<»n.  467  374 
Claflin   V.    Ambrose,     37     Fla. 

78 339,  398,  790,     897 

Claflin  V.  Ballance,  91  Ga.  411  596 
Claflin  V.  Batchelder,  65  N.  H. 

29 231,  334,     376 

Claflin  V.  Dodson,  111  Mo.  195  50 
Claflin  V.  Freudenthal,  58  N.  J. 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixxi 


PAOE 

Eq.  298  .  .  ..263,  264,  937,  938 
Olaflin  V.  HouBeman,  93  U.  8. 

130 1207 

ClAflin  ▼.  Lisao,  27  Fed.  420.. 

646,   649,  1016 
Claflin  V.  Mess,  37   N.  J.  Eq. 

211    270 

Claflin   V.   Mess,   39  N.   J.   Eq. 

211 269 

Claflin  V.  Mess,  30    N.    J.    Eq. 

211 ...194,  269,     910 

Claflin  T.  Rosenberg,  42  Mo.  439 

626,  630,    636 
Claflin    T.    Sanger,    31     Barb. 

(N.  Y.)   36 48 

Claflin  V.  Smith,   13  Abb.    (N. 

Y.)    206 880 

Claflin  V.  Sommers,  39  Mo.  App. 

419 883 

:naflin'T.    Songer,    11    Abb.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)  338 49 

Clagett  v.    Hall,    9   GUI   &  J. 

(Md.)  80 942 

Clapp  V.  Ely,  27  N.  J.  L.  666 

302,     761 
Clapp  V.  Ingraham,   126  Mass. 

200 , 144 

Clapp  V.  Saunders,  76  Iowa,  634  726 
Clapp  V.  Tirrell,  37  Ma^s.  247  218 
Clarion  Bank  t.  Jones,  21  Wall. 

(U.  S.)  326  .  .  ..1162,  1157,  1172 
dark  T.  Am.  M^.  &  Enameling 

Co.,  4  Am.  B.  K  351   1099 

dark  y.  Anthony,  31  Ark.  646 

770,  773,  806,  900,     966 
Clark  V.   Bailey,   2   Strob.   Eq. 

(S.  C.)   143 962 

dark   V.  Beecher,     164  U.   S. 

631 376,    689 

dark     V.     Bell      (dv.     App. 

231,  309,  586,  697 
Clark  T.  Bradley  Coal,  etc.,  Co., 

6  App.  Cas.  (D.  C.)  437  ..  818 
dark  V.  Chamberlain,  13  Allen 

(Mass.)  257 37 


PAGE 

dark  T.  Chamberlain,  96  Mass. 

257 70,   586,  753,  934,     936 

Clark  T.  Cox,  118  Mo.  662 667 

dark  V.  Depew,  26  Pa.  St.  509 

250,  343,  573,     972 
dark  V.  Douglass,  62   Pa.  St 

408 13,  14,  42,  45,  238,     627 

Clark  V.  Else,   110  N.  W.    (S. 

D.)    88   .    357,  403,  1128 

dark  V.  Equitable  Life  Assur. 

Co.,   16  Am.  B.  R.   137 1191 

dark  V.   Figgins,    31   W.  Va. 

156 1036 

dark   V.    Finn,     12   Mo.   App. 

683 588,     945 

dark  V.  JV)rbe8,  9  Neb.  476..  728 
Clark  V.  Ford,  126  Iowa,  460. . 

613,  898 
dark  V.  French,  23  Me.  221 . . 

192,  626 
dark  V.  Fuller,  39  Conn.  238  624 
dark  V.  Hardiman,     2     Leigh 

(Va.),  347 618 

dark  V.  Henne,  11  Aul  B.  R. 

683   1084 

dark  V.   Ingraham,    16   Phila. 

(Pa.)    646 .166,     612 

darke  v.  Iselin,  21  Wall.    (U. 

S.)  360  .  ..1093,  1120,  1138,  1168 
Clark     V.     Johneon,     6     Day 

(Conn.),  373 78 

Clark  V.  Jones,  87  Mass.  379.  761 
dark  V.  Rnox,  32  Colo.  342. . .  818 
dark  V.  ELrause,  2  Mackey  (D. 

C),  669. .  .233,  363,  392,  401,  468 
Clark  V.  Kreig,  7  Phila.  126. . .  188 
CJarke  v.   Laird,   60  Mo.   App. 

289 774,     804 

dark  V.  Larremore,  188  U.  S. 

486 1144 

Clarke  v.  Lee,  78  Mich.  221... 

71,  333,  521,  634,  1002 
Clark  V.  Marshall,  62  N.  H. 

498 624 

Clark  V.  McMahon,   170  Mass. 

91 322,  324,     339 


Izxii 


Table  of  Cases. 


Clark   T.    Meyers,    24    Ky.    L. 

Rep.    380    107 

Clark  y.  Morse,  10  K.  H.  236. .     529 
Clark    V.    Mulcahy,    190    Mass. 

64 1127 

Clark  ▼.  Olsen   (Cal.),  33  Pac. 

274 879 

Clark  ▼.  Phelps,  76  Mich.  664 . .  997 
Clark  y.  Raymond,  86  Iowa,  661 

160,  385,  1035,  1047 
Clark    y.    Reiniger,    66    lowa^ 

507 925 

Clark  y.  Robbins,  8  Kan.  574..  418 
Clark  y.  Rucker,  7  B.  Mon. 

( Ky. )  583 . .  138, 143,  532,  653,  668 
Clark  y.  Taylor,  37  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  312  241 

Clark  y.  Thias,  173  Mo.  628.. 

853,    902 
Clark     y.     Van    Riemsdyk,     9 

Cranch   (U.  S.),  153 879 

Clark    y.    Walter    T.    Bradley 

Coal,  etc.,   Co.,   6  App.   Cas. 

(D.  O.)   437.... 57,  58,  1046,  1047 
Clark    y.    Watson,    141    Mass. 

248 254 

Clark  y.  White,  12  Pet  (U.  S.) 

178 457 

Claxk  y.  White,  37  U.  S.  178..  885 
Clark  y.  Wilson,  127  HI.  449. . .  929 
Clark  y.  Wise,  46  N.  Y.  612.. 

244,    992 
Clark   y.   Wise,   57   Barb.    (N. 

Y.)    416    273 

Clarke  y.  Allen,  34  Iowa,  190. .  723 
Clarke  y.  Black,  78  Conn.  467 

8,  231,  290,    988 
Clarke  y.  King,  34  W.  Va.  631 

142,  148,    361 
Clarke  y.  Sherman,  103  N.  W. 

(Iowa)   982  691,1126 

Clarkson  y.  Clarkson,  4  Ey.  L. 

Rep.  901  376 

Clarkson  y.  DePeyster,  3  Paige 

(N.  Y.),  320.. 771,  793,  815,    844 
Clarkson   y.   Dunning,   51    Hun 


PAOB 
(N.  Y.),  644 809,    970 

Clarkson  y.  Dupre,  16  Ont.  Pr. 

521 812 

Clarkson   y.   Thorn,   2   Pennyp. 

(Pa.)    491    638 

aarkson  y.  White,  38  Ky.  11 . .     450 
Claudine    y.    Aguirre,    89    Cal. 

601 1052 

Clary  y.  McCally,  5  Fed.  Cas. 

No.   2,869    290,    973 

Clay    y.    Trimble,    13    Ky.    L. 

Rep.   61    366 

Clay  y.  Walter,  79  Va.  92 

582,  584,     609 
Claybrooks    y.   Kelly,    61    Tex. 

634 646 

Clay  County  Bank  y.  Keith,  85 

Mo.  App.   409 662 

Clayton   y.    Anthony,   6    Rand. 

(Va.)    286 78 

Clayton  y.  Brown,  30  Ga.  490. .     187 
Clayton  y.  Brown,   17  Ga.  217 

249,     264 
Clayton     y.     Exchange     Bank, 

121  Fed.  630 252,  560,  1115 

Cleland   y.    Anderson,    11    Am. 

B.  R.  605 1185,  1199 

Cleland  y.  Taylor,  3  Mich.  201 

731,    748 
Clemens  y.   Brillhart,   17   Neb. 

335 110,    381 

Clemens    y.    Clemens,    28    Wis. 

637 633,  642,  643,  656,     663 

Clemens  y.  Dayis,  7  Pa.  St  263 

471,  494,     501 
Clement  y.   Cozart,   109  N.   C. 

173 349,  436,     983 

Clement  y.   Hartzell,    67    Kan. 

482 235,301,     315 

Clement  y.  Nicholson,  6  Wall. 

(U.   S.)    299 12 

Clements  y.  Eccles,  11   Ir.  Eq. 

229 93,     250 

Clements  y.  (3erow,  30  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)    326    48 

Clements  v.  Moore,  6  Wall.  (U. 


Table  of  Cases. 


Izxiii 


8.)   290   14,      '^^ 

Clements  ▼.   Moore,   78  U.   S. 

299 413,  476,  477,    478 

Clements  t.  Nieholson,  6  Wall. 

(U.   a)    299 

13,  171,  330,  678,  692,     893 
Clements  t.  Nicholson,  73  U.  S. 

299 , .     885 

Clendening  ▼.  Ohl,  118  Ind.  46.     177 
Clerf  ▼.  Montgomery,  15  Wash. 

488 716 

Clearfield    Bank    ▼.    Olin,    112 

Iowa,   476    274 

Cleveland    t.    Bntts,     13    Tez. 

Ciy.  App.  272 609,  706,    906 

Cleveland  ▼.  Chambliss,  64  €ra. 

362 787,  872,    882 

Cleveland    v.   Empire   Mills,    6 

Tex.  Civ.  App.  479 78,    926 

Cleveland     v.      People's     Nat. 

Bank  (Tex.  Civ.  App.),  49  S. 

W.  523   818 

Cleveland  v.  Sims,  69  Tez.  163.     625 
Clewis  V.  Malon,  119  Ala.  312 

394,  938,  964 
Click  V.  Green,  77  Va.  827...226,  240 
Clift  V.  Moaes,  76  Hwi  (N.  Y.), 

617 367 

Clinton  Bank  v.  Collignon,  83 

Hon   (N.  Y.),  467 974 

Clinton  Bank  v.  Cummins,  38 

N.  J.  Eq.  191 869 

Clinton    Hill    lAimber    Co.    v. 

StrUty,  62  N.  J.  Eq.  676. . . 

236,    314 
Cliver  v.  Applegate,  6  N.  J.  L. 

479 49 

Cloe  V.  Call,  79  Mich.  159 089 

Cloeman  v.  Smith,  55  Ala.  368.     679 
Cloud    V.    Malvin,    76    N.    W. 

<Iowa)    645    387 

Clond  V.  Malvin,  108  Iowa,  52 

137,  330,  631,  669,    670 
Clongh  V.  Thompson,  7  Gratt. 

(Va.)   26 204,  817,  818,    826 

Clow  V.  Brown,  72  N.  W.  (Ind.) 


FAGB 

534 326,  386,  610,  1007 

Clow  V.  Woods,  6  Serg.  &  R. 

(Pa.)    275    527 

ante  V.    Fitch,  26   Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   428   177,    216 

Clute  V.  Newkirk,  46  N.  Y.  684 

662,     563 
Cluett  V.  Rosenthal,  100  Mich. 

193 947 

Clute  V.  Steele,  6  Nev.  335.. 553,  804 
Coal    City    C^al,    etc.,    Co.    v. 

Hazard  Powder  Co.,  108  Ala. 

218 862,  855,  860,    861 

Coaldale    Coal    Co.     v.     State 

Bank,  142  Pa.  St.  288 59 

Coale  v.  Mildred,  3  Har.  &  J. 

(Md.)   278   815 

Coale  V.  Moline  Plow  Ck>.,  134 

III.  350 367,  679,  680,  1060 

Coan  V.  Morrison,  34  HI.  App. 

362 241,    895 

Coates  V.  Day,  9  Mo.  304 821 

Coates  V.  Gerlach,  44  Pa.  St.  43  253 
Coates  V.  Wilson,  20  R.  I.  106.  462 
Coble  V.  Nonemaker,  78  P.  St 

501 746 

Cobum  V.  Pickering,  3   N.  H. 

415 434,    522 

Cochonour  v.  Ratcliff,  223  111. 

274 631 

Cochran  v.  Cochran,  62  Neb. 

450 87,  136,  202 

Cochrane    v.    Gilbert,    41    La. 

Ann.  786   620,    736 

Cochran  v.  MoBeath,  1  Del.  Ch. 

187 559,    661 

Cochran  v.  Rennison,  23  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  2326   613 

Cock  V.  Oakley,  50  Miss.  628.. 

270,  282,    296 
Cocke  V.   Carrington  Shoe   (Do. 

(Miss.),  18  So.  683 471,    926 

Cocke  V.  Chapman,  7  Ark.  197 

620,  567,    910 
Cockrill  V.  Cockrill,  13  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  10  837 


Ixidv 


Table  of  Cases. 


Cocks  V.  Varney,  46  N.  J.  £q. 

72 782,     900 

Cockshott  V.   Bennett,  2  T.   R. 

763 662 

Coder  v.  Arts,  18  Am.  6.  R.  513 

1135,  1157,  1164,  1165 
Coder  v.  McPherson,  18  Am.  B. 

R.  523  1165,  1168 

Coflfey  V.  Norwood,  81  Ala.  512.    821 
Coffield    V.    Parmenter,    2    Neb. 

(Unoflf.)    42   979 

Coffin  V.  Day,  34  Fed.  687 308 

Cogbum    y.    Pollock,    54    Miss. 

639 78.. 

Coggeshall  v.  Potter,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  2,995    1158 

Cogwill,  etc..  Milling  Co.  v.  L. 

M.  Nicholson  Co.  (Miss.),  24 

So.  880  868 

Cohen  v.  Boyd,  17  Am.  B.  R. 

329 1190 

Cohen  t.  Knox,  90  Cal.  266... 

322,  324,  579 
Cohen  v.  Meyer,  19  S.  C.  190..  351 
Cohen  v.  Meyers,  42  Ga.  46 . . 

1041,  1047 
Cohen  v.  Parish,  105  6a.  339.. 

411,  914,  921 
Cohen  y.  Parish,  100  Ga.  335 . . 

260,  276,  277,  282,  902,  976 
Cohen  v.  Plonsky,  60  Him  (N. 

Y.),  103  860,  862 

Cohen  v.  Wagar,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

381 1205 

Cohn  y.  Ward,  32  W.  Va.  34 

893,     905 
Cohn  y.  Ward,  36  W.  Va.  516 

333,  1035,  1036 
Coker    y.    Shropshire,    59    Ala. 

542 482 

Colbern    y.    Robinson,    80    Mo. 

541 64,  236,  318,     473 

Colbert   y.   Sutton,   6    Del.    Ch. 

294 158,     626 

Colby    y.    Peabody,    52    N.    Y. 

Super.  Ct.  394 117,    985 


PAGE 

Cole   y.   Albers,    1    Gill    (Md.), 

412 460,  613,  942,     945 

Cole  V.  Brown,  114  Mich.  396.. 

187,     348 

Cole  y.  Byrd,  83  Ga.  207 751 

Cole  y.  Cole,  39  La.  Ann.   878 

520,  563 
Cole  y.  Cole,  126  Mich.  569...  513 
Cole  y.  Dayies,  1  Ld.  Raym.  724.  518 
Cole  y.  Lee,  45  N.  J.  Eq.  779. . 

366,  368,  694,     703 
Cole  y.  Malcom,  66  N.  Y.  363. ,     709 

Cole  y.  Marple,  98  111.   58 

120,   121,   124,   125,   126,  1035 
Cole  y.  Millerton  Iron  Co.,  133 

N.  Y.   164    239 

Cole  y.  Terrell,  71  Tex.  549... 

190,  932 
Cole  y.  Tyler,  65  N.  Y.  73 

210,  263,  264,  274,  338,  340,     968 

Cole  y.  Vamer,  31  Ala.  244 186 

Cole  y.   White,  26   Wend.    (N. 

Y.)    511    519 

Cole  y.  Yancy,  62  Mo.  App.  234.     332 
Coleman  y.  Bank  of  Hamberg, 

2  Strob.  Eq.  (S.  C.)  285 557 

Coleman  y.  Burr,  93  N.  Y.  17 . . 

108,  142,  362,  363,     573 
Coleman    y.     Cocke,     6     Rand. 

(Va.)    618 37,  344,  411,     723 

Colman  y.   Croker,    1    Ves.   Jr. 

161 776 

Coleman    y.    Franklin,    26    Ga. 

368 814 

Coleman  y.  Gammon,  83  N.  W. 

(Iowa)    898   299 

Colenuin  y.  Rice,   115  Ga.   510 

413,  418,     734 
Colman  y.  Vroker,    1   Ves.   Jr. 

(Eng.)    160    186 

Coles  y.  Allen,  64  Ala.  98 933 

Coles  y.  Sellers,  1  Phila.   (Pa.) 

533 301 

Coley  y.    Coley,    14   N.   J.   Eq. 

350 332,  337,  461,     510 

Colfax  Bank  y.  Richardson,  34 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixxv 


pAoB 

Or.  618  896 

Colgan  T.  Jones,  44  N.  J.  Eq. 

274 99,  100,  102,  700 

Collier  v.  Carlisle,  133  Ala.  478.  896 
Collier  v.  French,  64  Iowa,  677.  381 
Collier  v.  Wertheimer-Schwartz 

Shoe  Co.,  122  Ala.  320 66 

OollioA  V.   Brush,  9  Wend.    (N. 

Y.)    198    619 

Collins  y.  Barton,  4  De6.  &  J. 

(Eng.)    612    186 

Collins  V.  Cook,  40  Tex.  238..  682 
Collins  y.  Corwith,  94  Wis.  614.  666 
Collins    y.   Cronin,   117  Pa.  St. 

35 609 

Collins  y.  Gray,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

3,013 1172 

Collins  y.  Hood,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

3,015 1093 

Collins  y.  Ughtly,  60  Ark.  97 . .  620 
(Collins  y.  Myers,  16  Ohio,  647.  622 
Collins  y.  Nelson,  81  Ind.  76..  199 
Collins    y.    Sanger,   8   Tex.   Ciy. 

App.    69    826 

Collins  y.  Stix,  96  Ala.  338 869 

Collins  y.  Taggart,  67  6a.  356 

620,     664 
Collinson   y.    Jackson,    14    Fed. 

305 68,  687,  631,  830,     871 

Collomb  y.  Caldwell,  16  N.  Y. 

484    418,    420,     472 

Collumb  y.  Read,  24  N.  Y.  606 

130,     688 
Colorado   Trading,    etc.,   Co.   y. 

Acres    Commission     Co.,     18 

Colo.  App.  253.. 67,  476,  699,     741 
Colquitt  y.  Thomas,  8  Ga.  258 

226,  609,  616,     708 
722,  727,j  892,    963 
Colston  V.  Miller  (W.  Va.),  47 

S.  E.  268 974 

Colston  V.  Miller,  65  W.  Va.  490 

304,  667,  904,  911,    980 
Coltraine   y.   Causey,   38  N.   C. 

246 634 

Columbia   Nat.   Bank   y.    Bald- 


PAOB 

win,  64  Neb.  732 295,     599 

Columbia    Bank    y.    Jacobs,    10 

Mich.    349 97,    99,     443 

Columbia  Say.   Bank  y.   Winn, 

132  Mo.  80 332,  361,  372,     678 

Columbine  y.  Penhall,  1  Smale 

k  G.    (Eng.)    228 324 

Columbus  Watch  Co.  y.  Hoden- 

pyl,  135  N.  Y.  430.  .474,  903,     904 
Colunibus  Watch  Co.  y.  Hoden- 

pyl,  61  Hun   (N.  Y.),  657... 

310,    982 
Colyin    y.    Johnston,    104    La. 

Ann.   655    371 

Combs  y.  Dayis,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

648 962 

Combs  y.  Watson,  32  Ohio  St. 

228 778,    836 

Comer  y.  Allen,  72  Ga.  1 

319,  324,  361,  458,     613 
Comer  y.  Heidelbach,   109  Ala. 

220 66 

Comey  y.  Pickering,  63  N.  H. 

126 722 

Comingor    y.    Louisyille    Trust 

Co.,  184  U.  S.  18 1174 

Comly  y.  Fisher,  6  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

3,053 628 

Commercial  Bank  y.  Bolton,  20 

App.  Div.    (N.  Y.)    70 

310,  333,    940 
Commercial    Bank    y.    Chilberg 

14   Wash.  47 226 

Commercial   Bank  y.   Cooke,   9 

Grant  Ch.    (Can.)    524 1.     324 

Commercial    Bank   y.    Cunning- 
ham, 41  Mass.  270 301 

Commercial  Bank  y.  Sherwood, 

162  N.  Y.  310 73,  333,    608 

Commercial  Bank  y.  Wilson,  14 

Grant  Ch.    (Can.)    473 332 

Commercial      Nat.      Bank      y. 

Kendall    (S.  D.),  106  N.  W. 

63 161 

Commonwealth  Bank  y.  Keams, 

100   Md.   202 


Izxvi 


Tabi^  of  Casbs. 


PAGE 

290,  410,  471,  509,  611,    597 
Commonwealth  Title  Ins.,  etc., 

Co.  T.  Brown,  166  Pa.  St.  477.    360 
Commonwealth    ▼.    Brown,    81 

Maes.  189 . .  1062,  1063,  1064,  1065 
Commonwealth   v.   Campbell,   7 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  746 450 

Commonwealth  v.  Cremeans,  11 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  985 971 

Commonwealth  v.  Drake,  81  Va. 

305 870 

Commonwealth    v.    Duffield,    12 

Pa.  St.  277 144 

Commonwealth  ▼.  Gkillagher,  2 

Clark    (Pa.),  297 1063 

Commonwealth     ▼.     Harriman, 

127   Mass.   287 1065 

Commonwealth     ▼.    Hickey,    2 

Pars.  Eq.  Cas.    (Pa.)   317...  1062 
Commonwealth  y.  Lewis,  6  Pa. 

Super.   Ct.   610 1064 

Commonwealth     ▼.     Ricks,      1 

Gratt   (Va.)   416 712 

Commonwealth     ▼.     Smith,     1 

Brewst.    (Pa.)    347...; 481 

Commonwealth  ▼.  Williams,  127 

Mass.   285    1064 

Compton  V.  Dietlein  ft  Jaoobs 

(La.),  42  So.  964 468 

Compton  T.  Dietlein  &  Jacobs, 

118   La.    360 1062 

Compton   ▼.   Marshal,    88   Tex. 

50 474,  485,  890,  894,  904,    905 

Compton   ▼.    Patterson,    28    S. 

C.  162   796 

Compton  ▼.  Perry,  23  Tex.  414..    722 
Comstock   ▼.   Bechtel,   63   Wis. 

656 159 

Comstock  V.  Bayford,  20  Miss. 

369 521 

Comstock  V.  Rayford,  12  Sm.  St 

M.    (Miss.)    369 246,  667,    910 

Comstock-Castle    Stove    dk).    v. 

Baldwin,   169  111.  636 599 

Comyns  t.  Riker,  65  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  626    1043 


Comyns  ▼.  Riker,  83  Hun   (K. 

Y.),  471    661,  1021 

Cone  V.  Cone,  118  Iowa,  458..  666 
Cone  V.  Cross,  72  Md.  102.  .330,  691 
Conger  ▼.  Corey,  39  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)  241  363 

Congleton  v.  Schreihofer  (N.  J. 

Ch.),  64  Atl.  144 1127 

Conigland  ▼.   Smith,  79  N.   C. 

303 123 

Conihe    t.    Sawyer,    12    K.    H. 

396 627 

Conkey  t.  Hawthorne,  69  Wis. 

199 1052 

C6nkling  v.  Shelley,  28  N.  Y. 

360 448,  554,     566 

Conley  ▼.  Bentley,  87  Pa.  St.  40 

279,    988 
Conley  ▼.  Buck,  100  Ga.  187.. 

497,  687,  596,  603,     870 
Conlin  ▼.  Elmer,  16  Grant  Ch. 

(U.  C.)    541    217 

Connecticut  Mut.  L.  Ins.  Co.  v. 

Smith,  117  Mo.  261 

663,  890,    913 
Connecticut  River  Sav.  Bank  ▼. 

Barrett,  33  Neb.  709 691 

ConneU's  Estate,  13  Phila.  393 .  351 
Connelly  v.  Edgerton,  22  Neb. 

82 986 

Connelly  v.  Walker,  45  Pa.  St. 

449 436,  437,  445,  938,  1002 

Conner  v.  Hawkins,  66  Tex.  639 

153,     158 
Connor  v.   Hardwick,   53   Kan. 

60 473 

Connor  v.  Long,  104  U.  S.  228. .  1179 
(Donnolly  v.  Dillrance,  50  Iowa, 

92 272 

ConncUy  v.  BUej,  26  Md.  402 

1042,  1044 
Connolly   v.    Rogers,   51    Iowa, 

704 972 

Ck>nover  v.  Beckett,  38  N.  J.  Eq. 

384 668 

Conover  v.  Ruckman,  36  N.  J. 


Table  of  CAaxs. 


Ixxvii 


Eq.    498    

Conard  t.  AtUntie  Ids.  Co.,  26 

U.  S.  386    86, 

Conrad  ▼.   8homo,   44   Pa.   St. 

103 

Conrad  t.  Smith,  2  N.  D.  408. . 
Conrad  v.  Smith,  6  N.  D.  337 . . 
Conry   t.  Benedict    (Iowa),   76 

N.  W.  840 302, 

Consolidated  Tank  Line  Co.  t. 

TT^itaaa  City  Vamiah  Co.,  45 

Fed.  7   

Conatable    v.    Weaser,    8    Ohio 

Dec   339 300,  807,  827, 

Constantine  t.  Twelres,  29  Ala. 

607 79,926, 

Continental     L.     Ina.     Co.     v. 

Palmer,  42  Conn.  60 

Continental    Bank    ▼.    Kats,    1 

Am.  B.  R.  19 

Continental      Nat.      Bank      ▼. 

Moore,  83  App.  Div.   (N.  Y.) 

419 122,  969, 

Continental       TruBt       Co.      ▼. 

Toledo,  etc.,  R.  Co.,  82  Fed. 

642 

Conyerse   ▼.   Hartly,   31    Conn. 

372 

Converse  t.  MeKee,  14  Tex.  20. . 
Conover  v.  Ruckman,  36  N.  J. 

Eq.  493    40, 

Conway  ▼.  Brown,  62  Tenn.  237 
Cook  T.  Coekins,  117  Cal.   140 

17,  346, 
Cook   T.   Greenberg,    34   S.   W. 

(Tex.)  687.... 674,  712,  948, 
CSook  ▼.  Holbrook,  146  Mass.  66 
Cook  ▼.  Hopper,  23  Mich.  511. . 

Cook  ▼.  Horton,  48  111.  20 

Cook  V.  Jones  (Tenn.  Ch.  App.), 

47  8.  W.  14   

Cook  T.  Johnson,  12  y.  J.  Eq. 

61    (Eng.)    

181,  182,  267,  337,  672,  760, 

Cooke  v.  Kell,  13  Md.  469 

Cook  V.  Landnim,  26  Ky.  L. 


37 

311 

972 
622 
622 

938 

797 
840 
943 
124 
1112 

976 

186 

347 
523 

743 
840 

861 

1005 
339 
883 
676 

39 


761 
15 


PAcn 

Rep.  813  217 

Cook  ▼.  Lake,  50  App.  Div.  (N. 

Y.)  92  82-^ 

Cook  ▼.  Lee,  72  N.  H.  569...179,  192 

Coons  v.  Lennieu,  68  Minn.  99 .  1020 

Cook  ▼.  Liggin,  64  Miss.  308..  203 

Cook  v.  Mann,  6  Colo.  21 

628,  530,  540 
Cook  V.  Mason,  87  Mass.  212.. 

920,  935,  1010 

Cook  V.  Meyers,  166  111.  282..  666 

Cook  V.  Scott,  6  111.  336 154 

Cook  ▼.  Swan,  5  Conn.  140.  .77,  939 
Cook  T.  Thornton,  109  Ala.  523 

471,  487,  492,  912 

Cook  ▼.  'nbbals,  12  Wash.  207.  861 
Cook  V.  Tullis,  18  WaU.  (U.  S.) 

332 1163 

Cook   V.   Van   Home,   76   Wis. 

620 628 

Cook  V.  Whipple,  56  N.  Y.  160.  1210 
Cook  k  B.  Co.  T.  Hunt,  18  Tex. 

Civ.  App.  314 432 

Cooke  y.  Cooke,  43  Md.  622 .. . 

16,  19,  67,  201,  243,  680 

626,  915,  916 

Ck>oke  V.  Kell,  13  Md.  469.  .221,  912 
Cooke  ▼.  Peter,  93  111.  App.  1 

468,  513,  966 
Cooke  ▼.   Smith,   3   Sandf.   Ch. 

(N.  Y.)    333    412 

(jookingham    v.    Morgan,    Fed. 

Cas.   No.   3,183 1164 

Cool  T.  Snover,  38  Mich.  662..  632 

Cooley  V.  Abbey,  111  Ga.  439. .  407 

Cooley  V.  Brown,  30  Iowa,  470.  765 

Coolidge  y.  Heneky,  11  Or.  327  615 
CooUdge  v.  Melvin,  42  N.  H.  510 

172,   192,  348,  414,  423,  434,  438 

Coombs  V.  Collins,  6  Ida.  636. .  546 

Coon  V.  Beardsley,  68  Mo.  436.  574 

Coon  V.  Henry,  49  Mich.  208..  688 

Coon  y.  McClure,  53  Neb.  622 . .  1005 
Cooper  y.  Bemey  Nat.  Bank,  99 

Ala.  119  * 697 

Cooper  y.  Bigley,  13  Mich.  463  220 


Ixxviii 


Table  of  Casbs. 


PAQB 

Cooper  V.  Dayidson,  86  Ala.  367 

563,     561 
Cooper  Y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  40 

Kan.  6   509,     513 

Cooper  T.  Friedman,  23  Tex. 

Civ.  App.  585 699,  894,  1001 

Cooper  y.  Ham,  49  Ind.  393...  114 
Cooper  T.  Martin-Brown  Co.,  78 

Tex.  219   979 

Cooper  v.  McClun,  16  111.  435. .  458 
Cooper  ▼.  Perdue,  114  Ind.  207.  .502 
Cooper  V.  Standley,  40  Mo.  App. 

138 141,  366,  624,  938,     940 

Copeland  v.  Kehoe,  57  Ala.  246  398 
Copelly   v.  Deverges,    11   Mart. 

(La.)    641    269 

Copenheaver    v.    Huffaker,    45 

Ky.    18 713,   714,    716 

Copis    v.    Middleton,    2    Madd. 

410 393,     619 

Coppage   ▼.    Bamett,   34    Miaa. 

621 220 

Corbin    ▼.    Goddard,    94    Ind. 

419 1008 

Corbitt  y.   Cutcheon,   79  Mich. 

41 210 

Corder   y.    Williams,   40   Iowa, 

582 200,     239 

Cordery  v.  Zealy,  2  Bailey   (S. 

C),  206    523 

Cordes  y.  Straszer,  8  Mo.  App. 

61 599 

Cordier  y.  Schloss,  12  Cal.  143.  48 
Core  y.  Cunningham,  27  W.  Va. 

206 365,  375,  633,  980,  1022 

Corey  y.  Cornelius,  1  Barb.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)    671    842 

Corey  y.  Greene,  51  Me.   114.. 

795,  801,     842 

Corey  y.  Morrill,  71  Vt.  51 

37,  136,  200,  335,  576,     586 

Corgan  y.  Frew,  39  111.  31 520 

Corlett    y.    Radcliff,    14    Moore 

P.  C.    (Eng.)    121 255,     627 

Comaita  y.  Kyle,  19  Ney.  38..  548 
Cornelius   v.   Boiling,    IS   Okla. 


PAQB 

469 1115 

Cornell  y.  Cook,  7  Cow.  (N.  Y.) 

310 478 

Cornell  y.  Gibeon,  114  Ind.  144.  366 
Cornell  y.  Pierson,  8  N.  J.  £q. 

478 661 

Cornell  y.  Radway,  22  Wis.  260. 

794,  821,     844 
Com   Exc.    Bank  v.   Applegate, 

91  Iowa,  411    

225,  787,  827,  959,     965 
Cornish  y.  Clark,  L.  R.  14  Eq. 

184 343,  589,     870 

Cornish  y.  Dews,  18  Ark.  172.. 

78,  236,  314,  582 
Cornwall  y.  Mix,  3  Ida.  687...  552 
Corogan  y.  Cooke,  2  Ball,  k  B. 

233 100 

Corpew  y.  Arthur,  15  Ala.  525. 

216,     220 
Corse    y.    Patterson,  6  Harr.  & 

J.    (Md.)    153   35 

Cort  y.  Skillin,  29  N.  J.  Eq.  70    279 
Cortland  Wagon  Co.  y.  (Jordy, 

98  Ga.  527    298,  1040 

Cortland  Wagon  Co.  y.  Sharvy, 

53  Miss.  216  521,     962 

Corwin  y.  Beddington,    4    Ind. 

198 711 

Corwins     y.     'rhompson     Nat. 

Bank,  105  Fed.  196 

478,  508,  560,  561,     701 

Cosby  y.  Ross,  '26  Ky.  290 348 

Costello     y.     Chamberlain,     36 

Neb.  45 461 

Costello   y.    Friedman,    71    Pac. 

935 955 

Costello    y.    Harbaugh,    83    111. 

App.  29 1072 

Costello    y.    Palmer,    20    App. 

Cas.    (D.   C.)    210 1061,1063 

Costello  V.  Prospect  Brew.  Co., 

52  N.  J.  Eq.  357 

107,  639,  692,  698 
Cothran  y.  Forsyth,  68  Ga.  560. 

273,  341,  587,  626,  902 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixxix 


PAGE 

Cottiiighain'B  Successicm,  29  La. 

Ann.  669 160 

Cottingham   v.   Greely-Bamham 
Grocery  Co.,  137  Ala.  149... 

227,  680,  686,  744,  745,  1001 
Cottle  V.  Harrold,  72  Ga.  830. .  711 
Cottrell  V.  Smith,  63  Iowa,  181. 

138,  295 
Coiaghlin  v.  Ryan,  43  Mo.  99..  107 
Coulaon    ▼.    Galtsman,    1    Neb. 

(Unoff.)   502 763,     794 

Coulter   V.   Lumpkin,    100    Ga. 

784 914,     943 

Countryman  t.  Goimtryman,  28 

N.  Y.  Supp.  258 156 

CouTsey  v.  Morton,   132  K.  Y. 

556 573 

Couse  y.  Columbia  Powder  Mfg. 
Co.,  33  Atl.    (N.  J.)    297... 

726,     857 
Coutts   ▼.    Greenhow,    2   Munf. 

(Va.)   363 323 

Oovanhovan  v.  Hart,  21  Pa.  St. 

495 315,  462,  463,     471 

479,  490,  595,  627,  915,  924,     939 
Cover  V.  Manaway,  115  Pa.  St. 

338 996 

Cowan  ▼.  PhiUipe,    119    N.    C. 

.      26 430 

Cowan  ▼.  PhiUipe,  122  N.  C.  70  186 
Cowart  V.  Epstein,  101  Ga.  1 . .  396 
Cowen  T.  Aleop,  51  Miss.  158.. 

178,  249,  265,  279,     339 
Cowing  ▼.  Howard,  46  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)   579 600 

Cowles  V.  Coc,  21  Conn.  60 938 

Cowles  V.  KickettB,  1  Iowa,  582. 

244,  459,  487,  492 
C6wling  V.   Estee,   15   111.  App. 

255,   256 396,   590,   612,     979 

Cowling  ▼.  Hill,  69  Ark.  350 .. .  407 
Cox  T.  OoUis,  109  Iowa,  270 . . 

217,  330,  356,  583 
CoK  V.  Cox,  91  Mo.  71 . .  146,  149,  396 
Cox  V.  Dunham,    8    N.    J.    Eq. 

594 763,     807 

Cox  V.  Einspahr,  40  Neb.  411. .     950 


PACT 

Cox  V.  Fraley,  26  Ark.  20,  250. 

458,  473,     847 
Cox   V.    Gniver,    40   N.    J.    Eq. 

473 731,  732,     760 

Cox  V.  Horner,  43  W.  Va.  786. 

95,     827 
Cox      y.      Jackson,      6      Allen 

(Mass.),  108 218 

Cox  V.  Jackson,  88  Mass.  108..     215 

Cox  V.  Miller,  54  Tex.  16 401 

Cox    V.     Morrison,    31    S.    W. 

(Tex.)  67 582 

Cox  V.   Scott,  9  Baxt.    (Tenn.) 

305 106 

Cox  V.  Scott,  68  Tenn.  305.362,  898 
Cox  V.  Shropshire,  25  Tex.  113.  165 
Cox     V.     Swofford     Bros.     Dry 

Goods  Co.,  2  Ind.  T.  61 856 

Cox  V.  Trent,  1  Tex.  Civ.  App. 

639 *  916 

Cox  V.  Wall,  132  N.  C.  730.904,  1204 
Cox  V.  Wilder,  6  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

3,308 92 

Cox  V.  Wilder,  2  Dill.    (U.  S.) 

45 159 

Coykendall  v.  Ladd,  32  Minn. 

529 119 

Coyne  v.  Sayre,    64    N.  J.  Eq. 

702 104,  105,  110,  840,     900 

Coyne,  Stone  &  Co.  ▼.  Jones,  51 

111.   App.    17 ,..     742 

Cozzens  v.  Holt,  136  Mass.  237.  901 
Crabb  v.  Morrisey,  31  Neb.  161.  581 
Cracknall  v.  Jansen,  11  Ch.  Div. 

(Eng.)   1.  .  .  .1 215,     217 

Crait  y.   Schlag,   61   N.   J.   Eq. 

567 304 

Craft  V.  Wilcox,  102  Ala.  378. 

848,     870 
Craig    V.    California    Vineyard 

Co.,  46  Pac.   (Or.)   421 958 

Craig    V.    (California    Vineyard 

Co.,  30  Or.  43   964 

Craig  V.  Conover,  24  Ky.  L. 

Eep.  1682 374 

Craig  V.  Fowler,  59  Iowa,  200. 

892,  947,     948 


Ixxx 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

Craig  y.  Gamble,  6  Fla.  430. . .  40 
Craig  T.  Tappin,  2  Sandf.  Oh. 

(N.  Y.)  78 225 

Craig  T.  Zimmerman,    87    Mo. 

475 721,    727 

Craigmiles  t.  Hays,    75    Tenn. 

720 101© 

Crain  t.  Gould,  46  111.  203 208 

Cram  v.  Mitchell,  1   Sand.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)    251    619 

Cramer  t.  Beford,  17  N.  J.  Eq. 

367 106,  182,  351,    897 

Cramer   t.    Bede,   24   111.   App. 

219 351,     863 

Cramer  ▼.  Blood,  57  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)   155 35,     185 

Cramer  v.  Blood,  48  N.  Y.  684. 

83,  143,    681 
Crampton  ▼.  Sehaap,    56    Ark. 

253 186,    847 

Cramton  ▼.  Tarbell,  6  Fed.  Qaa. 

No.  3,349 528 

Crane  v.  Barkdale,  59  Md.  534.  513 
Crane  ▼.  Linnius,  77  Me.  59 . . .  155 
Crane  v.  Powell,  139  N.  Y.  379.  878 
Crane  v.  Smythe,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

747 1120,  1121 

Crane  ▼.  Stickles,  15  Vt.  252.. 

299,    744 
Crane  y.   Timberlake,    81    Mo. 

431 29,    551 

Cranston   ▼.   Smith,    47    Mich. 

189 769 

Crapeter  v.  Williams,  21   Kan. 

109 321,    486 

Crary   v.    Goodman,    22    N.   Y. 

177 23 

Crary    y.    Hoffman,    115    Iowa, 

332 896 

Crary  y.  Kurtz  (Iowa),  105  N. 

W.  590. . .  .250,  266,  272,  339,    787 

852,  902,  1133 
Crary  y.  Sprague,  12  Wend.  (N. 

Y.)   41 62,      53 

Crayer  y.  Niller,  65  Pa.  St.  456  989 
Crawford  y.  Austin,  34  Md.  49.  465 
Crawford  y.  Beard,  12  Or.  447.    573 


Crawford  y.   Crawford,    4    W. 

Va.  56 320 

Crawford  y.  Dayie,  99  Pa.  St. 

576.  .  . 543 

Crawford   y.    Kirksey,    50   Ala. 

590 .240,  241,  252,    304 

Crawford    y.   Kirksey,    55   Ala. 

282 343,   433,   457,   483,    490 

492,  499,  587,  592,  597,     610 

618,  867 
Crawford  y.  Lehr,  20  Kan.  509. 

209,  631,     765 
Crawford  y.  Logan,  97  111.  396. 

192,  267 
Crawford  y.  Meldoum,  3  Grant 

Err.  App.    (U.  C.)    101.. 232,    354 
Crawford    y.    Neal,    144    U.    S. 

585 .78,  76,  562,    593 

Crawford  y.  Nolan,  70  Iowa,  97.    996 
Crawford  y.   Osmun,    70   Mich. 

651 654 

Crawfordsyille   Bank  y.  Carter, 

89  Ind.  317    ...      .  ...     452 

Creagh  y.  Sayage,  14  Ala.  454.     557 
Crecelius  y.  Bierman,    72    Mo. 

App.  355 311 

Credle  y.  Carrawan,   64  N.   C. 

422 327 

Creed  y.  Lancaster  Baiik,  1  Ohio 

St.  1 284,  349,    569 

Creig  V.  Ricft,  66  S.  C.  171 ... .     976 
Creighton  y.  Roe,  218  HI.  619. 

631,  640 
Creighton  y.  Scranton.  Lace-Cur- 

•  tain  Mfg.  Co.,  191  Pa.  St.  231     302 
Cresaon    Coal    &    Ooke    Co.    y. 

Stauffer    (C.  C.  A.),   17  Am. 

B.  R.  573    1104 

Cresswell  y.  McGaig,    11    Neb. 

222 139 

Criag  y.  Webber,  36  Me.  504.. 

1057,  1058 
Cribb  y.  Bagl^,  83  Ga.  105 .. . 

430,  1005 
Crim  y.  Price,  46  W.  Va.  374. ,  816 
Crim  y.  Walker,  79  Mo.  335 .. . 

776,    781 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixxzi 


PAGE 

Crim  T.  Woodford   (0.  C.  A.), 

14  Am.  B.  R.  302 1124 

Orippen   ▼.    Fletcher,   56   Mich. 

386 744,  748,  781,  782,    793 

803,  897 
Critee  T.  Hart,  49  Neb.  63.272,  297 
Crittenden  t.  Barton,  6  Am.  B. 

R.  775 1165 

Croarkin  t.  Hutchinson,  108  111. 

633 179,    971 

Crocker  t.  Craig,  46  Me.  327..     864 
Crodcer  ▼.  Huntzicker,  113  Wis. 

181 183,  234,     356 

Crockett  t.  Jewett,  2  Ben.   (U. 

a)  514 1198 

Crockett  v.  Magoire,  10  Mo.  34.    717 
Crockett  T.  Phinney,  33  Minn. 

167 810 

Croft  ▼.  Arthur,  3  Deaauss.  (S. 

C.)  223 324,    411 

Crocker  v.  Huntaicker,  113  Wis. 

181 ,.., 698 

Crombie  ▼.  Toung,  26  Ont.  194.     184 
Cromelin  ▼.  McOauley,  67  Ala. 

542 593 

Cromie  v.  Hart,  18  Gratt.  (Va.) 

739 1022 

Crompton  t.  Anthony,  95  Mass. 

33 815 

Cronie  ▼.  Smith,  96  Ga.  794. . .     650 
Crooie  t.  Hart,  18  Gratt.  (Va.) 

739. 983 

Crooke  ▼.  Kings  County,  97  N. 

Y.  421 145 

Crooker  ▼.  Holmes,  65  Me.  195. 

85,  184 
Crooks  ▼.  Stewart,  7  Fed.  800.  1223 
Crooks  T.  The  Peoples  Bank,  3 

Am.  B.  R.  238 

1089,  1160,  1165,  1169,  1170 
Crooks  v.  Brydon,  93  Md.  640. 

13,  580,  778,  892,  907,    971 
Cropsey  ▼.  McKinney,  30  Barb. 

<N.  Y.)   47   376,     772 

Crosby  t.  Huston,  1  Tex.  203. . 

237,    316 
Crosby  v.  Spear,  11  Am.  B.  R. 
f 


PAQS 

613 1218,  1221 

Crosby  v.  Miller,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

806 1180,  1221 

Cross  ▼.  Armstrong,  44  Ohio  St. 

613 124 

Cross  T.  Berry,  132  Ala.  92... 

151,     157 

Cross  y.  Bryant,  3  111.  36 468 

Cross  V.  McKinley,  81  Tex.  332.  1000 
Crossley  y.  Elworthy,  L.  R.   12 

Eq.    (Eng.)    168   200,    903 

Crothers  y.  Busch,  163  Mo.  606. 

460,  472,  492 
Crouch  y.  Carrier,  16  Conn.  605  646 
Crouse  y.   Frothingham,  97   N. 

Y.  105 438 

Crow  y.  Andrews,  24  Mo.  App. 

169 727 

Crow  y.  Beardsley,  68  Mo.  435. 

472,  488,  497,    607 
Crow  y.  Ouryer,  133  Ind.  260. . 

852,  1009 
Crowder  y.  Garber,  97  Va.  666. 

898,  963,  966 
Crowell    y.    Horacek,    12    Neb. 

622 774,  1041 

Crowinshield    y.    Kittridge,    48 

Mass.  520 497,  626,    661 

Croder  y.  Young,  3  T.  B.  Mon. 

(Ky.)   157 35 

Cnmip  y.  Chapman,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  3,455 1165 

Cruger  y.  Tucker,  69  Ga.  657.. 

899,  1021 
Cruikahanks  y.  Oogswell,  26  111. 

366 662,    635 

CuUough  y.  Will^,  192  Pa.  St. 

176 636 

Crumbaugh  y.   Kugler,   3  Ohio 

St.  644 -214 

Crumbaugh  y.   Kugler,  2   Ohio 

St.  373 281,    340 

Crummen  y.  Bennett^  68  N.  C. 

494 92,  161,     166 

Cnunp  y.   Johnson    (Tenn.   Ch. 

App.),  40  S.  W.  73 898 

Cubbedge  y.  Adams,  42  Ga.  124.  1044 


Ixxxii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Cubberly  v.  Yager   (N.  J.  Ch.), 

2  Atl.   814    768 

Cuendet  v.  Lahmer,  16  Kan.  527  459 
Culbertson  v.  Luckey,  13  Iowa, 

12 288,    967 

Gulp  y.  Mulvane,  66  Kan.  143.  906 
Culver  V.  Graham,  3  Wyo.  211.  183 
Cumberland   Coal,    etc.,    Co.  v. 

Hoffman  Steam  Coal  Co.,  30 

Barb.    (N.   Y.)    159 812 

CiimmingB   v.    Feary,    44   Mich. 

39 915 

Cummings      v.      Kansas      City 

Wholesale    Grocery    Co.,    123 

Mo.  App.  9   1164,  1168 

Cummins  v.  Griggs,  63  Ky.  87.  566 
Cuney  v.  Dupree,  21  Tex.  211. 

640,    641 
Cunningham    t.    Ashbrook,    20 

Mo.  553 562 

Cunningham     ▼.     Campbell,     3 

Tcnn.  Ch.  708  84,    214 

Cunningham  v.  Eagan,  102  Wis. 

272 316 

Cunningham     v.     Freenofn,    11 

Wend.    (N.  Y.)   240 

673,  876,  879,  956,    983 
Cunningham  v.  Norton,  126  U. 

S.  77 969 

Cunningham  v.  Rogers,  14  Ala. 

147 872 

Cunningham  t.   Schley,  41   Ga. 

426 192 

Cunningham    v.    Williams,    42 

Ark.  170 863 

Curd  V.  Miller,  7  Gratt.  186... 

182,  206,  623,  567,     911 
Cureton  v.   Doby,   10  Rich.  Eq. 

(S.   C.)    411... 452,  462,  466,     474 
Curlee    v.    Rembert,    37    S.    C. 

214 1036 

Curran  v.  Bernard,  6  111.  App. 

341 626 

Curran   v.    Munger,    Fed.    Caa. 

3,487 1130,  1131 

Curran   v.    Olmstead,    101   Ala. 

('^2 309,  855,     859 


PAGV 

Curran   v.   Rothchild,    14   Colo. 

App.   497    087 

Currie   v.    Gillespie,    21    Grant 

Ch.    (U;   C.)    267 840 

Currie  v.  Jordan,  4  Biss.    (U. 

S.)    513   758 

Currier  v.   Ford,  26   111.  488.. 

177,  956 
Currier  v.  Sutherland,  54  N.  H. 

475 163,     164 

Currier  v.  Taylor,  19  N.  H.  189  581 
Curry  v.  Catlin,  9  Wash.  495. .  37 
Curry  v.  Curry,  8  Pa.  Cas.  247  922 
Curry   v.   Glass,   25   N.   J.   Eq. 

108 782,     847 

Curry  v.  Lloyd,  22   Fed.  258.. 

394,  409 
Curry  v.  McCauiey,  20  Fed.  683  253 
Curtin  v.  Curtin,  58  Hun    (N. 

Y.),   607    709 

Curtis  V.   Fox,  47  N.  Y.  300.. 

264,  482,  1016 
Curtin  v.  Isaacsen,  36  W.  Va. 

391 523,     911 

Curtis  V.  Leavitt,   15   N.   Y.   9 

13,  418,  419,  421,  427,     443 
Curtin  v.  Lewis,  74  Conn.  367 

252,  560,  711 
Curtner  v.  Lyndon,  128  Cal.  35  540 
Curtis  V.  Price,  12  Ves.  Jr.  89.  633 
Curtis  T.  Riddle,  89  Mass.  186 

724,  725 
Curtis  V.  Steever,  36  N.  J.  L. 

304 741,     742 

Curtis  V.  Valiton,  3  Mont.  163.  681 
Curtis  V.  Wilcox,  91  Mich.  229.  389 
Curtis    V.    Wortsman,    26    Fed. 

893 896 

Cushman  v.  Addison,  62  N.  Y. 

«28 178,     278 

Cushing    V.    Breed,    96     Mass. 

376 541,  544,  646,     560 

Cushing   V.    Quigley,    11    Mont. 

677 156 

Cushwa  V.  Cushwa,  5  Md.  44 . .  639 
Cutcheon  v.  Buchanan,  88  Mich. 

^^^ 572,     691 


Table  of  Cases. 


Izxxiii 


PAGE 

Cutcheon   v.    Corbitt,   09  Mich. 

578 687 

Cutler  V.   Dickinson,   25   Mass. 

386 303,  434,     443 

Cutter  V.  Pollock,  4  N.  D.  266 

461,     473 
Cutting    V.    Cutting,   86   N.   Y. 

522 146 

Cutting   V.   Jackson,  56  N.   H. 

253 522,     962 

Cutting  V.  Pike,  21  N.  H.  347. .     665 
Cuyler  ▼.  McCartney,  33  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)   165  946 

D. 
Dabney  y.  Kennedy,  7  Gratt. 

(Va.)  317  326 

Daenport     ▼.     Cummings,      15 

Iowa,  219   671 

Dagliah  v.  McCarthy,  19  Grant 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   678 463 

Dahlmaa  v.  Greenwood,  99  Wis. 

163 748 

Dahlman    v.    Jacobs,     15    Fed. 

863 773,     786 

Daisy  Roller  Mills  v.  Ward,  6 

N.  D.  317. .600,  627,  696,  702,    817 
Dale  V.  Arnold,  2  Bibb.    (Ky.) 

605 626 

Dalglish  T.  McCarthy,  19  Grant 

Ch.   578    723 

Dallas  Brewing  Co.  t.  Holzner, 

116  La.  719.  . 240,    250 

Dalley's  Estate,   13  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.   506    498,    596 

DaUam    v.     Renshaw,    26    Mo. 

533   53,  891,     952 

Dalrymple  t.  Security  Imp.  Co., 

11   N.  D.  65 161 

Dalrymple  ▼.  Security  L.  ft  T. 

Co.,  9  N.  D.  306 569,    860 

Dalton    ▼.    MitcheU,    4    J.    J. 

March   (Ky.),  372   215 

Dalton  y.  Stiles,  74  Mich.  726 

463,    460 
Dameron    ▼.    Williams,    7    Mo. 

138 931 


PAGE 

Damon  v.  Bache,  55  Pa.  St.  67 .     597 
Damon  v.  Bryant,  19  Mass.  411 

192,  956 
Damon  v.  Damon,  28  Wis.  515.  202 
Dana  v.  Haskell,  41  Me.  25 ... . 

805,  842 
Dana  v.  Stanford,  10  Cal.  269. 

458,  463,  464,  487 
489,  490,  491,  492 
Danbury  v.  Robinson,  14  N.  J. 

Eq.   213 688,  716,  720,     724 

Danby    v.    Sharp,    2    McArthur 

(D.  C),  435 297 

Dance    v.    Seaman,    11    Gratt. 

(Va.)    778    623 

Danforth  v.  Beattie,  43  Vt.  138 

161,  166,  167 
Danforth  v.  Roberts,  20  Me.  307  61 
Danforth   v.   Robinson,   80  Me. 

466 206 

Danforth  v.  Wood,  11  Paige  (N. 

Y.),  9    632 

Danjean   v.    Blacketer,    13    La. 

Ann.  595    688,     623 

Daniel     v.     Brandenburgh,     14 

Ky.  L.   Rep.   310 378 

Daniel  v.  McHenery,  67  Ky.  277     648 
Daniel    v.    Palmer,    124    Mich. 

365 833,     838 

Daniel  v.  Vaccaro,  41  Ark.  316 

1054,  1058,  1060 
Daniels  v.  Nelson,  41  Vt.  161..  527 
Dann  v.  Luke,  74  Conn.   146.. 

528,  538,     540 
Dannels  v.  Fitch,  8  Pa.  St.  406     643 
Danner  Land,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Stone- 
wall Ins.  Co.,  77  Ala.  184... 

86,  441,  538,  561,  929 
Danner  v.  Brewer,  69  Ala.  191.  86 
Danzey  v.  Smith,  4  Tex.  411.. 

634,  636,     641 
Darby  ▼.  Boatman's  Say.  Inst. 

1  Dill.    (U.   S.)    141 1083 

Darby  v.  Gilligan,  37   W.   Va. 

69 1033 

Darcy     v.     Labennes,     31     La. 


Ixxxiy 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Ann.   404    899 

Darden  v.  Skinner,  4  N.  C.  259 

232,  247,  260,  264,  1010 
Bardenne  v.  Hardnrick,  0  Ark. 

482 271 

Dargan  t.  Waring,  11  Ala.  988 

722,  794 
Darland     v.     Rosencranes,     66 

Iowa,    122    618 

Darling  ▼.   Haanks,   42   S.   W. 

(Ky.)    1130   368,  369,    361 

Darling  v.  Price,  27  Grant  Ch. 

(U.   C.)    331    188 

Darling  v.  Ricker,  68  Vt.  471 

163,  161,  298,    901 
D'Armand    v.    Sheriff,    21    La. 

Ann.   198    667 

Darnell  v.  Mack,  46  Neb.  740. .     970 
Dart    y.     Farmers'    Bank,    27 

Barb.  (N.  Y.)  337 693 

Dart  V.  Stewart,  17  Ind.  221 . . 

192,  977 
Darvill  v.  Terry,  0  H.  &  N.  807  443 
Darwin    v.    Handley,    3    Yerg. 

(Tenn.)    502    

72,  523,  666,  603,  910 
Daakam  v.  Neff,  79  Wis.  161..  801 
D.  A.  Tompkins  Co.  v.  Catawba, 

Mills,   82   Fed.   780 846 

liaugherty    v.    Bogy,    104    Fed. 

938 161,     157 

Daugherty  y.   Bogy,  3  Ind.  T. 

197 92,   101,  603,    909 

Daugherty    y.    Daugherty,    104 

Cal.  221 244,  247,  250,    264 

Daugherty  y.  Powell,  67  Kan. 

867 185,  197,    804 

Dauley  y.  Rector,  10  Ark.  211.     620 
Dayenport   y.   Foulke,    68   Ind. 

382  . 437 

Dayenport     y.     Ciunmings,     16 

Iowa,  219    237,    976 

Dayenport    y.    Wright,    61    Pa. 

St.  292    238 

David  Adler,  etc.,  Clothing  Co. 

y.  Hellman,  66  Neb.  266.... 


PAGE 

121,  123,  276v  279,  399,  897,  953 
Dayid  y.  Birchard,  53  Wis.  492  574 
Dayidson  y.  Alexander,  84  N.  C. 

621 49 

Dayidson  y.  Burke,  143  III.  139 

299,  1019 
Dayidson    y.    Carter,    65    Iowa, 

117 644 

Dayidson  y.  Dishman,  22  Ky.  L. 

Rep.    940    872 

Dayidson  y.  Dockery,   179  Mo. 

687 

185,  216,  350,  770,  774,  776,     783 
Dayidson    y.    Dwyer,    62    Iowa, 

332 83,     143 

Dayidson  y.  Grayes,  Riley  Eq. 

(S.  C.)    232 

91,  146,  322,  328,  668,  692 
Dayidson  y.  Kahn,  116  Ala.  427  467 
Dayidson  y.  Kahn,  119  Ala.  364 

924,    986 
Dayidson  y.  Lanier,  51  Ala.  318 

347,    375 
Dayidson   y.    Watts    Min.    Car 

Wheel  Co.,  121  Ala.  691.. 44,    433 
Dayis  y.  Anderson,  1  Ga.  176.. 

311,  436,  458,    473 
Dayis  y.  Anderson,  99  Va.  620 

280,  290,     846 
Dayis  y.  Arkansas  F.  Ins.  Co., 

63   Ark.   412 962 

Dayis  y.  Armstrong,  7  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  3,624    268 

Day^  y.  Reason,  77  Tex.  604..  315 
Dayis  y.  Bigler,  62  Pa.  St.  242.  534 
Dayis  y.  Bohle,  1  Am.  B.  R.  412 

1082,  1099,  1139 
Dayis  y.  Briscoe,  81  Mo.  27 . . 

207,  722,    900 
Dayis  y.  Bonning,  89  Va.  766.. 

1035,  1049 
Dayis  y.  Bowman,  26  Or.  189. .     560 
Dayis   y.   Bums,   23   Hun    (N. 
Y.),   648    780,    781 

Dayis  y.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St.  82. 

318,  462,  474,  483,     490 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixxxv 


PACBB 

DaTis  y.  Chafle,    160  Ind.   242 

818,  861 
DaTia  y.  Gulp,  78  S.  W.  (Tex-) 

654 613 

Dayis  y.  Dayis,  20  Or.  78.  .196,    609 
Dayis  v.  Dayis,  26  Gratt.  (Va.) 

687 369 

Dayis  y.  Dayis,  98  S.  W.  (Tex.) 

198 634 

Dayis  y.  Dean,  26  Nl  J.  Eq.  436     781 
Dayia  y.  Fredericks^  104  U.  S. 

618 146 

Dayis  y.  Garrison,  86  Iowa,  447 

366,    679 
ris  y.  Getchell,  32  Neb.  792 

263,    999 
ris  y.  Gibbon,  24  Iowa,  267 

171,    469 
ria  y.  Grayes,  29  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)    480   139,  140,  143,     186 

646,  663,  668,  726 
Dayis  y.  Harper,  14  App.  Gas. 

(D.  C.)  468 617,  818 

Dayis  y.  Harris,  21  Miss.  9 386 

Dayis  y.  Herrick,  37  Me.  397..     348 
Dayia  y.  H.  Feltman  Co.,  112 

Ky.    293    160,  1033 

Dayis  y.  Howard,  73  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  347   319 

Dayis  y.  Jones,  67  Ark.  122 311 

Dayis  y.  Justice,  14  Ky.  L.  Rep; 

741    36,  38,  148,    361 

Dayy  y.  Kelley,  66  Wis.  462.. 

633,  636 
Dayis  y.  Kennedy,  106  HI.  300.  376 
Dayis  y.  Kline,  96  Mo.  401 .. .  220 
Dayis  y.  Land,  88  Mo.  436..  162,  160 
Dayis  y.  Leopold,  87  N.  Y.  620 

698,   626,  689,    696 
Dayis  y.  Mendenhall,  19  Minn. 

149 748 

Dayis  y.  Meyer,  47  Ark.  210..     548 
is    ▼.    McGarthy,    62    Kan. 

116 683 

is  y.  McCarthy,  40  Kan.  18    603 
is  y.  McFarlane,  37  Cal.  634    666 


PAGS 

Dayis  y.  Morgan,  19  Mont.  141     669 
Dayis  y.  Payne,  4  Rand.   (Va.) 

332 349 

Dayis  y.  R.  R.  Co.,  Fed.   Cas. 

No.  3,648    1138 

Dayis   y.   Schwartz,    166   U.   S. 
631 ... .  10,  226,  236,  262,  264,     31& 
389,  467,  473,  489,  498,     490 
Dayis  y.  Scott,  27  Neb.  642... 

461,  473 
Dayis  v.  Settig,  66  Tex.  497. . .  666 
Dayis  y.  Sharron,  64  Ky.  64 . . .  100 
Dayis  y.  Shepherd,  87  111.  App. 

467 666 

Dayis    y.    Stern,    16    La.    Ann. 

177 187 

Dayis  y.  Steyens,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

763,  1086,  1087,  1100 
Dayis  y.  Swanson,  64  Ala.  277 

209,  766 
Dayis  y.  Tibbetts,  39  Me.  279 

680,  727 
Dayis  y.  Turner,  120  Fed.  606 

664,  1122,  1123 
Dayis  y.  Turner,  4  Gratt.  (Va.) 
422 13,  14,    623 

Dayis  y.  W.  F.  Vandiyer  &  Co. 

(Ala.),  38  So.  860 821,  1138 

Dayis  y.  White,  49  N.  J.  Eq. 

567 1014 

•  Dayis   y.    Winona   Wagon   Co., 

120  Cal.  244   624 

Dayis  y.  Woods,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

Dayis  y.  Yoder,  173  Pa.  St.  138 

430,  448 
Dayis  y.  Yonge    (Ark.),  86  S. 

W.  90 . .  172, 276, 368,  360,  403,     762 
Dawkins  y.  Gault,  6  Rich.   (S. 

C.)    161    944 

Dawley  y.  Brown,  79  N.  Y.  390      23 
Dawley    y.    Brown,    66    Barb.  ' 

(N.  Y.)    107    1022 

Dawley  y.  Brown,   11  St.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    260    1025 


Ixxxvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PACK 

Dawson  Bank  v.  Harris,  84  N. 

C.    206    

778,  779,  823,  824,  863,  870 
•Dawson  v.  Coffey,  12  Or.  613..  774 
Dawson  v.  Flash,  07  Ala.  639. . 

309,  457,     495 
Dawson  v.  Holbert,  4  La.  Ann. 

36 53 

Dawson  v.  Sims,  14  Or'.  561 .. .  783 
Dawson  v.  Waltmeyer,  91  Md. 

328 902,  913,     980 

Day  V.  Beck,  etc.,  Co.,  8  Am.  B. 

R.   463    1099 

Day  V.  Cole,  44  Iowa,  462 329 

Day   V.  Cooley,   118  Mass.  524 

19,  187,  189,  588 
Day  V.  Day,  17  Ont.  App.  157.  652 
Day  y.  Goodbar,  69  Miss.  687 

252,  253 
Day  V.  Kendall,  60  Iowa,  414. .  179 
Day  V.  Lown,  51  Iowa,  364.  .86,    995 

Day  V.  Stone,  69  Tex.  612 924 

Day  V.  Washburn,  24  How.  (N. 

Y.)    352    185 

Dayton  Spice  Mills  y.  Sloan,  49 

Neb.  622 235,  316,  320,    514 

Dayton  v.  Walsh,  47  Wis.  113.  114 
Deakers  v.  Temple,  41   Pa.  St. 

234 297,    924 

Dean  v.  Grimes,  72  Cal.  442..  458 
Dean  v.  Plane,  96  111.  App.  428  366 
Dean  y.  Skinner,  42  Iowa,  418.  435 
Dean  y.  Walkenhorst,  64  Cal.  78  524 
Dearman  y.  Dearman,  4  Ala.  521 

631,  665 
Dearman   y.    Dearman,    5    Ala. 

202 90,      96 

Dearman    y.    Radcliffe,    6    Ala. 

192 636,  641,    645 

De  Armond  y.  Ballon,  122  Ind. 

398 833 

Dearing     y.     McKinnon    Dash, 

etc.,    Co.,    33   App.    Diy.    (N. 

Y.)  31   32 

Dearing     y.     McKinnon     Dash, 

etc.,  Co.,  165  N.  Y.  78 


PAOB 

87,  88,  576,  878,     884 
Desbecker     y.     Mendel  son,     117 

Mich.  293 958 

DeBerry  v.  Wheeler,  128  Mo.  84  139 
De    Blanc    y.    Martin,    2    Rob. 

(La.)    38    490,     598 

Decatur  Branch  Bank  y.  Jones, 

6  Ala.  487 941 

DeChambrun     y.     Schemerhom, 

59  Fed.  504   669 

Decker    y.    Decker,    108    N.    Y. 

128 27,  62,  53,  450,  687,     686 

768,  776,  832,     836 
Decuir  y.  Veazy,  8  La.  Ann.  453 

675,  1021 
Dedesdemier     y.     Burton,     12 

Grant  Oh.    (Can.)    569 305 

Dedson  y.  Cooper,  50  Kan.  680.  354 
Deere  Plow  Co.  y.  McDayid,  14 

Am.  B.  R.  653 1193 

Deere  Plow  Co.  y.  Sulliyan,  158 

Mo.   440    1001 

Deere  y.  Needles,  65  Iowa,  101 .  637 
Deere  v.  Wolf,  77  Iowa,  115...  998 
Deering  y.  Collins,  38  Mo.  App. 

80 461,  490,  694,     893 

Deering  y.  Holcomb,  26  Wash. 

688 150,  279,    284 

Deering  y.  Lawrence,  79  Iowa, 

610 703 

DeFarges  y.  Ryland,  87  Va.  404 

328,  941 
De  Ford  y.  Nye,  40  Kan.  666. .  513 
De  Frehn  y.  Leitenberger,  2  Leg. 

Ohron.   (Pa.)   365 898 

DeGarca  y.  Galyan,  65  Tex.  63 .  180 
Deggender  y.  Seattle  Brew.,  etc., 

Co.,  41  Wash.  385   525,    561 

DeGraw  y.  Meehan,  48  N.  J.  £q. 

219 214,     839 

De  Hierapolis  y.  Lawrence,  115 

Fed.  761..  102,  132,  422,  858,     868 
De    Hierapolis    y.     Reilly,    44 

App.  Diy.    (N.  Y.)   22... 322,     325 
Delacroix    y.    Lacaze,     14    La. 

Ann.   519    708 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixxxvii 


FAOB 

BeLacy  v.  Hurst,  83  Oa.  223. . 

777,    779 
Be     Lancey    v.     Finnegan,     86 

Minn.   256    402 

Delaad    v.    Miller    &    Cheney 

Bank,  11  Am.  B.  R.  744 

1115,  1166,  1167 
Delaney  v.  Valentine,  154  N.  T. 

692 2,  13,  22,  253,  428,  456 

470,  471,  472,    673 
Delaware   v.   Ensign,   21    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)   85  231,    363 

DelaTan  v.   Wright,*  110  Mich. 

143 680 

Delesdemier  v.  Mowry,  20  Me. 

160 666 

Delo  V.  JohnBon,  110  Mo.  App. 

642 401 

Be  Loach  v.  Sarratt,  56  S.  C. 

264 967,  968,     981 

Be   Loach  v.   Sarratt    (S.  C), 

33  S.  E.  366 920,     963 

Bel   Valle  v.   Hyland,   76  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  493 .%.     319 

Bel    Valle  t.   Hyland,   61   Hun 

(N.  Y.),  626   996 

Bemaree  v.  BriBkill,   3  Blackf. 

(Ind.)  115 411 

Bemaree  v.   Briskill^  3  Blackf. 

(Ind.)  115 36,  136,     880 

Bemareet  v.  House,  91  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  290 '..     578 

Bemarest  v.  Terhune^  18  N.  J. 

Eq.  632 314,  349,  683,     909 

Bemeritt  ▼.  Miles,  22  N.  H.  523. 

939,    949 
Be  Mestre  v.  West,  A.  C.  (Eng.) 

264.  ..  w 216 

Be     Millon     y.     McAlliley,     2 

McMull.   (S.  C.)  499 423 

Bemorest  y.  Miller,  42  U.  C.  Q. 

B.  56 215,    219 

Bempsey  v.  Bowen,  25  111.  App. 

192 1002 

Bempsey  y.  Gardner,  127  Mass. 

381 644,    548 


PAOB 

Dempster  Mill  Mfg.  Co.  v.  First 

Nat.  Bank,  49  Neb.  321 490 

Demuth  v.  Bochler,  11  Mo.  App. 

588 233,     363 

Den  V.  Erwin,  18  N.  C.  569 63' 

Den.  V.  Lippenoott,  6  N.  J.  L. 

473 344 

Denbell  v.  Fisher,  R.  M.  Carlt. 

(Ga.)  36 327 

Dening  v.  Nelson,   1  Ohio,  Dec. 

503 102 

Denison  v.  Tattersall,   18  L.  T. 

Rep.  N.  S.  303 343 

Dennis  v.  Ball-Warren  Commis- 
sion Co.,  77  S.  W.  (Ark.)  903. 

342,     664 
Dennis    y.    Dennis,    119    Mich. 

380 220 

Densmore    Commission    (Ik>.    y. 

Shong,  98  Wis.  380 ... .  58,  69,     523 
Densmore  y.  Tomer,  11  Neb.  118 

522,    910 
Dent  y.  Ferguson,  132  U.  S.  60. 

240,  433,  639,  649,  656 
Dent  y.  Pickens,  60  W.  Va.  382.  1029 
Dent  y.  Pickens,  63  S.  E.   (W. 

Va.)    154 682,     875 

Dent  y.  Pickens,  46  W.  Va.  378. 

294,  824,  613,  617,  909 
Dent  y.  Portwood,  21  Ala.  588. 

218,    924 
Denton  y.  Crook,  Brayt.    (Vt.) 

188 1059 

Bent<xi  y.  Griffith,  17  Md.  301 .       29 
Denton  y.  Willcox,  2  La.  Ann. 
60 650 

Denyer  Jobbers'  Assoc,  y.  Rum- 

sey,  19  Colo.  App.  320 311 

Depew  y.  Clark,  1  Phila.   (Pa.) 

482 972,  1010 

IJeposit    Bank '  y.    Caffee,    136 

Ala.  208... 436,  439,  773,  828,     830 
De  Prato    y.    Jester,  20  S.  W. 

(Ark.)  807 

338,  372,  614,  579,  684,    619 


iXXXVlll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Derby  v.  Gallup^  5  Minn.  119.. 

30,  226,  907,  917 
Dereny  v.  Hicks,  82  Ga.  240. . .  1044 
Dermott  v.  Garter,  109  Mo.  21 .  138 
DeRuiter  v.   DeRuiter,  28  Ind. 

App.  9 202,    964 

Desbecker    v.     Mendelson,     117 

Iowa,  293 965 

Desberger  v.  Harrington,  28  Mo. 

App.  632 996 

Des  Brisay  ▼.  Hogan,    53    Me. 

554 796 

Deshazer  ▼.  Beshazer,  11  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  159. 1052 

Deshon  v.  Wood,  148  Mam.  132.    327 
Des  Moines  Ins.  Co.  v.  Lent,  76 

Iowa,  622 597,  715,    827 

Des  Moines  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Coun- 
cil B.  Sav.  Bank,  18  Am.  B. 

R.  108 1123 

Des  Moines  Sav.  Bank  ▼.  Mor- 
gan Co.,  12  Am.  B.  R.  781 . . . 

1166,  1220 
Desmond  ▼.  Myers,    113    Mich. 

437 139 

Dessar  v.  Field,  99  Ind.  648 .. .     428 
Detroit    Copper,    etc..    Mills    ▼. 

Ledwidge,   162  111.  305 

770,  773,  1039 
Detwiler  v.   Louison,    18    Ohio 

ar  Ct.  434 202,  723,    826 

Deunchy  v.  Smith,  83  111.  App. 

656 332 

Deutsch  V.  Allen,  57  Tex.  89. . .     290 
Deutsch  V.  Reilly,  57  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    76   208,    749 

Devlin  V.   O'Neill,   6  Daly    (N. 

Y.),  305 34 

Devoe  v.  Brandt,  53  N.  Y.  462.     979 
Devonshire    v.    Gaiithreauz,    32 

La.  Ann.  1132 520,    884 

De  Vore  v.  Jones,  82  Iowa,  66. 

139,  141 
Devries  v.  Phillips,  63  N.  C.  53.  627 
De  Walt  T.  Doran,  21  D.  C.  163.  390 
De  Ware  v.   Bailey    (Tex.  Civ. 


PAGV 

App.),  40  S.  W.  323 904 

Dewart  v.  Clement,  48  Pa.  St. 

413 928 

Deweese  v.  Deweese,  28  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  726 160- 

Deweese  v.  Deweese    (Ky.),  90 

S.   W.  256    877 

Dewey  v.  Eckert,  62  111.  218...     788 

Dewey  v.  Long,  25  Vt  564 

37,  192,  387,  682,     753 
Dewey  v.  Moyer,  9  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

473 066 

Dewey  v.  Moyer,  72  N.  Y.  70. . . 

71,  331,  678,    684 
Dewey  v.  Thrall,  13  Vt  281 .. . 

637,     638 
Dewitt  V.  Vansickle,   29   N.  J. 

Eq.  209. 

218,  221,  242,  383,  715,  716,     718 
De  Wolf  V.  A.   &  W.   Sprague 

Mfg.  Co.,  49  Conn.  282 31,     869 

De  Wolf  V.  McNabb,  1  Pa.  Sac. 

156 958 

DeWolf.v.  Pratt,  42  111.  198...     631 
Dews  V.  Cornish,  20  Ark.  332..     472- 
De  Young  v.  De  Young,  6  La. 

Ann.  786 OOO" 

Diamond    Coal    Co.    v.    Garter 

Dry   Goods    Co.,    20    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  1444 

231,  306,  364,  692,  698,    907 
Diamond  v.  Palmer^    78    Iowa, 

578 165 

Dibble  v.  Morris,  26  Conn.  416.     620 

Dice  V.  Irwin,  110  Ind.  561 

320,  459,  492,  499,  513,     516 
Dick  V.  Grissom^   1  Freem.  Ch. 

(Miss.)  428 109,  110,     380 

Dick  V.  Hamilton,  7   Fed.  Gas. 

No,  3890 278,     361 

Dick  V.  Hamilton,  1  Deady  (U. 

S.),  322 131,     148 

Dick  V.  Lindsay,  2  Grant  Gas. 

(Pa.)   431 527,     657 

Dickenson  v.  Cook,  17  Johns. 

(N.  Y.)  332 668 


Table  of  Cases. 


Ixxxix 


PAOV 

Dickennan  v.  Farrell,  59  Iowa, 

759 625 

Dickey  v.   Convene,   117   Mich. 

449.  . 160 

Dickinson  ▼.  Johnson,  110  Ky. 

236 363 

Dickinson  v.  National  Bank  of 

RepuhUc,  98  Ala.  546  171 

Dickinson  ▼.  Way,  3  Rich.  Eq. 

412 696 

Dickson   v.   McLamey,   97   Ala. 

383 191,    862 

Dickson  ▼.  McMahcm,  14  V.  C. 

C.  P.  521 43 

DiggB  V.   McColloug^,    69    Md. 

592..  183,  187,  190,  195,  368,  942 
Didier  v.  Paiteraon,  93  Va.  534.  443 
Dieffenderfer  ▼.  Fisher,  3  Grant. 

(Pa.)   39 154,    650 

Diefendorf    v.    Barry,    5    Kan. 

App.  879 580 

Diefendorf    v.    OliTer,    8    Kan. 

366 13 

Dierker  y.  Hess^  54  Mo.  246. . .  110 
Dietrich  v.  Koch,  35  Wis.  618.  634 
Diets  V.  Atwood,   19   111.   App. 

96 130 

Dinunoek  v.  Bixby,  37  "Mslbs, 

368 869 

Dilion  V.  Harkness,  80  Miss.  8.  636 
Dillard,  etc..  Go.  ▼.  Snfith,  105 

Tenn.  372 297 

DUIard  v.  Dillard,  22  Tenn.  41 . 

188,  194,  349 
DiUen  v.  Johnson,  132  Ind.  75.  369 
Dillin  ▼.  Kincaid,  70  Mo.  App. 

670 552 

Dillnian  ▼.  Nadelhoffer,  56  111. 

App.  517 339,  373,  796,    798 

Dillman  v.  Nedelhoffer,  162  III. 

625 281,  397,     515 

Bilworth  v.  Cnrtis,  137  111.  508. 

679,     681 
DimodE  V.  Ridgeway,  169  Mass. 

626 82,     702 

Dingley  v.  Robinson,  5  Me.  127.    210 


PAGB 

Binius  v.  Lahr  (Ind.  App.),  74 

N.  E.  1033 .....276,  1009 

Dishman   v.    Davidson,    19   Ky. 

L.  Rep.  139 195^ 

Diichbum  v.  Jermyn,  13  Pa.  Go. 

Ct  1 245 

Ditchburn  v.  Jermyn,  etc.,  Co.- 
Operative  Assoc.,  3  Pa.  Diet. 

635 45,     973 

Ditman  v.  Raule,    124    Pa.  St. 

225 569,     635 

Dittman   v.    Weiss,    31    S.    W. 

(Tex.)   67 582,  918,    927 

Divrer  v.  Mclaughlin,  2  Wend. 

(N.  Y.)   596 301,     519 

Dix  V.  Cobb,  4  Mass.  508 1039 

Dix    ▼.    Jackman,    37    S.    W. 

(Tex.)  344 30^ 

Dixon  T.  Higgins,  82  Ala.  284.  506 
Dixon  V.  HiU,  5  Mich.  404.705,  718 
Dixon    V.    Sanderson,    72    Tex. 

859 279 

Doak  v.  Brubaker,  1  Nev.  218. 

544,  546,     526 
Doane  v.  Eddy,   16  Wend.    (N. 

Y.)  523 524 

Dobbins  v.  Gruger,  108  111.  188. 

212,  637,     639 
Dobson  V.  Erwin,  18  N.  G.  569. 

37,  753 
Dobson  y.  More,  171  111.  49. . . .  953 
Dobson  V.  Snyder,  70  Fed.   10. 

252,    255 
Dockray  y.  Mason,  48  Me.  178. 

36,  588,  753,  763,  821,     842 
Dodd  y.  Adams,  126  Mass.  398. 

131,     674 
Dodd  y.  Gaines,  82  Tex.  429. . . 

581,  615,     909 
Dodd  y.  Levy,  10  Mo.  App.  121. 

774,  788,  797,     806 

IDodd  v.  McGraw,  8  Ark.  83 

283,  344,  360,  520,     586 
•Dodge  v.  Griswold,  8  N.  H.  426. 

758,     782 


xc 


Table  of  Casbs. 


PAOV 

Dodge  v.  Jones,  7  Mont.  121 .. . 

636,    551 
Dodge  V.  McKechnie,  156  N.  Y. 

514 456 

Dodge  V.  McKechnie,  35  N.  Y. 

Supp.  1106 303 

Dodge  V.  Norlin,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

177 1114,  1136,  1136 

Dodson  V.  Cooper,  60  Kan.  680. 

231,  234,  273,  610,  092 
Doe  V.  Bevan,  3  Maule  &.  S.  353  1189 
Doe  V.  Blanchfield,   1  U.  C.  Q. 

B.    (CSan.)    350  204 

Doe  V.  Childress,  21  Wall.   (U. 

8.)  642 1112 

Doe  ▼.  Clark,  42  Iowa,  123... 

732,    765 

Doe  V.  Horn,  1  Ind.  363 579 

Doe  V.  Horn,  Smith  (Ind.),  242    703 
Doe  v.  Hurd,  7  Blackf.    (Ind.) 

510 645 

Doe  V.  Manning,  9  East  (Eng.), 

59 336 

Doe  V.  Martyr,  1  B.  &  P.  N.  R. 

(Eng.)  332 336 

Doe  V.  Smith,  5  Taunt.  795 1189 

Doerfler  v.  Schmidt,  64  Cal.  265    850 
Doe  V.  McKinney,  6  Ala.  719.. 

36,  286,  337,    752 
Doe  T.  Roe^  6  B.  &  Ad.  1  Axn. 

(Eng.)  279 215 

Doe  V.  Rolfe,  8  A.  &  E.  (Eng.) 

650 215 

Doe  V.  Rolfe,  35  E.  C.  L.  (Eng.) 

776 291 

Doe  v.  Rusham,  17  Q.  B.  723..     218 
Doe     V.     Routledge,     2     Cowp. 

(Eng.)  705 218 

Doe  V.  Van  Koughnet,  5  U.  C. 

Q.  B.  O.  S.  246 53 

Doherty    v.    Holliday,    37    Ind. 

282 678,  680,  817,  1012,  1017 

Dokken  v.  Page,  17  Am.  B.  R. 

228 1128,  1129,  1131 

Dolan  V.  Hughes,  20  R.  I.  513.     437 
Do]  an  V.  Van  Demark,  35  Kan. 


PAOB 
304 713 

Dole  V.  Farwell,  72  N.  H.  183. 

104,  505 

Dole  V.  Wilson  (Minn.),  40  N. 

W.  161 834 

Dolphin  V.  Aylward,  L.  R.  4  H. 

L.    (Eng.)   486   217,    218 

Dommett    v.    Bedford,    3    Ves. 

148 1189 

Donahue  ▼.  Campbell,  81  Minn. 

107 977 

Donald  v.  McDonald,    57    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  594 967 

Donaldson  y.  Jaoobitz,  67  Kan. 

244 836,  837,     838 

Doncet  y.  Richardson,  67  N.  H. 

186 434,     522 

Donegan  y.  Dayis,  66  Ala.  362. 

109,  110,  381,     385 
Doney    y.    Clark,    65    Ohio    St 

294 766 

Doney  y.  Dunnick,  8  Ohio  Cir. 

Ct.  163 765 

Donk    Bros.    Coal,   etc.,   Co.   y. 

Stevens,  74  Mo.  A^,  39 493 

Donk      Ooal,      etc.,      Co.      y. 

Kinealy,  81  Mo.  App.  646 .. .     745 
Donley  y.   McKieman,   62  Ala. 

34 179,     848 

Donly  y.  Ray,  6  So.  324 226,    510 

Donnebaum  y.  Tinsley,  54  Tex. 

362 342,     414 

Donnelly   y.    Public   Ledger,    2 

Phila.  (Pa.)  51 149 

Donnelly  y.  Rees,  141  CaL  56. 

639,  644 
IDonner  y.  Brackett,  21  Vt.  599.  1112 
Donoghue    y.    Shull,    85    Miss. 

404 195,  499,     509 

Donohue  y.  Joyce,  64  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  634 1051 

Donoyan  y.  Gathe,  3  Colo.  App. 

151 , 528 

Donoyan    y.    Dunning,    69    Mo. 

436. . .  .23,  344,  378,  420,  436,     824 
Donoyan    y.    Sheridan^  5  J.  & 


Table  of  Cases. 


xci 


PAGE 

Sp.   (N.  Y.)    266 136 

Donovan  v.  Sheridan^  37  N.  Y. 

Super   Ct.    256 682.    684,     866 

Dood  V.  McCraw,  8  Ark.  83...     338 

Doolej  V.  Pease^  88  Fed.  446..     528 

Boremus  v.  Daniels  {N.  J.  Sh.), 

20  Atl.   147   500,    510 

Doremus  t.  Lewis,  8  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)    124 420 

Dorman  v.  Soto  (Oil.),  36  Pac. 

588 549 

Domraeil,  r.  Ward,  108  IlL  216    773 
Dom  ▼.  Bayer,  16  Md.   144... 

344,  585 
Dombrook   v.   M.   Rumely   Oo., 

120  Wis.  36  583 

Dorr  V.  Beck,  76  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

540 578 

Dorranoe  v.   McAlester^   1    Ind. 

T.  473 612 

Dorrance  v.  McAlister,  01  Fed. 

614 603 

Dorrington  v.  Minnick,  15  Neb. 

397 625 

Dorroh  ▼.  Holberg    (Miss.),  25 

So.  661 165 

Doraey  v.  PhiUips,  84  Ky.  420.     833 
Dortch  V.  Benton,  98  N.  C.  190. 

160,  166 
Dortie  v.  Dugaa,  52  Ga.  231 .. .  1041 
Dorwin  v.  Patton,   112   N.   W. 

(Minn.)   266 983 

Dosch  v.  Nette  (Tex.),  16  8.  W. 

1013 279 

Doeche  v.  Nette^  81  Tex.  265.. 

998,  1000 
Doss  v.  Tyack,  14  How.  297...  1006 
Boeter  v.  Manistee  Nat.  Bank, 

67  Ark.  635 645,  739,     740 

763,  760,  770,  773,    792 
Doeter    v.    National    Bank,    67 

Ark.  325 68 

Doswell  y.  Adler,  28  Ark.  82.. 

251,  442,  458,    475 
Doty  ▼.  Clint,  11  St.  Bep.   (N. 

Y.)  87 311,    512 


PAGE 

Doty  V.  Louisville  Banking  0>., 

10  Ky.  L.  Rep.  898 182 

Doucette    v.    Baldwin     (Mass.), 

80  N.  E.  444 1180 

Dougherty    r.    Cooper,    77    Mo. 

528 674,  609,  703,  705,     706 

Dougherty  v.  Haggerty,  96  Pa. 

St.  515 660 

Dougherty   v.   Halloran,   9   Ky. 

L.  Rep.  308 346 

Dougherty  v.   Mortland,   8   Pa. 

Cas.  384 296 

Dougherty  v.  Schlotman,  1  Cine. 

Super.  Ct.   (Ohio)   292... 749,     961 
Douthitt  V.  Applegate,  33  Kan. 

396 231 

Doughten  v.  Gray,  10  N.  J.  Eq. 

323 627 

Doughty  v.  Harsel,  91  Mo.  500.    383 
Doughty  V.  King,  10  N.  J.  Eq. 

396 327 

Doughty  V.  Miller,  60  N.  J.  Eq. 

529 632 

Douglass    Merchandise    Co.    ▼. 

Laird,  37  W.  Va.  687 570 

Douglass    V.    Douglass,    41    W. 

Va.  13 234,  365,    408 

Douglass  V.   Dunlapj    10    Ohio, 

162 69,  632,  646,     710 

Douglass  V.  Hannah,  81   Iowa, 

469 688 

Douglass  T.  Hill,  29  Kan.  527.     916 
Douglass  V.  Morford,   16  Tenn. 

373 660 

Douglass    V.    Waj-d,    11    Grant 

Ch.  39 964,    967 

Dow  T.  Dempsey,  21  Wash.  86. 

915,  1006 
Dow  ▼.  Sutphin,  47  Minn.  479.     613 

Dow  V.  Taylor,  71  Vt.  337 

103,  104,  332,  747 
Dowell  V.  Applegate,  7  Fed.  881  724 
Dowell    V.    Applegate,    16    Fed. 

419 109,  380,  381,     382 

Downer  y.  Porter,  116  Ky.  422.     833 


sen 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

Downing  v.  Gault,  8  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  62 299 

Downing  v.  Kelly,  49  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)  647 28 

Downs  V.  Klflwam,  10  How.   (U. 

S.)    102 315 

Downs  V.  Kissam,  51  U.  S.  102.  235 
Downs  V.  Miller,  96  Md.  602. . . 

913,    966 
Dozsee  t.  Waddick   (Iowa),  98 

N.  W.  110 976 

Doxsee  r.   Waddick,   122   Iowa, 

599... 621,  892,  903,  948,  951,    980 
Doyle  T.  First  Nat.  Bank  (Tex. 

Civ.  App.),  60  8.  W.  480...     167 
Doyle  y.  Heath,   4  Am.  B.  R. 

706 1142,  1146 

Doyle  v.  Sleeper,  31  Ey.  631.. 

12,      14 
Doyle  V.  Sleeper,  1  Dana  (Ky.), 

631 36,     136 

Doyle  V.  Smith,  41  Tenn.  15...  414 
Doyle  V.  Stevens,  4  Mich.  87 . . .  528 
Dozier  v.  Watson,  94  Mo.  328. 

345,    378 
Drake  v.  Rice,  130  Mass.  410.. 

11,  20,  98,  101,    731 
Drake  v.  Steadman,    46    S.    C. 

474 47,    915 

Drane  v.  Underwood,  1  Ey.  L. 

Rep.  317 294,    663 

Draper  v.  Andrews^    49    Iowa, 

637 979 

Draper    v.    Buggee,    133    Mass. 

268 107,    362 

Dresher  v.  Corson,  23  Kan.  313.  966 
Dressel  v.  North  State  Lumber 

Co.,  9  Am.  B.  R.  541 1158 

Dresser  v.  Zabriskie     (N.    J.), 

39  Atl.    1066 

141,  146,  247,  366,  638,  663,  974 
Drew  V.  Corliss,  66  Vt.  650 ... .  366 
Drew  V.  Rust,  36  N.  H.  336. . . 

248,    340* 
Drewry  v.  Phillips,  44  N.  C.  81      87 
Dreyfus  v.  Childs,  48  La.  Ann. 


PAGS 

872 80» 

Driggs  V.  Moore,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
4,083 1091 

^^^SS^   ^   ^•'■^   Bank    v.    Nor- 
wood,  60  Ark.   42 265 

Drinkwater    v.    Drinkwater,    4 

Mass.    354    634 

Droop  V.  Ridenour,  11  App.  Cas. 

(D.  C.)  224... 399,  679,  885,  963 
Drum  V.  Painter,  27  Pa.  St.  148 

271,  677,  632,  666,     738 
Drummond  v.  Couse,  39  Iowa, 

442 569,  671,    680 

Drury  v.  Briscoe,  42  Md.  154. 

149,  361 
Drury  v.  Cross,  74  U.  S.  299. . .  489 
Drury    v.    Milwaukee,    etc.,    R. 

Co.,  7  Wall.  299 599 

Drury  v.  Wilson,  4  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)  232... 466,  471,  637,  561 
Dubbs  V.  Finley,  2  Pa.  St.  379.  308 
Du  Bois  V.  Barker,  4  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  80  248,     392 

Dubois  V.  Spinks,  114  Cal.  289 

624,  533,  642,  543,  644,  662 
Dubose  V.  Dubose,  7  Ala.  236 . .  479 
Dubose  V.  Young,  14  Ala.  139.  618 
Dudley  v.  Danforth,  61   N.  Y. 

226 494,  678,     693 

Dudley  v.  Easton,  104  U.  S.  99.   1223 
Dudley  v.   Third   Order  of  St. 

Francis,   138  N.  Y.  461 866 

Dueber  Watch  Case  Mfg.  Co.  v. 

Young,  166  ni.  226 468 

Duerrigan  v.  Bewe,   18  Ky.  L. 

Rep.    1072 905 

Duffield  V.  Delancey,  36  111.  268    393 
Duffy  V.   Mechanics',   etc.,   Ins. 

Co.,  8  Watts  &  S.  (Pa.)  413  366 
Duffy  V.  State,  116  Ind.  351. . .  809 
Dufrene   v.   Anderson,   67   Neb. 

136 853 

Dugan    V.    Vattier,    3    Blackf. 

(Ind.)  245..703,  704,  721,  724,^  816 

Duhme  v.  Young,  66  Ky.  343. . 

348,     375 


Table  of  Cases. 


XClll 


PAGE 

Duke  v.  Pigman,  110  Kj.  766. .     602 
Dulaiiy     V.     Greene,     4     Harr. 

(Dd.)     285    273 

Dulcber     v.     Bank,     Fed.    Gas. 

4,203 1223 

Dulion  V.  Harknees,  80  Mich.  8 

92,     162 
Dull  V.  Merrill,  60  Mich.  49.. 

162,  613,  514,     974 
Domangue      v.      Daniels,      154 

Mass.  483    920,    921 

Dumas    v.    Leferre,     10    Bob. 

(La.)    399   819,     966 

Dumas  v.  Neal,  51  Oa.  563..108,    362 
Dumbould  v.  Bowlej,  113  Ind. 

263 162 

Dummer  v.  Smedley,  119  Mich. 

466 301 

Dnnaway  v.  Bobertson,  96  III. 

419 239,     650 

Dunbar  v.  Kelly,  189  Mass.  390    737 
Dunbar    ▼.    McFall,    28    Tenn. 

506 634 

Duncan  v.  Crayens,  65  Ind.  525  833 
Duncan  v.  Custard,  24  W.  Va. 

730 670,  1020 

Duncan  ▼.  Landis,  6  Am.  B.  B. 

649 1073,  1095 

Duncan  v.  Boselle,  15  Iowa,  501     105 
Dunekel     v.     Failing,     1     Sily. 

Sup.    <N.   y.)    543 466,     476 

Dundas  v.  Dutens,  2   Cox   Ch. 

236 100,     142 

Dunham-Buckley    y.    Halberg 

69  Mo.  App.  609 112,  672,     574 

Dunham  v.  Bentley,  103  Iowa, 

136 367,  370,    669 

Dunham    y,   Byrnes,   36    Minn. 

106 204,     846 

Dunham  v.  Ck>x,  10  N.  J.  £q. 

437 793,  842,    844 

Dunham   ▼.   Bamsey,  37  N.  J. 

Eq.  388   817 

Dunham    v.    Waterman,    17   N. 

Y.   9    48 

Dunham  v.  Whitehead,  21  N.  Y. 


PAOB 

131 427,  1100 

Dunlap  T.  Hawkins,  69  N.  Y.  342 

37,  263,  278,  280,  338,  346,  889 
Dunlap  y.  Haynes,  61  Tenn.  476  626 
Dunlap  y.  Mitchell,  80  Mo.  App. 

393 344,  377,     744 

Dunleyy  y.  Tallmadge,  32  N.  Y. 

467 771,  796,     842 

Dunlop    y.    Thomas,    28    Wash. 

621 1132 

Dimn  y.  Bozarth,  59  Neb.  244. .  597 
Dunn  y.  Dunn,  82  Ind.  42.. 283,  346 
Dunn  y.   Murt,   4  Mackey    (D. 

C),  289 789 

Dunn    y.    Whalen,    21    N.    Y. 

Supp.  869 139 

Dunn  y.  Wolf,  81  Iowa,  688... 

620,    820 
Dunnica  y.  Coy,  28  Mo.  525... 

70,  207,     753 
Dunning    y.    Baily,    120    Iowa, 

729 226,     714 

Dunphy  y.  Gorman,  29  111.  App. 

132 182,  206,    807 

Dunphy  y.  Kleinsmith,  78  U.  S. 

610 1024 

Dunsback  y.   C611ar,    95    Mich. 

.  611 863 

Dunsoomb  y.  Wallace,  105  Tenn. 

386 1017 

Duplan  Silk  Co.  y.  Spencer,  8 

Am.  B.  B.  367 1118,  1186 

Dupuy  y.  Dupont,  11  La.  Ann. 

226 641 

Durand  y.  Hankerson,  39  N.  Y. 

287 171,    669 

Durand  y.  Higgins,  67  Kan.  110  639 
Durand  y.  Weightman,  108  111. 

489 187,  194,    348 

DuBant  y.  DuBant,  36  S.  C.  49.    274 

Durant  y.  Hospital,  etc.,  Co., 
Fed.  Cas.  No.  4,188 1188 

Durfee  y.  Bump,  51  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  637 927,    946 

Durham  Fertilizer  Co.  y.  Hemp- 
hill, 45  S.  C.  621 91 


XCIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Durham  v.  Wick,  14  Am.  B.  R. 

386 1206 

Durham   Fertilizer   Co.   v.   Lit- 

tie,  118  N.  C.  308 1061 

Durkee    v.    Chambers^    67    Mo. 

575 617 

Durkee    v.     Mahoney,     1     Aik. 

(Vt.)  116.  .178,  275,  279,  342,  627 
Durr  V.  Bowyer,  2  McGord   (S. 

C),  368 149 

Duryea  v.  Guthrie  (Wis.),  11 

Am.  B.  R.  234 1071 

Durrell      v.      Richardson^      119 

Mich.  692.  . 913,    979 

Dusser     v.     Zabriskie     (N.     J. 

Ch.),   39  Atl.   1066 163 

Duttera  v.  Babylon,  83  Md.  636  397 
Dutton  T.  Cameron,  97  Mich.  93  1040 
Dutton  V.  Jackson,  2  Del.  Ch. 

86 434 

Dutton    V.    Wetmore,    10    Pa. 

Super  Ct.  630    666 

Duval  V.  Ardrey,    1    La.    Ann. 

243 426 

Duyall  ▼.  Rollins,  71  N.  C.  218.  163 
Duvall    V.    Watersj     1    Bland 

(Md.),  669 28,  29,     269 

Duveneck    v.    Kutzer,    17    Tex. 

Civ.  App.  677    .., 306 

Duxbury  ▼.  Boioe,  70  Minn.  113. 

836,    837 
Dwelly  V.  Van  Houghton,  4  N. 

Y.  Leg.  Obs.  (N.  Y.)  101...  634 
Dwight  V.  Bemiss,  16  La.  146. .  272 
Dyer  v.   Balsley,   40  Mo.   App. 

669 629 

Dyer  v.  Bradley,  89  Cal.  667 . .  458 
Dyer  v.  Dyer,  14  La.  Ann.  701.  520 
Dyer  ▼.  Homer,  39  Mass.  253..  663 
Dyer  v.  Rowe,  82  Minn.  223 .. .  996 
Dyer  v.  Taylor,  60  Ark.  314... 

516,  612,  914,     924 
Dygert  v.  Remerschnider,  32  N. 

Y.  629 179,   189,  264,    269 

326,  338,     346 
Dyson  v.   St.  Paul   Nat.   Bank, 

74  Minn.  439 469 


PAOB 

Eacker    v.    Thompson,    4    Ind. 

App.  393 1053 

Eagan  v.  Downing,  56  Ind.  66. 

140,  146,     278 
Eagle  V.  Eichelberger,  6  Watts 

(Pa.),  29 550 

Eagle  V.  Smylie,  126  Mich.  612.  161 
Eames  v.  Dorsett,  147  111.  540.  278 
Earl   V.   Champion,   65   Pa.   St. 

101 898 

Earl  V.  Earl,  186  111.  370 

297,  613,  661 
Earle  v.  Couch,  3  Mete.    (Ky.) 

460 220 

Earle  v.  Burch,  21  Neb.  702 

197,  220,  716 
Earle  v.   McCartney,    112   Fed. 

872 431 

Earle  v.  Thomas,  14  Tex.  683..  523 
Early  v.  Owens,  68  Ala.  171 .. . 

343,  371,  585 
Early  Times  Distilling    Co.    v. 

Zieger,  9  N.  M.  31 786,    845 

Eamshow  v.   Stewart,    64    Md. 

613 120,  250,     443 

Easley  v.  Dye,  14  Ala.  158 960 

Eaaon  v.  Garrison,  36  Tex.  Civ. 

App.  574 226,  1127,  1133 

Eastman  v.  Foster,  49  Iklass.  19.  439 
Eastman  v.  McAlpin,  1  Ga.  167. 

413,  418,  458 
Eastman  v.  Ramsey,  3  Ind.  419.  867 
Eastman  v.   Schettler,    13   Wis. 

324 .207,  738,  740,     748 

East   Side   Bank    v.     Columbus 

Tanning  Co.,  16  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 

357. 319 

Easum  v.  Pirtle,  81  Ey.  663.. 

231,  354,  384,  840 
Eaton  V.  Cooper,  29  Vt  444 .. .  980 
Eaton  V.  Metz    (Cal.),  40  Pac. 

947 884 

Eaton  V.  White,  2  Wis.  292...  177 
Eaves  v.  Williams,  10  Tex.  Civ. 

App.  423 153,  167,     67a 


Tabls  of  Casss. 


xcv 


PA6B 
Ebbitt    ▼.    Danham,    26    Misc. 

Rep.  232    (N.  Y.).. 188,    347 

Echols  ▼.  Orr,  106  Ala.  237... 

190,     361 
Eehols  ▼.  PeumiDg,    107    Ala. 

660 196,     866 

Eck  V.  Hatcher,  68  Mo.  236...  616 
Ecker  v.  McAHster,  64  Md.  362.  946 
Ecker  v.  McAUister,  46  Md.  290 

246,  268,  671,    994 
Eekfeldt     v.     Frick,     4     Phila. 

(Pa.)   116 627 

Eeklor  t.  Wolcott,  116  Wis.  19.  766 
Ector  V.  Welsh,  29  Ga.  443... 

632,    633 
EddinB  y.  Wilson,  1  Ala.  237.. 

216,    218 
Eddy  ▼.  Baldwin,  23  Mo.  688.. 

70,  763,  966 
Eddy  V.  Wearin,  106  Iowa,  387.  436 
Edelmuth  v.   Wyforant,  21  Ey. 

L.  Rep.  929   116 

Edey  y.  Path,  4  111.  App.  276..  892 
Edgar  t.  Clevenger,  3  N.  J.  Eq. 

268 872,     878 

Edgar  t.  Simmons,  2  La.  19...  303 
EdgeU  ▼.  Hart,  9  N.  T.  213. . . . 

673,  987,    988 

EdgeU  ▼.  Lowell,  4  Vt.  406 

689,    691 
EdgeU  y.  Smith,  60  W.  Va.  349. 

674,    640 
Edgerly  y.  First  Nat  Bank,  30 

IlL  App.  426. .  .187,  348,  439,     863 
Edgington  y.  Williams^  Wright 

(Ohio),  439 37,      63 

Edgwood  DistiUing  (>>.  y.  How- 
land,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1740...     711 
Edison     Electric     lUuminating 
Co.  y.  Riker,  90  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

608 386 

Edison    (Sen.     Electric    Go.    y. 
Westminster,    etc.,    Tramway 
<3o.,  66  L.  J.  P.  C.  36. . .  .43,      46 
Edmeston  y.  Lyde,  1  Paige   (N. 


pAoa 
Y.),  637.... 20,  98,   101,  814,     816 

823,     827 

Edmonson  y.  Meacham,  60  Miss. 

34 36,  37,  162,  164,  168,     172 

249,  264,     274 
Edmunds  y.  Edmunds,  73  L.  J. 

P.  97 100 

Edmunds  y.   Mister,    68    Miss. 

766 178,  279,  281,  282,     336 

Edmundson  y.  Silliman,  60  Tex. 

106 979 

Edrington   v.   Rogers,     16    Tex. 

188 310,  316,  409,     600 

Edward  P.  Allis  Co.  v.  Stand- 
ard Nat.  Bank,  110  Fed.  47.     962 
Edwards  y.   Anderson,   31   Tex. 

Ciy.  App.   131    893 

Edwards  y.  Ballard,  63  Ky.  289. 

216,  218 
Edwards   y.   Dickson,    66    Tex. 

613 462,  491,  623,   696,  1001 

Edwards  y.  Edwards,  64  Mich. 

347 660,     987 

Edwards  y.  Entwisle,  2  Maokey 

(D.  C),  43 129,  192,     338 

868,  899 
Edwards  y.  Harbin,  2  T.  R.  687  617 
Edwards  y.  Hayerstick,  63  Ind. 

348 631,  634,  666,     668 

Edwards  y.  Kilpatrick,   70  Ga. 

328 660 

Edwards    y.    McGee,    31    Miss. 

143 196 

Edwards    y.    Mister,    68    Miss. 

766 199 

Edwards    y.    Mitchell,    1    Gray 

(Mass.),  241 67,      69 

Edwards  y.  Reid«  39  Neb.  646. 

164,  166,  681,     613 
Edwards     y.     Sonoma     Valley 

Bank,  59  Cal.  148.. 624,  626,     663 
Edwards  y.  Stinson,  69  Ga.  443. 

6,  413,    434 
Edwards  y.  Story,  106  111.  App. 

433 679 

Egberts  y.  Pemberton,  7  Johns. 


XCVlll 


Table  of  Contexts. 


PAOB 

Bond    (U.    S.),   392 978,    981 

Erfort  V.  Ck)n8alu8,  47  Mo.  208 

886,  915 
Erhardt  v.  Estel,  6  Mo.  App.  6.  1002 
Erickson  v.  Paterson,  47  Minn. 

626 131,     167 

Erickson  v.  Quinn,  47  N.  Y.  410 

263,  338,  346,  864 
Erickson  v.  Quinn,  16  Abb.  Pr. 

N.  S.   (N.  Y.)   168 68 

Ernest  v.  Merritt,  107  Ga.  61 . . 

276,  336,  339,  1001 
Erskine  ▼.  Decker,  39  Me.  467.  722 
Erwin    v.    Holderman,    92    Mo. 

333 138 

Eskridge  v.  Carter,  16  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  760* 1017 

Eslow    V.    Mitchell,    26    Mich. 

600 186 

Esselbruegge  Mercantile  Co.  v. 

Troll,  79  Mo.  App.  568 

681,  688,     694 
Essex  County  ▼.  Lindsley,  41  N. 

J.  Eq.  189 461,  466,  482,     606 

Estes  ▼.  Jackson,  68  Me.  292. . 

736,  763 
Estes  V.  Wilcox,  67  N.  Y.  2C4. . 

186,  786,  790,  842 
Estey  T.  Cooke,  12  Nev.  276. . .  644 
Estwick   V.    Caillaud,    6   T.   R. 

420 « 

Esty  V.  Aldrich,  46  N.  H.  127 .  -       34 
Esty  T.  Long,  41  N.  H.  103.. 

198,  831 
Etchepare  v.   Aguirre,   91   Cal. 

288 536 

Etheridge  v.  Sperry,  139  U.  S. 

266 627,  1137 

Ethridge  v.  Dunshee,  31  Pitts. 

Leg.  J.    (Pa.)    39 322,     684 

Etter  V.  Anderson,  84  Ind.  333 

69,  177 
Ettien  v.  Drum,  32  Mont.  311 . .  625 
Ettlinger  y.  Kahn,  134  Mo.  492 

964,  966 
Euclid  Ave.  Nat.  Bank  v.  Jud- 


PAQB^ 

kins,  66  Ark.  486 

762,  807,  808,     80& 
Eufaula  Grocery   Co.  v.  Petty, 

116    Ala.    260 271 

Eufaula  Nat.   Bank  t.   Pruett> 

128  Ala.  470   449^ 

Eureka    Iron,    etc.,    Works    ▼. 

Bresnahan,  66  Mich.  489 .... 

460,  694,  616,  936 
Evans  v.  Coleman,  101  Ga.  162.  1005 
Evans    v.    Covington,    70    Ala. 

440 106,  106,     373 

Evans  v.  David,  98  Mo.  406.. 

216,     863 

Evans  v.  Ely,  55  Wis.  194 750 

Evans  v.  Evans,  59  Atl.  (N.  J.) 

664 957 

Evans  v.  Hamilton,  56  Ind.  34.  921 
Evans  v.  Herring,  27  N.  J.  L. 

243 69,  177,  637,     640 

Evans  v.  Hill,  18  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

464 795 

Evans  v.  Kilgore,  147  Pa.  St.  19  898 
Evans  v.  Lamar,  21  Ala.  333 . .  47? 
Evaqs  v.  Laughton,  69  Wis.  138 

701,     783 
Evans  v.  Lewis,  30  Ohio  St.  11 

188,  192,  286,  351,     919 
Evans  v.   Mansur,  etc..   Imple- 
ment Oo.,  87  Fed.  275... 678,    62& 
Evans  v.  Nealis,  69  Ind.  148..     727 

Evans  v.  Pence,  78  Ind.  439 271 

Evans  v.  Reay,  3  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

193 853 

Evans  v.  Rounsaville,  8  Am.  B. 

R.   236    1120 

Evans  v.  Rugee,  63  Wis.  31 987 

Evans  v.  Rugee,  57  Wis.  623 . . 

899,  908,  968,  1003 
Evans  v.  Scott,  89  Pa.  St.  136 

532,  641 
Evans  v.  Sims,  82  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

396 266,  965 

Evans  v.  Thomburg,  77  Ind.  106  199 
Evans  v.  Virgin,  69  Wis.  148..  799 
Evans  v.  Welch,  63  Ala.  260..   1035 


Table  of  Cases^ 


xcis 


Evans  v.  WilliamB,  82  Wis.  666    859 

Eve  T.  Louis,  01  Ind.  457 

753,  834,  835 
Ereleth  v.  Harmon,  33  Me.  275.  1010 
Everett  v.  Everett,  48  N.  Y.  218  752 
Everett  v.  Raby,  104  N.  C.  479 

70,  753 
Everett  v.  Read,  3  N.  H.  55.60,  102 
Everett  v.  Taylor,  14  Utah,  242 

634,   536,  538,     549 
Everett  v.  Winn,  1   Sm.  &.  M. 

Ch.    (Miss.)    67 85,    178,    637 

Everett  Produce  Co.   v.   Smith 

Bro8.,  40  Wash.  566 174 

Everist  v.  Pierce,  107  Iowa,  44     187 
Sveraman  v.  Clements,  6  Colo. 

App.  224   8,    671 

Eversole  v.  Bullock,  26  Ky.  L. 

Rep.   1098    105,     146 

Every  v.  Edgerton,  7  Wend.  (N. 

Y.)    259    562 

Ewing  V.  Cantrell,  19  Tenn.  364     763 
Ewing  V.  CargiU,  13  Sm.  &  M. 

(Miss.)   79   555,  557,    580 

Ewing  V.  Gray,  12  Ind.  64 

36,  401,  572,  579,  1001 
Ewing  V.  Merkley,  3  Utah,  406 

529,    538 
Ewing    V.    Patterson,    35    Ind. 

326 278 

Ewing  V.  Runkle,  20  111.  448. . 

12,  13,  29,  489,  506 
Ez  parte  Bell,  1  Glyn.  t  J.  282  633 
Ex    parte    Berry,    19    Ves.    Jr. 

(aig.)    218    337 

Ex  parte  Blain,  12  Ch.  D.  522.    1081 
Ex  parte  Boyd,  105  U.  S.  647. 

773,  1040 
Ex  parte  Christy,  3  How.   (U. 

S.)    292    1112,  1225 

Ex  parte  Doran,  2  Pars.  £q. 

Caa.  (Pa.)  467 1061 

Ex  parte  Gaines,  12  Ch.  D.  314 

302,     488 
Ex  parte  Hull,   Fed.   Cas.  No. 

6,858 1073 


PAGB 

Ex  parte  Jordan,  50  Mass.  292    469 
Ex    parte    Russell,    19    Ch.    D. 

(Eng.)    588    190 

Eyre  v.  Eyre,  19  N.  J.  £q.  42 

640,  650,     651 
Eyrick   v.   Hetrick,    13   Pa.  St. 

488 636 

Eyster  v.  Gaff,  91  U.  S.  521 .. . 

1207,  1213,  1223 
Ezekiel  v.  Dixon,  3  Ga.  146...  472 
Ezsell  V.  Brown,   121  Ala.   150 

904,  931,     941 

r 

Faber  v.  Matz,  86  Wis.  370.. 

299,  762,  765,  956 
Faber  v.  Wagner,  10  N.  D.  287  586 
Fabian  v.  Traeger,  117  111.  App. 

176,  215  III.  220 71,  458,    914 

Fair   v.   Young,   26    Grant   Ch. 

(U.   C.)    544    514 

Fairbaim     v.    Mlddlemiss,     47 

Mich.  372   38,  682,     795 

Fairbanks  v.  Benjamin,  50  Vt. 

99 198 

Fairbanks    v.    Blackington,    26 

Mass.    23    642 

Fairbanks  v.  Welshaus,  55  Neb. 

362 774,     783 

Fairfield  Bridge  Co.  v.  Nye,  60 

Me.   372    , . . .     521 

Fairfield   Packing   Co.   v.   Ken- 
tucky Jeans  Clo.  Co.,  110  Ala. 

536 232,     354 

Fair  Haven  Marble,  etc.,  Co.  v. 

Owens,  69  Vt  246 . .  180,  296,  349 
Fairhurst  v.  Lewis,  23  Ark.  435  139 
Faitoute  v.  Sayer,  28  Atl.    (N. 

J.)    711    356 

Faivre  v.  Gillman,  84  Iowa,  573     786 
Falconer  v.  Freeman,  4  Sandf. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    602 784 

Falconer  v.  Freeman,  4  Sandf. 

Ch.    (N.   Y.)    566 1044 

Falkenburg  v.  Johnson,  102  Ky. 

643 156,     362 

Fales  V.  Thompson,  1  Mass.  134 


Table  of  Casbs. 


PA6B 

Falkman  v.  Bedillion,  131  Pa. 

St.  386    372 

Falkner  v.  Perkins,  3  N.  C.  224  622 
Fallows  V.  Smith,  40  Mich.  689  375 
Faloon    t.    Mclntyre,    118    111. 

292 187,  348,  383,   426,    427 

Fanning  y.  Russell,  94  111.  386.  278 
Fant  V.  Willis  (Tex.  Civ.  App.), 

23   8.  W.  99 948 

Fargo  V.  Ladd,  6  Wis.  106 

143,  634,  654,     659 
Farguson  V.  Hall,  99  Ala.  209 

309,  315,  467,  471,    476 
496,  506,  506,    605 
Farguson  v.   Johnson,  36   Fed. 

134 301 

Faringer  v.  Ramsay,  4  Md.  Ch. 

33 187,    262 

Paris  T.  Dunham,  21  Ey.  397 . .  880 
Farley    v.    Carpenter,    27    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  359   614 

Farlin  v.  Sook,  30  Kan.  401.. 

300,    580 
Farmers'  k  Merchants'  Irr.  Co. 

V.    Brumbaugh,    110    N.    W. 

(Neb.)    663    365 

F.  &  M.  Schaefer  Brewing  Co. 

▼.  Moebs,    187   Mass.  571 . . . 

231,  386,    410 
Farmers'   Bank   of  Virginia  ▼. 

Douglass,     11     Sm.     &     H. 

(Miss.)   469   353 

Farmers'  Bank  r.  Carr  &  Co., 

11  Am.  B.  R.  733 1117,  1134 

Farmers'    Bank    ▼.    Corder,    32 

W.   Va.   232 633,  1035 

Farmers'  Bank  ▼.  Douglass,  11 

Sm.  &  M.   (Miss.)   469 

233,  556,  588,    597 
Farmers'  Bank  v.  Douglass,  19 

Miss.   469    220,    521 

Farmers'    Bank    v.    First    Nat. 

Bank,  30  Ind.  App.  520 

341,  387,     716 
Farmers'  Bank  v.  Gould,  48  W. 

Va.  99 143,   188,  291,     292 


PAC» 

Farmers*     Bank     y.    Long,     7 

Bush.    (Ey.)    337 330,    331 

Farmers'  Bank  v.  Marshall,  18 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  249 113,  963,    967 

Farmers'    Bank    v.    Stapp,    97 

Ky.  432    972 

Farmers'  Bank  v.  Worthington, 

145  Mo.  91    ...594,  619,  882,    890 

939,  952,  955,    619 
Fanner's,    etc.,    Nat.    Bank    t. 

Conner    (Ky.    1902),    20    S. 

W.  265    296 

Farmers',    etc.,    Nat.    Bank    ▼. 

Connor,  13  Ky.  L.  Rep.  592.     580 
Farmers',  etc..  Bank  ▼.  Conner, 

14  Ky.   L.  Rep.  316 807 

Farmers',    etc.,    Nat.    Bank    v. 

Hemdon    (Tenn.    Ch.    App.), 

46  S.  W.  560   1052 

Farmer's,    etc.,    Nat.    Bank    ▼. 

Mosher,    94    N.    W.     (Neb.) 

1003 691,    696 

Farmer's,  etc..  Bank  v.  Mosher, 

63  Neb.  130 298,  416,  581,    962 

Farmers',  etc..  Bank  v.  Orme,  5 

Ariz.  304 605 

Farmers',   etc.,   Bank  ▼.   Price, 

41   Ma  App.  291 

342,  344,  570,    586 
Farmers',  etc..   Bank  v.   Spear, 

49  111.   App.  509 303,    484 

Farmers'  Loan,  etc.,  (Do.  v.  Wal- 
worth, 1  N.  Y.  433. 616 

Farmers'  Nat.   Bank  v.  Miller, 
9  Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  Ill 275 

Farmers'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Teeters, 
31   Ohio  St.  36 1037 

Farmers  Nat.  Bank    t.    Thom- 
son, 74  Vt.  442 267 

Farmers'  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Thomp- 
son,  74  Vt.  442....  180,   183,     274 

342,  362,  376,     767 

Farmers'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Warner, 
68   Iowa,    147    975 

Farmers'  Tranep.  Co.  v.  Swaney, 
48  W.  Va.  272 394,     408 


Table  or  Casss. 


ci' 


PAG» 

Fiarmen'  Tnut  Ck>.  ▼.  lisn,  108 

Iowa,  169 163,    360 

Fanner  ▼.  Calvert,  44  Ind.  200.  892 
Fanner  ▼.  Calvert,  14  Ind.  209.  954 
Famed  v.  Harris,  11  Sm.  &  M. 

(MiM.)  366 771,    845 

Famed  v.  Harris,  19  Miss.  366.  781 
Famham  v.  Ounpbell,  10  Paige 

(N.  Y.),  698 129,    688 

Famham  v.  Kennedy,  28  Minn. 

365 141 

Famham  v.  Truseell,  28  Minn. 

366 972 

Famaworth    v.    Bell^    6    Sneed 

(T^nn.),  631 201,    243 

Famaworth  v.  Shepard,    6   Vt. 

521 527 

Farasworth  v.  Stresler,   12  IlL 

482 763,    791 

Farquharson    v.    McDonald,    49 

Tenn.  404 432 

Fbrr  V.  Hauenatein  (N.  J.  Ch.), 

62  Ati.  383 40 

Farr  v.   Simma,  Rieh.  Eq.    (8. 

C.)  122 633 

Fkrr  V.  Swigart,  13  Utah,  150. 

532,    924 
Earrand  v.  Qaton,  69  Mich.  235. 

294,    724 
Ftarar   v.    Bemheim,    74    Fbd. 

435.. ...... 206,  660,  676,  676,    836 

Fiarrar  ▼.  Levison,  etc.,  Co.,  33 

Mo.  App.  246    530 

Fiarrar  v.  Smith,  64  Me.  74 521 

Farrel  v.  Colwell,  30  K  J.  L. 

123 73 

Farrell  v.  Duffy,    5    Tex.    Civ. 

App.  435 651 

Farrell  v.  O^Neil,  22  La.  Ann. 

619 898 

Farren  v.  Mintaer,  10  Pa.  Cas. 

Farrington  v.  Caawell,  15  Johns. 

(N.  Y.)  480 558 

Farrington  v.   Stone,    35    Neb. 

456 393,  509,  511,    581 


PAGB 

Farris  ▼.  Grosa   (Ark.),  87  S. 

W.  815 741 

Farrow  v.  Hayes,  51  Md.  498..     572 
Farrow  v.  Teackle,  4  Harr.   & 

J.    (Md.)   271    817,    821 

Farthing  v.  Carrington,  116  N. 

C.  816 468 

Farwell   v.  Howard^    26    Iowa, 

381 459,  473,     487 

Farwell  v.  Kerr,  28  Fed.  345.. 

159,   162,     166 
Farwell  v.  Meyer,  67  Mo.  App. 

566 599,  872,    896 

Farwell  v,  Norton,  77  111.  App. 

«85 313,    574 

Fass  V.  Rice,  30  La.  Ann.  1278. 

62,  112,  116,    054 
Fassett  v.  Taber,  20  Ohio,  640., 

600,    954 
Fassit    V.    Phillips,    4    Whart. 

(Pa.)  399 94 

Fast  V.  McPherson,  98  111.  496.  639 
Faunoe  v.  Lesley,  6  Pa.  St.  121 .  260 
Faurote  v.  Carr,  103  Ind.  123.  152 
Faxon  v.  Ball,  21  N.  Y.  Supp. 

737 881 

Feagan  v.  Cureton,  19  Ga.  404. 

67,  197,  738,    829 

Fearly  v.  O'Neill,  149  Mo.  467. 

1004,  1006 

Feaiy  v.   Cummings,   41   Mich. 

376 436,     748 

Feara  v.  Ward,  65  Ala.  33 

123,  126,  127,  182,    203 
Featherston  v.  Dagnell,  29  S.  C. 

45 942 

Fechheimer  v.  Baum,    37    Fed. 

167 1046 

Fechheimer   v.    Baum,    43    Fed. 

719 428,  602,  503,    559 

Fechheimer     v.     Hollander,     6 

Mackey  (D.  C),  512 769 

Fechheimer  v.  Sloman,  33  Fed. 

787 599 

Feder    v.    Erwin      (Tenn.     Ch. 

App.),  38  S.  W.  446.... 462,    498 


Cll 


Table  of  Cases. 


Feeley  v.  Boyd,  143  Cal.  282 .. . 

633,  640, 

Fehlig  ▼.  BuBch,  166  Mo.  144.. 

279,  339, 

Fehling  ▼.  Goings,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

164 1120, 

Feigley  v.  Feigley,  7  Md.  637 . . 

202,  233,  363, 

Feild  T.  Ridgely,  116  DI.  424.. 

Feimester  v.  McRorie,  34  N.  C. 

287 , 

Feingold  t.   Steinberg,    33    Pa. 

Super.  Ct.  39 

Feldenheimer  ▼.  Treaeel,  6  Bak. 

266 764, 

Felder  ▼.  Harper,  12  Ala.  612. . 

Feldman  t.   Gamble^   26   N.   J. 

Eq.  494 

Feldman  ▼.  Nicolai,  28  Or.  34. . 

609, 

Felker  t.  Chubb,  90  Mich.  24.. 

343, 

Fellows   ▼.   Emperor,    13   Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    92    

Fellows  y.  Fellows,  4  Cow.   (N. 

Y.)  682 819,  823,  868, 

Fellows  ▼.  Lewis,  66  Ala.  343. . 

169, 

Fellers  ▼.  Smith,  40  Mich.  689. 

343, 

Felming  v.  Townsend,  6  Ga.  103 

Felrath    v.    Schonfleld^   76  Ala. 
199 124,  126, 

Fenner  t.  Dickey,  1  Flippin,  36. 

Fenton  ▼.  Ham,  36  Mo.  409 

Fenton  t.  Morgan,  16  Wash.  30 

Ferbrache  t.  Martin,  3  Ida^  673. 

914, 

Ferguson's  Appeal,  117  Pa.  St. 

426 

Ferguson  t.  Bobo  64  Miss.  121. 

70,  774,  846,  846, 
Ferguson  ▼.  Daughtrey,  94  Va. 

308 

Ferguson  v.  Dent,  24  Fed.  412. 
Ferguson    v.    Ferguson,   9   Ont 


PAGE  PAGE 

(Can.)   218 188 

662      Ferguson  ▼.  Gilbert,  16  Ohio  St. 

88 622,  904.     905 

342      Ferguson  v.  Harrison.  41  S.  0. 

340 366,     942 

1121       Ferguson  ▼.   Hillman,   66   Wis. 

181 678,  681,     696 

621       Ferguson  ▼.   Kenney,    12    Ont. 

602  Pr.  456 816 

Ferguson  v.  Kenny,  16  Ont. 

909    App.  (Can.)  276  183,  194 

Ferguson  ▼.  Kumler,   11  Minn. 

990  104 499,  610,     832 

Ferguson  ▼.  May,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

768  989 580,  590,  613^     616 

293      Ferguson  t.   Oxford  Mercantile 

Co.,  27  So.   (Miss.)   877.. 313,    694 
499      Ferguson  t.  Spear,  65  Me.  277. 

469,     613 
611      Ferree  ▼.  Cook,  119  N.  C.  161.. 

894,  1001 
976      Ferric  v.  Cleghom,  19  U.  C.  Q. 

B.  241 468 

296      Ferris  ▼.  Irons,  83  Pa.  St  179. 

207,    992 
870      Ferris    y.    McQueen,    94    Mich. 

;     367 227,  317,    460 


433 


.< 


473,  490,  492,  1002 


'■'"Feriy  v.  McKenna,    9    Pa.  Co. 

672         Ct.  17 980 

910      Ferry's  Adm'r  y.  Cornelius,  23 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  26 381 

126      Forst  y.  Powers,  64  S.  C.  221. .     816 
3      Fertner  y.  Whelan,  87  Wis.  88.     226 
662      Fick  y.  MulhoUand,  48  Wis.  310  1007 
1060      Ficklin  y.  Rixey,  89  Va.  832.. 

329,    868 
820      Fidelity,    etc.,    Co.    y.    O'Brien 
(Tenn.  Ch.  App.),  38  S.  W. 
283  417 472,    488 

Fidelity,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Thompson, 
885  128  Gal.  606   296,    311 

Fidelity  Ins.^  etc.,  Co.  y.  Mad- 
013  den,  14  Monl^.  Co.  Rep. 
•*3  (Pa.)  210 961,    967 


Table  of  Cases. 


cm 


PAGB 

Tidelity  L.  ft  T.  Co.  ▼.  Engleby, 

99  Vaw   1«8   872,    899 

Fidelity  Tnut»  ete.,  Co.  v.  Bell, 
63  App.  Div.   (N.  Y.)   623...     178 

Field  ▼.  Jones,  10  Ga.  229 

36,  136,    761 
Field  ▼.  HastingB,  etc.,  Co.,  66 

Fed.  279 1040 

Field  T.  HolDnan,  93  Ind.  206.   1043 
Field    y.    Ingreham,     16    Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)    629 167 

Field  ▼.  LiTermAn,  17  Mo.  218. 

46,  46,  916,    947 

Field  ▼.  8imco,  7  Ark.  269 

620,  644,    910 
Fifield  T.  Gaston,  12  Iowa,  218. 

170,  680,  803,  1036 
FUldns  ▼.  People,  69  N.  Y.  101.  673 
Filley    y.     Register,     4     Minn. 

391 249,  254,  266,  274,     339 

918,  946,  986,    993 
Finch  y.  Kent,  24  Mont.  268..     838 
894,  922,  ^927,  932,  936,    946 
Finding  y.  Hjartman.   14   Colo. 

596 641 

Findley    y.    Cooley,    1    Blackf. 

(Ind.)   262 631,    663 

Fink    y.    Algermissen,    26    Mo. 

App.  186 627 

Fink  y.  Dennj,  76  Va.  663 

328,  346,  898,  929 
Fink  y.  Jetter,  38  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

163 881 

Fink  y.  Martin,  1  La.  Ann.  117. 

900,  956 
Finley  y.  MeConnell,  60  111.  259.  634 
Fink  y.  McCue,  100  8.  W.  (Mo.) 

549 1000,  1005 

Fink  y.  Nolan,  21  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1305 364 

y.  Pike,  50  Mo.  App.  564.    228 
y.  Krut,  13  Tex.  Ciy.  App. 

36 161,  168,     942 

Flnley  y.  Smitli,  24  N.  C.  225.       47 
First  Nat  Bank  y.  Acme  Wliite 
Lead,  etc.,  Co.,  123  Ala.  344. 


PAOB 

56,  457,  474,  502,     599 
First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Bartlett,  8 

Neb.  319 397,  399,    972 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Bayless,  96 

6a.  684 193,  196,    270 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Beasley,  12 

Colo.  App.  313 460 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Bertschy,  52 

Wis.  438 311,  331,     332 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Bowman,  36 

W.  Va.  649 285 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Browne,  128 

Ala.  657 159 

First   Nat   Bank  y.    Brubaker, 

128  Iowa,  587 510,    511 

First  Nat.    Bank    y.    Buck,  66 

Mich.  394 669 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Burkhardt, 

71  Minn.   185    180 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Odkins,  16 

S.  D.  445   198 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Carter,  89 

Ind.  317 579 

First   Nat.   Bank  y.   Chapman, 

77    111.   App.    105 843 

First    Nat    Bank    y.    Chicago 

Title  ft  Trust  Co.,  14  Am.  B. 

R.  102 1214 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Comfort,  4 

Dak.  167 433,  436,  518,    625 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Condon,  122 

Mich.  457 966 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Connett  (C. 

C.  A.),  15  Am.  B.  R.  662.. ..   1156 
First  Nat  Bank  y.   Cummins, 

39  N.  J.  Eq.  577 76 

First  Nat   Bank  y.   Cummins, 

38  N.  J.  Eq.  191.:... 

377,  386,  408,    410 
First  Nat  Bank  y.  Dwelly,  72 

Me.  223 136 

First    Nat    Bank  y.  Eastman, 

144  Cal.  487 787,  813,    846 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  East  Omaha 

Box  Co.,  90  N.  W.  (Neb.)  223    287 
First  Nat.  Bank  y.  F.  C.  Tre- 


CIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOC 

bein  Co.,  59  Ohio  St.  316. .. .  S7 
First  Nat.  Bonk    ▼.    Fenn,    75 

Iowa,  221 1007 

First  Nat  Bank  v.  Fry,  168  Mo. 

402 318,  331,  333,  986,    998 

1000,  1001 
First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Ft.  Wayne 

Artificial    Ice    Co.,    105    La. 

133 560 

First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Qarrettson, 

107  Iowa,   196    459,    962 

First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Gibson,  105 

N.  W.    (Neb.)    1081 688 

First    Nat.     Bank    ▼.     Gibson 

(Neb.),  94  N.  W.  965... 814,  820 
First   Nat.    Bank   ▼.   Glass,   79 

Fed.  706 168 

First  Nat   Bank   y.   Hamilton, 

76  Hun  (N.  Y.),  613... 512,  578 
First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Hollerin,  31 

Neb.  668 759,    761 

First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Hosmer,  48 

Mich.  200 774,    807 

First  Nat.   Bank  ▼.   Hostetter, 

61    Iowa,   395    143 

First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Jaffray,  41 

Kan.  694 251,  253,  351,    443 

First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Johnson,  10 

Am.  B.  R.  208 1163 

First     Nat.     Bank    y.    Kansas 

City  Line  Co.,  43  Mo.   App. 

561 43« 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Kavanagfa, 

7  CokK  App.   160 613 

First    Nat.    Bank  v.  King,  67 

Kan.  244 838 

First  Nat.   Bank  y.   Lancaster, 

12  Ky.  L.  Rep.  541 964 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Lasater,  13 

Am.  B.  R.  698 1200 

First  Nat.    Bank   y.    Leppel,  9 

Colo.  594 666 

First  Nat.  Bank  t.  Lowrey,  36 

Neb.  290 473,    522 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  McAllister, 

46  Mich.  397 366 


PAOS 
First  Nat  Bank  y.  McClellan, 

9  N.  3C.  636  183,  368,  897,     903 

First  Nat   Bank   y.   McDonald 

Mfg.  Co.,  67  Wis.  373 

414,  744,     74S 
First  Nat.  Bank  of  Amsterdam 

y.  Miller,  163  N.  Y.  164.  .230,     247 
313,  353,  407,  519,     614 
First  Nat  Bank  y.  Marshall,  5^* 

Kan.  441 594,     947 

First   Nat.   Bank    y.    Maxwell, 

123  Cal.  360. . .  .210,  336,  577,     969 
First  Nat.  Bank  of  Amsterdam 

y.  Miller,  24  App.   Diy.    (N. 

Y.)  551 137,    292 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Moffatt,  77 

Hun    (N.   Y.),  468 407,     410 

First  Nat  Bank    y.    NaiU,    52 

Kan.  211 47S 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  North,  2  S. 

D.  480 153,  467,     502 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  North  Wis- 
consin   Lumber    Co.,    41    111. 

App.  383 813 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Parsons,  42 

W.  Va.  137 ... .  369,  398,  984,  1036 
First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Penn  Trust 

Co.,  10  Am.  B.  R.  782 1158 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Peterson,  3 

Neb.    (Unoff.)    102    405 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Prager,  91 

Fed.  689 773,     846 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Prager,  50 

W.  Va.  660 872 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Randall,  20 

R.  L  319 586 

First  Nat  Baok  y.    Reece,    64 

Neb.  292 387 

First  Nat.   Bank   y.   Reid,    122 

Iowa,  280 189 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Rhea,    155 

lU.  434 159,  166,  1036 

First   Nat.    Bank    y.    Rice,    22 

Ohio  ar.  Ct  183 968 

First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Ridenour,  46 

Kan.  707.. 459,  473,  487,  491,     60a 


Table  of  Cases. 


c^ 


FAQC 

Fint  Nat.  Bank  t.  Bolurer,  138 

Mo.  389 «.  .263,  562,    859 

F!rat  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Shuler,  153 

N.  Y.  163 98 

First     State     Bank    ▼.    Sibley 

County  Bank,  96  Minn.  456.     468 
First    Nat.    Bank    v.    Simpson, 

152   Mo.  638 123,     128 

First  Nat.   Bank  ▼.   Smith,   93 

Aki.  97 366,  457,    465 

First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Smith,  149 

Ind.  443 620 

First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Smith,  133 

Mass.  26 460,  492,    495 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Staake^  15 

Am.   B.  R.  639 

1119,   1147,    1185,  1193 
First  Nat.  Bank  y.   Steele,  98 

Ala.  85 962 

First    Nat^    Bank   y.    Swan,    3 

Wyo.  356 903 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Tompkins,  3 

Neb.    (Unoff.)    328    808,    965 

First   Nat.    Bank  y.   Tyler,   55 

Mich.  297 973 

First  Nat.   Bank  y.  Van  Ness, 

4  Ida,  539 979 

First  Nat.  Bank  y.  White,  60 

N.  J.  Eq.  487..  123,  128,  183,    291 
First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Wright,  38 

App.  Diy.   (N.  Y.)   2 821 

First    Nat.   Bank   y.   Wyoming 

Valley  Joe  Co.,  14  Am.  B.  R. 

448 1081 

First  Nat  Bank  y.  Yeoman,  14 

Okla.  626 184 

Fish  y.  Field,  19  Vt.  141 987 

Fish  y.  Hunt,  81  Ky.  584 169 

Fish   y.   McDonnell,    42    Minn. 

519 997 

Fishel  y.  Lockard,  52  Ga.  632. 

254,    995 
Fiflhel  y.  Motta,  76  Conn.  197. 

244,  338,    397 
Fisher  y.   Campbell,    101    Fed. 
156 59,  476,    871 


PAfflB 
Fisher  y.  Cushman,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

646 , 1189 

Fisher  y.  Dickenson,  84  Va.  318. 

893,  1008 
Fisher  y.  Hall,  44  Mich.  493.. 

584,  594,     609 
Fisher  y.  Henderson,  8  N.  B.  R. 

175 23,  1138 

Fisher  y.   Herrman^     118    Wis. 

424 960,  961,    979 

Fisher  y.  Herron,  22  Neb.  183.  508 
Fisher  y.  Lewis,  69  Mo.  629. . . 

351,     352 
Fisher  y.  Mclnlyre,    66    Mich. 

681 152 

Fisher  y.   Mclnemey,    137   Ckl. 

38 54,     891 

Fisher  y.  Moog,  39  Fed.  665.. 

669,  866,  867,  904,  964,    979 
Fisher  y.  Moore,  12  Rob.  (La.) 

95 891 

Fishel  y.  Motta,  76  Conn.  197 . .  898 
Fisher  y.  Schlosser,  41  Ohio  St. 

147 30,    240 

Fischer  y.  Schultc,  98  Wis.  462  387 
Fisher  y.  Shelyer,  53  Wis.  498 

232,  354,  376,  627,  894,     898 
Fisher  y.  Stout,  74  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)    97    640 

Fisher  y.  Syfers,  109  Ind.  514.  856 
Fisher  y.  Tallman,  74  Mo.  39. .  776 
Fisk    y.    Montgomery,    21    La. 

Ann.  446    1069 

Fitch  y.  Burk,  38  Vt.  683 542 

Fitch  y.  Corbett,  64  Cal.  150..  210 
Fitch  y.  Rising  Sun  Bank,  99 

Ind.    443    958 

Fitts    y.    Beardflley,    8    N.    Y. 

Supp.  567   84,  94,     310 

Fitzell  V.  Leaky,  72  Cal.  477 . .  168 
Fitaer  y.  Fitzer,  2  Atk.  (Bng.) 

511 336 

Fitz  Henry  y.  Hunter,  33  Wash. 

629 174 

Fitzgerald  y.  Forristal,  48  111. 

228 635,  637,     642 


CVl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Fitzgerald  ▼.  Meyer,  25  Neb.  77    522 
Fitzpatrick  v.  Burchill,  7  Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)    463 374 

Fitzpatrick    y.    Fox,    80    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    346 919,     930 

Fitzpatrick  v.  Hanson,  65  Minn. 

195 220 

Flanagan  v.  Oberthier,  50  Tex. 

379 398 

Flanagan  ▼.  Wood,  33  Vt.  332 

629,  531,  546,  549 
Flanary  y.  Kane,  102  Va.  547.  700 
Flagg  y.  Mann,   1   8umm.    (U. 

S.)    486    689 

Flagg  y.  Pierce,  58  N.  H.  348 

522,  524,  584 
Flagg  y.  Willington,  6  Me.  386  925 
Flaherty  y.  Stephenson,  66  W. 

Va.    192    688 

Flaherty  y.  Stephenson,  49  S. 

E.  (W.  Va.)  131 299 

Flanders    y.    Batten,    60    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  542    672,     676 

Flanigan  y.  Pomeroy,  85  Minn. 

264 521,  1009 

Flannagan    y.     Donaldson,     85 

Ind.   517    336,    626 

Flannery  y.  Coleman,   112  Ga. 

648 687 

Flannery  y.  Van  Tassel,  62  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  621   308 

Flannigan    y.    Barter,    12    St 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)    554 365 

Flash  y.  Tindall,  39  Ark.  571 . . 

159,  169,  486 
Fleischman  y.  Bowser,  62  Fed. 

259 572,    985 

Fleischner  y.   Bank  of  McMin- 

yille,  36  Or.  553 310 

Fleischner  y.  First  Nat.  Bank, 

36  Or.  553 783,  844,    873 

Fleming   y.    Edwards,    23    Ont. 

App.   (Can.)    718   191 

Fleming    y.    Grafton,    54   Miss. 

79... 771,  774,  777,  794,  795,  844 
Fleming  y.-  Magley,  32  111.  App. 


PAGE 
183 140 

Fleming    y.    Martin,    2    Head 

(Tenn.),  43   61 

Fleming  y.  Townsend,  6  Ga.  103 

15,  16,    520 
Fleming    y.    Weagley,    32    III. 

App.    183    513 

Fleming  y.  Yost,  137  Ind.  95.. 

597,  937,  940,     941 
Flemington  Nat.  Bank  y.  Jones, 

50  N.  J.  Eq.  244. .  .253,  254,    581 
Fletcher  y.  Clarke,  29  Me.  486.     187 
Fletcher    y.    Fletcher,    2    Mac- 
Arthur    (8.  C),   38 639,    644 

Fletcher  y.  Harl,  3  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

335 348 

Fletcher  y.  Holmes,  40  Me.  364 

774,  790,  864 
Fletcher  y.  Mansur,  5  Ind.  267  818 
Fletcher  y.  Martin,  126  Ind.  55  1008 
Fletcher  y.  Sidley,  2  Vem.  490  293 
Fletcher  t.  Tuttle,  97  Me.  491 

734,  762,  799 
Fletcher  y.   Willard,   31   Maas. 

464 521 

Flewellen  y.  Crane,  58  Ala.  627 

759,  855,  858 
Fleury    y.    Pringle,    26    Grant 

Ch.    (U.   C.)    67 135,     170 

Flickey     y.     Loney,     4     Baxt. 

(Tenn.)    169    87 

Flint  y.  Chaloupka,  18  Am.  B. 

R.   293    1227 

Flood  y.   Clemence,   106  Mass. 

299 917,    950 

Flook   y.   Armentrout's   Adm'r, 

100  Va.   638 

234,  356,  833,  861,    979 
Florence   Sewing  Mach.   Co.  y. 

Zeigler,  58  Ala.  224 

4,  610,  705,    706 
Florida  L.  &,  T.  Co.  y.  Crabb, 

33   So.    (Fla.)    523 348,    403 

Flory  y.  Houck,  186  Pa.  St.  263    327 
Flour  City  Nat.  Bank  y.  Doty, 

41  Hun  (N.  Y.),  76 48 


Table  of  Cases. 


evil 


PAQB 

Tloyd  V.  Floyd,  77  Ala.  353.. 

850,  1040 
Floyd     V.     Goodwin,    8     Yerg. 

(Tenn.)   484.... 72,  667,  670,    676 
Floyd    T.    Martin,    4    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  891    201,    373 

Flu^  T.  Henscbel,  7  N.  D.  276 

393,  688,  690,  610,  613,  615,     625 
Fly  ▼.  Screeton,  64  Ark.  184.. 

604,    970 
Flynn  ▼.  Baialey,  35  Or.  268.. 

110,  379,  380,    511 
Flynn  ▼.  Jackson,  93  Va.  341 . . 

328,  368,  692,  941,  1050 
J^ynn  v.  Todd,  77  111.  App.  682  892 
Flynn  y.  Williams,  29  N.  C.  32 

67,      98 
Forbes  t.  Howe,  102  Mass.  427 

503,  1166 

Fogg  V.  Lawry,  71  Me.  215 

757,  758,  1055,  1058 
Foley  ▼.  Bitter,  34  Md.  646 .. .     585 

Foley  V.  Doyle,  1  Neb.  643 

574,  627,  763,    799 
JPoley    v.     Knight,     4     Blackf. 

(Ind.)    420    950 

Folk  T.  Fonda,  29  Atl.  676...     600 
Folkerts  ▼.  Standish,  55  Mich. 

463 997 

Fohnar   t.   Lehman,   Durr  Co., 

41  So.   (Ala.)    750 376 

Folsom  y.  Clemence,  111  Mass. 

273 253,     254 

J'onda  y.  Gross,  15  Wend.   (N. 

Y.)    628    558 

Fones  y.  Rice,  9  Gratt.    (Va.) 

568 1022 

Foote  y.  Cobb,  18  Ala.  585.... 

182,  337,     926 
Joote    y.    Stryker,    10    N.    Y. 

Supp.   472    385 

Footman     y.     Pendergrass,     3 

Rich.  Eq.    (S.  C.)   33 

14,  15,  93,  220,  349,  523,  912 
Forbes  v.  Dayison,  11  Vt.  660 

1056,  1057,  1059,  1060 


PAGE 

Forbes  y.  Howe,  102  Mass.  427 
Forbes  y.  Marsh,  15  Conn.  384      34 
Forbes  y.  Scannell,  13  Cal.  242       86 
Forbes  v.  Waller,  26  N.  Y.  430 

800,  842,  927 
Forbush  y.  Willard,  33  Mass.  42  292 
Ford  V.  Aiken,  4  Rich.  L.    (8. 

C.)    121    207 

Ford   y.    Caldwell,    3    Hill    (S. 

C),  248   418,     423 

Ford  y.  Chambers,  28  Cal.  13 . .     536 
Ford  y.  Johnston,   7  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  563 19,  200,  239,     243 

Ford  V.  Lewis,  49  Ky.  127 650 

Ford  y.  Rosenthal,  74  Tex.  28. .   1021 
Ford  y.  Williams,  13  N.  Y.  577 

925,     948 
Ford  ▼.  Williams,  24  N.  Y.  359 

554,  573,  987 
Ford  ▼.  Williams,  42  Ky.  550 

75,  76,  459,  519,     583 
Fordyce  y.  Hicks,  80  Iowa,  272 

161,  631,  645 
Foreman     y.     Citizens'     State 

Bonk,  128  Iowa»  661 94,     152 

Forepaugh  v.  Pryor,  30  Minn. 

35 1007 

Forester  y.  Moore,  77  Mo.  651.     460 
Forkner    v.    Stuart,    6    Gratt. 

(Va.)    197    523 

Fomiquet  y.  Forstall,  34  Miss. 

87 870 

Forrest   y.   Laycook,    18   Grant 

Ch.    611    358 

Forrest  y.  Camp,  16  Ala.  642. . 

52,       54 
Forrester  y.  Gill,  11  Colo.  App. 

410 119,     171 

Forrester  y.  Moore,  77  Mo.  651     703 
Forrester  y.  Strauss,   18  N.  Y. 

Supp.  41    46,     304 

Forstell  y.  Larche,  39  La.  Ann. 

286 973 

Forsyth  v.  Kreakbaum,  46  Ky. 

07 533 

Forsyth    v.    Matthews,    14    Pa. 


CYUl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 
St.  100 27,  20,  30,  226,    246 

340,  980,  990,    993 

Fortner  ▼.  Whelan,  87  Wis.  88 .     254 

Foster  ▼.  Berkey,  8  Minn.  361 

682,    993 

Foster  y.  Brown,  65  Ind.  234.. 

122,     128 

Foster  v.  Foster,  56  Vt.  540. . . 

331,     692 

Foster  ▼.  Grigsby,  64  Ky.  86 . . 

506,  626,  583,  594,  599,  602,    603 

Foster  t.  Haglin,  68  Ark.  621.     905 

Foster  ▼.  Haglin,  64  Ark.  606.     906 

Foster  t.  Hall,  29  Mass.  89... 

580,  904,    926 

Foster  ▼.  Knowles,  42  K.  J.  Eq. 

226 871 

Foster  v.  Lincoln,  79  Fed.  170.     671 

Foster  v.  McAlester,   114   Fed. 

145 7,    254 

256,  257,  457,  464,  473,  487,     489 

490,  401,  498,  502,  569,  593,     598 

599,  922,  942,  945,  952,  997,  1002 

Foster  ▼.  MeAlester,  3  Ind.  T. 

307   908,  914,  923,    953 

Foster  y.  McGregor,  11  Vt  595     153 

Foster  y.  Pugh,  20  Miss.  416.. 

232,  233,  353,  356,    557 

Foster  y.  Thompson,  71   Mass. 

453 943 

Foster  y.  Wallace,  2  Mo.  231 . .     526 

Foster    v.    Walton,    5     Watts 

(Pa.),  378   220 

Foster  y.  Whelpley,  123  Mich. 

360 31 

Foster   ▼.    Woodfln,    33   K.    C. 

339 8,  227,    622 

Fonche  y.  Brower,  74  Ga.  251 . . 

24,  69,    631 

Fouke  Y.  Fleming,  13  Md.  392.     428 

Foulds  Y.  Curtelett,  21  U.  C.  C. 

P.    368    113 

Foules      V.      Foules,      33      So. 

(Miss.)    072    634,     641 

Foulk  V.  McFarlane,  1  Watts.  & 

S.    (Pa.)    297 42,      58 


PAGB 

Fowes  Y.  Rice,  9  Gratt.  568 670 

Fowler  y.  Bell,  90  Tex.  150 87 

Fowler  y.  Frisbie,  3  Conn.  320 

201,  1057 
Fowler  v.  Hendry,  7  U.  C.  C. 

P.    360* 913 

Fowler  ▼.  Jenks,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

255 1186 

Fowler  v.  McCartney,  27  Miss. 

509 763 

Fowler  y.  Stoneum,  11  Tex.  478 

216,  220,  634,     641 
Fowler  t.  Trebein,  16  Ohio  St. 

403 67,  375,     738 

Fowler  y.  Waldrip,  10  Ga.  360.     215 
Fowler  Co.  ▼.  McDonnell,   100 

Iowa,   636    513 

Fowler's  Appeal,  87  Pa.  St.  449 

766,  789,    790 
Fox  ▼.  Bronson,  36  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    431    965 

Fox    Y.    Clark,    1     Walk.    Ch. 

(Mich.)    535    185,  200,     217 

Fox  ▼.  Dyer  (Cal.),  22  Pac.  257 

848,     865 
Fox  v.  Erbe,  100  App.  DiY.  (N. 

Y.)   343 678,  953,  1021,  102S 

Fox  Y.  Eckstein,  9  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

5 1009,  1084,  1087 

Fox  Y.  Fox,  4  La.  Ann.  135 891 

Fox  ▼.  Hills,  1  Conn.  295 

13,   19,   200,     201 
Fox  Y.  lipe,  14  Colo.  App.  268 

36,  136,  338,  403,  851,  855,     865 
Fox  V.  Moyer,  54  N.  Y.  125. . . 

336,  793,     854 

Fox  V.  Peck,  161  111.  226 356 

Fox  ▼.  Peck,  45  111.  App.  239. . 

717,     724 
Fox  Y.  Wallace,  31  Miss.  660..     196 

Fox  y.  Webster,  46  Mo.  181 829 

Fox  Y.  Willis,  1  Mich.  321 .  .785,     804 
Foy  ▼.  East  Dallas  Bank,  28  S. 

W.  137    1010 

Fradd  v.  Charon,  69  N.  H.  ISO 

104,     595 


Table  of  Casks. 


CIS 


PAOB 

Fraket    ▼.    Brown,    2    Blackf. 

(Ind.)    296 206,   769,  1026 

Francis  v.  Lawrence,  4-S  "S,  J. 

Eq.   608 337,    774,   782,    783 

FraadB  t.  Kankin,  84  HI.  169.  468 
FraaciB  v.  Wilkinson,   147  111. 

370 «41 

Frank  ▼.  Batten,  49  Hnn    (N. 

y.),  »1    ^^ 

Frank    v.    Bobbitt,    166    Mass. 

112 »^ 

Frank   v.    Carutbers,    108   Mo. 

M9 «1 

Frank  v.  Curtis,  68  Mo.  App. 

349 683,    694 

Frank    ▼.    Frank,    26    S.    W. 

(Tex.)    819    ^37,    646 

Frank  ▼.  Kessler,  30  Ind.  8 

346,737,    777 

Frank  v.  King,  121  HI.  260... 

397,    968 

Frank  ▼.  Musliner,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

229 ^^^ 

Frank  v.  Peters,  9  Ind.  343. . . 

233,  271,     363 

Frank  ▼.  Priee,  1  Leg.  Rec.  B^p. 

(Pa.)    101    3* 

Frank  ▼.  Renter,  116  Mo.  617. .  961 

Frank  ▼.  Robinson,  96  N.  C.  28  761 

Frank    ▼.    Stepbenson,    21    So. 

(MiEs.)    778    M2>    »«3 

Frank  v.  Welsb,  89  111.  38. . . .  482 
Frsnk    ▼.    Zeigler,   46    W.   Va. 

514 463,689,691,     627 

Frankenthal     t.     GUbert,     34 

Fed.  5    »»'    *^1 

Frankentbal    v.    Goldstein,    44 

Mo.   App.    189 6127,1003 

Frankfort    Cbair    CJo.    v.    Bu- 

ebanan,  21  Ky.  L-  Rep.  269. .  647 
Frankbouser  t.  EUett,  22  Kan. 


127 


664 


Franklin  v.  CUflin,  49  Md.  24 

413,  436,  1002 

Franklin  t.  Cooper,  19  Ky.  L. 
Rep.    1976    377 


PAOB 

Franklin  v.  Gummersell,  11  Mo. 

App.  306    629,    960 

Franklin  ▼.  Gummersell,  9  Mo. 

App.  84    663 

Franklin    v.    Larabee,    I    Root 

(Conn.),  488 747 

Franklin  y.  Stagg,  22  Mo.  193 

638,     661 
Franklin  Needle  Co.  v.  Amazon 

Hosiery  Co.,  128  Micb.  198..     683 
Franzke  v.  Hitcbon,  106  Wis.  11 

436,     436 
Fredrick    ▼.    Allgaier,    88    Mo. 

698 980 

Frederick  v.  Shorey,  4  Wasb.  76    276 
Fredricks    y.    Clarke,    3    Mont. 

268 1008 

Fredricks  ▼.  Davis,  3  Mont.  261 

637,     639 
Freedman  v.  Morrow  Shoe  Mfg. 

Co.,  122  Pa.  St.  26 634 

Freeland  v.  Freeland,  102  Mass. 

476 203,     216 

Freelander    ▼.    HoUoman,    Fed. 

Cas.  6,081    1236 

Freelove  ▼.  Cole,  41  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)    318   639,     662 

Freeman  ▼.  Bumbam,  36  Conn. 

469 275 

Freeman  v.   Eatman,  38  N.  C. 

81 295 

Freeman    v.    Hamblin,    1    Tex. 

Civ.  App.  167    166 

Freeman  v.  Hensley   (Cal.),  30 

Pac.  792   «50 

Freeman  v.  Lewis,  27  N.  C.  91 . 

216,     217 
Freeman  v.  Pope,  L.  R.  9  Eq. 

206 120,     194 

Freeman  v.  Pullen,  130  Ala.  663    727 
Freeman    v.    Pullen,    119    Ala. 

236 778,     822 

Freeman  v.  Savage,  2  La.  Ann. 

269 663 

Freeman    v.    Sedwick,    6    Gill. 
(Md.)  28 661 


ex 


Table  of  Cases. 


VAom 
Freeman  y.   Smith,  30  Pa.   St. 

264 154 

Freeman  t.   Stewart,    119   Ala. 

158... 814,  849,  856,  875,  904,  1048 

Frees  v.  Baker,  81  Tex.  216... 

467,  481,     482 

Freeae   v.   Eemplay,     118    Fed. 

428 921,    922 

Frei  ▼.  McMurdo,  101  Wis.  423.     178 
Freiberg  ▼.   Freiberg,    74    Tex. 

122 920 

Freiberg  t.   Johnson,     71    Tex. 

558 1003 

Freiberg  ▼.  Steenbock,  54  Minn. 

509 544 

Freiburg  ▼.  Dreyfus,  136  U.  S. 

478 724,  726,     980 

Freiburg  v.  Langfelder,  46  La. 

Ann.  1117 371 

Freider  ▼.   Lienkauff,    92    Ala. 

469 199 

Freishenmeyer  ▼.  Lehmkuhl,  29 

111.  App.  465   226 

French  v.  Breidelman,  2  Grant 

(Pa.),  319 748 

French     t.     Commercial     Nat. 

Bank,  199  111.  213.... 41,  42,      45 
171,  172,  671,  700,  843,  844,    872 
French     y.     Commercial     Nat. 

Bank,  79  111.  App.  110 798 

French  y.  French,  2  Jur.  N.  S. 

169 92,   116,  282,  343,    414 

French  y.  Holmes,  67  Me.  186. 

96,  96,  264,  339,  341,  988,     993 
French  y.  Mehan,    56    Pa.    St. 

286 212,  632,     640 

French  y.  Motley,  63  Me.  326. . 

320,  469,  513,     515 
French  v.  Newberry,  124  Mich. 

147 749,     754 

French  y.  Reel,  61  Iowa,  143 . .     673 
French  y.  Smith,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

785 1220 

Frenche    y.   Kitchen,   53   N.   J. 

Eq.  37 839 

French  Lumbering  Co.  y.   The- 


PAQB 

riault,   107  Wis.  627 

68,  733,  777,    792 

Frey  y.  Fenn,  126  Ala.  291 861 

Frey  y.  Gessler,  9  Pa.  Cas.  509.  432 
Frey  v.  Harris,  29  111.  App.  243.  618 
Freybe  v.  Tieman,  76  Tex.  286.  318 
Freyer  y.  Bryan,  2  Hill  £q.   (S. 

C.)  56 600 

Frieberg  y.   Sanger    (Tex.),   12 

S.  W.   1136    550,  1052 

Friedberg  y.  Elliott,    8    S.    W. 

(Tex.)   832 1000 

Friedenwald  ▼.  MuUan,  57  Tenn. 

226 722 

Friedlander  y.   Brodcs,   35   La. 

Ann.  741 396,    973 

Friedman  y.  Bierman,  43  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  387   293 

Friedman  y.   Fennell,    94    Ala. 

570 119,     121 

Friedman  y.  Rose,  83  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  542 74,      77 

Friedman  y.  Verchofsky,  105  111. 

App.  414 1131,  1183 

Friedrich  y.  Brewster,  26  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  236 214 

Friend  y.  Oarcelon,  77  Me.  25.  155 
Frisbey  y.   Thayer,    25    Wend. 

(N.  Y.)  396 185,    772 

Frisbie  y.  McCarty,  1  Stew,  ft 

P.   (AU.)   68 220 

Frisk    y.    Reigelman,    75    Wis. 

499 971,     979 

Fritz  y.  Worden,  20  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)   241    ..165,     157 

Fromme  y.  Jones,  13  Iowa,  474.  473 
Frost  y.  Beekman,  1  Johns.  Gh. 

(N.  Y.)    288    877 

Frost  y.  Goddard,  25  Me.  414. 

67,  755 
Frost  y.  libby,  79  Me.  56.  .766,  815 
Frost  y.   Mason,    17   Tex.    Ciy. 

App.  466 595.  958,  1002 

Frost  y.  Mott,  34  N.  Y.  253 .. .  784 
Frost  y.  Reynolds,  39  N.  C.  494. 

133,     135 


Table  of  Cases* 


CXI 


PAGE 

Frost  T.  Rosecrans,  66  Iowa,  405 

924,     946 

Fio0t  ▼.  Steele^  46  Minn.  1 

320,  399,  613,  616,  975 
Ftost  T.  Warren,  42  N.  T..204.  554 
Frothingham  y.   Hodenpyl,    135 

N.  Y.  630    772,     803 

Fry  ▼.  Penn  Tnut  Co.,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  61    1162 

Fiyberger  y.  Bergen,  88  Minn. 

311 901,  935,     970 

Fiye  V.  Miley,  54  W.  Va.  324. . 

775,  778,  793 
Fryer  r.  Bryan,  2  Hill  £q.  66..  314 
Fraser    y.    Murray,    34    K.    8. 

(Can.)   186 247,    618 

Fraaer  y.  Paaeage,  63  Mich.  661. 

684,  694,  824 
Fraser  y.  Rodney,  12  Qrant  Gh. 

154 652 

Fraser   y.   Xjegare,    Bailey    Eq. 

(S.  C.)   389   823 

Frazer  y.  Fritcbard,  6  La.  Ann. 

728 411 

Fraxer  y.  Thatcher,  49  Tex.  26. 

462,  601,  598 
Frazer  y.  Western,  1  Barb.  Gh. 

(N.  Y.)  220 294,  718,     722 

Frazier  y.  Fredericks,  24  N.  J. 

L.  162 87 

Fnlkerson    y.    Sappington,    104 

Mo.  472 267 

Fullenwider  y.  Robertson,  20  N. 

C.  420 218 

PuUer  y.  Bean,  30  K.  H.  181 . .     199 
Fuller  y.  Brewster,  63  Md.  358. 

231,  260,  961,  962 
Fuller  y.  Brown,   76  Hun    (N. 

Y.),   657 200,  239,   801,  854 

859,  935 

Fuller  y.  Oason,  26  Fla.  476 .. .  1044 

Fuller  y.  Croco,  46  Kan.  634. . .  513 
Fuller  y.  Griffith,  91  Iowa,  632. 

251,  442,  444,  475,  693 

Fuller  y.  Nelson,  36  Minn.  213.  832 


PAGE 

Fuller  V.  Pinson,  98  Ky.  441 . .     206 

Fuller  V.  Sears,  5  Vt.  527 589 

Fuller  y.  Whitlock,  99  Ala.  411     159 

Fuller  Electrical  Co.  v.  Lewis, 
101  N.  Y.  674.. 271,  345,  456.     582 

Fuller,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Gaul,  85  HI. 
App.  500 448 

Fullington  y.  Northwestern  Im- 
porters', etc.,  Assoc.,  48  Minn. 
490 193. 

Fulmore  y.  Burrows,  2  Rich. 
Eq.  (S.  G.)  95 692,  961,     967 

Fulp  y.  Beayer,  136  Ind.  319. . . 

152,  369,     892 

Fulton  y.  Woodman,  54  Miss. 
168 402,     879 

Fults  y.  Paul,  63  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

Funk  y.   Lawson,   12   111.   App. 

220 382 

Funk  y.  8taa4»,  24  III.  633 

458,  501,  533,  542 
Funkhouser  y.  Lay,  78  Mo.  458.  704 
Fuqua   y.    Farmers',    etc.,    Nat. 

Bank,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep.  101 .. .  1045 
Furguson  y.  Bobo,  54  Miss.  121 .  753 
Furman  y.  Tenney,  28  Minn.  77. 

152,  160,  878,  884 
Fumess   y.    Ewing,   2    Pa.    St. 

479 84,     214 

Furrh  y.  McKnig^t,  6  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.  683 110 

Furth  y.  March,  101  Mo.  App. 

329 107,  156,  884,     901 

Furth  y.  Snell,  6  Wash.  542...     598- 
Furth  y.  Stahl,   10  Am.  B.  R. 

442 1158,  1174 

Furth  Grocery  Oo.  v.  May,  78 

Mo.  App.  323 926 

Fury  y.  Kempin,  79  Mo.  477. . .     719 
Fury  y.   Strohecker,    44    Mich. 

337 131,  132,  674,    915 

Fusze  y.   Stem,    17    111.    App. 

429 843 


CZll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PA^ 

o 

Gaar  v.  Hart,  77  Iowa,  697 685 

Gaar  ▼.  Klein,  93  Iowa,  313. . .     697 
Gear  v.  Stolte,  116  Iowa,  139. . 

969,  966,    969 
Gable  y.  Columlius    Cigar    Co., 

140  Ind.  663   24,     366 

Gaff  V.  Stern,  12  Mo.  App.  116. 

694,    699 
Gaffney  v.  Signaigo,  9  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  6,169 261,     442 

Gage  ▼.  Chesebro,  49  Wis.  486. 

463,  488,  492,  493 
Gage  V.  Dauchy,  34  N.  Y.  293. .  113 
Gage  y.  Perry,  69  Iowa,  606  487 

Gage  y.  Trawick,  94  Mo.  App. 

307 959,     960 

Gaidry  y.  Lyons,  29  La.  Ann.  4.    736 
Gainer  y.  Rase,  20  Fla.  157... 

232,    364 
Gaines  y.  Chew,  2  How.  (U.  S.) 

619 869 

Gaines  y.  National  Ezch.  Bank, 

64  Tex.  18 164,    761 

Gaither  y.  Mumford,    4    N.    C. 

600 441 

Gaitskill  y.  Stiyers,    5    Kj.    L. 

Rep.  866 769 

Galbreath  y.  Cook,  30  Ark.  417. 

232,  364,  579,  687,  703,  706,    707 
Gale  y.  Gale,  19  Barb.  (N.  Y.) 

249 •  639 

Gale  y.  Williamson,    10    L.    J. 

Exch.  446 299 

Galentine  y.  Burbaker,  147  Ind. 

468 1007 

Gallatian    y.     Cunningham,     8 

Cow.    (N.  Y.)    361 877 

Galle  y.  Tode,  148  N.  Y.  270. . . 

44,  456,  474,  493,    678 
684,  696,  600,     604 
Gallego  y.  Oheyallie,    2    Brock. 

(U.  S.)  286.  . 142,     149 

Gailick  y.  Bordeaux,  22  Mont. 

470 538 

Gallman  y.  Perrie,  47  Miss.  131. 


138,  764,    769 
Gailober    y.    Martin,    33    Kan. 

252 1002 

Galloway  y.  Hamilton,  68  Wis. 

651 771,    799 

GtJlus  y.  Elmer,  193  Mass.  106. 

29,     176 
Galpin  y.  Galpin,  76  Iowa,  464. 

636,  656,    657 
Gait     y.      Dibrell,      10     Terg. 

(Tenn.)  146 ,. 623 

Gait  y.  Jackson,  9  Ga.  151 660 

Galyeston    Dry    Goods    Co.    y. 

Blum,  23  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  703.    583 
Galyeston    Dry    Goods    CSt>.    y. 

Frienkel    (Tex.    Ciy.    App.), 

103  S.  W.  224 1165 

Gamble  y.  C.  Aultmaa   ft   Co., 

125  Ala.  372 234,  306,  355,     876 

Gamble    y.    Harris^  5  Del.  Ch. 

512 682 

Gamble  y.  Johnson,  9  Mo.  605. 

341,    686 

Gamble  y.  Talbot,  2  Tex.  App. 

ay.  Gbs.  Sec  729.. 462 

Gamet  y.   Simmons,   103   Iowa, 

163 344,380,388,612,     816 

Gandall  y.  Finn,  33  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    444 49 

Gannard  y.  Dslaya,  20  Ala.  732. 

182,  294,    337 
Ganong  y.  Green,  71  Bfich.  1.. 

943,  1000 
GttDB  y.  Ellison,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

153 1173 

Gans    y.    Weinstein,    37    Misc. 

Rep.   (N.  Y.)  209 1126 

Garahy  y.  Bayley,  25  Tex.  294. 

582,  613,     882 
Garbutt  y.  Smith,  40  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)  22 182 

Gardiner  Bank  t.  Hodgdon,  14 

Me.  453 521 

Gardiner  Bank  y.   Wheaton,   8 

Me.  373. 682,  691,     699 

Gardiner  Nat.  Bank  y.  Hagar, 

65  Me.  359   490,  1060 


Table  of  Cajses. 


CXlll 


PA8C 

Gardiner  Sav.  Inst.  ▼.  Emerson, 

91  Me.  535   265 

Oardinier  ▼.  Otis,  13  Wis.  480.     589 
Gardinier  y.   Tubbe,   21    Wend. 

(N.  Y.)   169 658 

Gardner  y.  Baker,  25  lowa^  343. 

339,  375 
Gardner  v.  Boothe,  31  Ala.  186.  220 
Gardner  y.  Broussard,  39  Tex. 

372 312 

Gardner  y.  C.  B.  Keough  Mfg. 

Co.,  63  Hun   (N.  Y.),  519...     817 
Gardner  ▼.  Cole,  21  Iowa,  205. 

13,  15,  93,  215,    221 
Gardner  y.  Cook,  Fed.  Obb,  No. 

5,226 1120 

Gardner     y.    Commercial     Nat. 

Bank,  95  111.  298   413 

Gardner    y.    Commercial    Nat. 

Bank,  13  R.  I.  155 638,    642 

Gardner  y.  Gardner,  17  R.  I. 

761 209,  789 

Gardner  y.  Haines  (S.  D.),  104 

N.  W.  244... 59,  85,  291,  570,    574 
Gardner  y.  Holland,  19  Mass. 

599 540 

Gardner    y.    Klienke,  40  N.  J. 

Eq.  90 337,  959,  967,  977,    978 

Gardner    y.    lanaing,    28    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  413   789 

Gardner    t.    Maxwell,    27    La. 

Ann.  561 302 

Gardner  y.   McEwen,   19  N.  Y. 

123 519 

Gardner    y.    Painter,    Oaa.    t^ 

King  (Eng.),  65 336 

Gardner  y.  Rowe,  3  L.  J.  Ch.  O. 

S.  220 140 

Gardner  y.   Sehooley,  25  N.  J. 

Eq.  150 109,    880 

Gardner  y.  Webber,  34  Mass. 

407 808 

Gardnerahire   y.  White,    59    S. 

W.   (Tenn.)   661 882 

GardoD  y.  Woodward,  44  Kan. 

758 927 

h 


PAGE 

Garesche  y.  McDonald,  103  Mo. 

1 588,    882 

Garfield  y.  Hatmaker,  15  N.  Y. 

475 682,  752,     767 

Garland  y.  CSiambers,  19  Miss. 

337 521,     557 

Garland     y.     Rives,     4     Rand. 

(Va.)   282 72,  573,  589,    607 

627,    731 
Garlock    y.    Atlee     (Tenn.    Ch. 

App.),  53  S.  W.  186 567 

Garman  y.  Cooper,   72  Pa.   St. 

32 634,    990 

Gamer  y.  Bridges,  38  Ala.  276.  151 
Gamer  y.  Grayes,  54  Ind.  188. .  631 
Gamer    y.    Phillips,    36    Iowa, 

597 692,  1033 

Gamer  y.  Second    Nat.    Bank, 

151  U.  S.  420   113 

Gamier  y.  Wheeler,  40  Or.  198. 

241,  581,  615 
Garr  t.  Hill,  9  N.  J.  Eq.  210..  461 
Garritt  y.  Burlington  Plow  Co., 

70  Iowa,  597 459 

Garrett  y.  Rhame,  9  Rich.    (S. 

0.)  407 557 

Garrett  y.  Wagner,  125  Mo.  450. 

37,  157,  897,     928 
Garretson  y.  Kane,  27  N.  J.  L. 

208 64,  177,    632 

Garrigues  y.  Harris,  17  Pa.  St. 

344 915 

Garrison  y.  Brice,  48  N.  C.  85. 

15,  16,      93 
Garrison  y.  Monaghan,   33  Pa. 

St.  232 94 

Garritj  y:  Rankin,    55    S.    W. 

(Tex.)   367 597 

Garyey  y.  Moore,  12  Kj.  L.  Rep. 

732 359,     361 

Ganrin  y.  Garvin,  55  S.  C.  360.  301 
Garyin  y.  Ganrin,  40  S.  C.  435. 

676,    676 
Qmxj  y.  Jaoobson,  65  Miss.  204. 

661,    663 
Gasgst  y.  Scott,  17  Tenn.  244. .     777 


CXIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Oaakill    v.    Benton,    14    Phila. 

(Pa.)  487 42,      45 

Gassenheimer    ▼.    Kellogg,    121 

Ala.  109.... 56,  816,  852,  868,    870 
Gasser  ▼.  Crittenden,  140  Mich. 

301 160 

Gassett     v.     Grout,     4     Mete. 

(Mass.)    486 142,     149 

Gassett  v.  Wilson,  3  Fla.  235..  501 
Gaster  ▼.  Hardie,  75  N.  C.  460.  153 
Gates  ▼.  Andrews,  37  N.  Y.  657.  837 
Gates  V.  Boomer,  17  Wis.  456. 

796,  816 
Gates  ▼.  Gaines,  10  Vt.  346. . . 

529,  657 
Gates  V.  Gates,  15  Mass.  310. . .  749 
Gates  T.  JohnstoD,  3  Pa.  St.  52. 

72,  73 
Gates  V.  Labeaume,  19  Mo.  17.  78 
Gatewood    t.    Scurlock,    2   Tex. 

Civ.  App.  98    164 

Gatman  y.  Honea,  10  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  5,271 1083 

Gattle  ▼.  E^remp,  6  Pa.  Super. 

a.  514 538 

Gaugh  ▼.  Henderson,   39  Tenn. 

628 37,     378 

Gay  T.  Gay,  123  111.  221 147 

Gay    V.    Havermale,    27    Wash. 

390 840 

Gaylord  ▼.  Kelshaw,   68  U.   S. 

81 819 

Gayoso  v.  Lewis,  4  La.  329 806 

Gazlay  ▼.  Williams   (C.  C.  A.), 

17  Am.  B.  R.  249 1180 

Gear  ▼.  Schrei,  57  Iowa,  666. . . 

36,  38,     363 
Gebhart  v.  Merfeld,  51  Md.  525. 

19,  201,  239,  626 
Gebhard  v.  Satler,  40  Iowa,  152  639 
Gee  T.  Van  Natta-Lynds  Drug 

Co.,  105  Mo.  App.  27 304 

Geer    ▼.    Traders'    Bank,     132 

Mich.  215   460,  472,    490 

Geery  v.  Geery,  63  N.  Y.  252.. 

185,  772,  796.     844 


PAOB 

Gehies  v.   Wallace,    38    Wash. 

101 411 

Geiger  ▼.  Welsh,  1  Rawle  (Pa.), 

349 383,    636 

Geiler  v.  litUefleld,  148  N.  Y. 

603 610 

Geisendorff  v.   Eagles,  106  Ind. 

38 264 

Geiser  Mfg.  Co.  t.  Lee,  33  Ind. 

App.  38 808 

Geisse  v.  Beall,  3  Wis.  367....       83 
Genesee     River    Nat.    Bank    y. 

Mead,  92  N.  Y.  637 

290,  338,  345,     346 
Gennerich  y.  Voight,    46    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    622 973 

Gens  v.  Hargadine,  56  Mo.  App. 

245 569 

Gens  y.  Hargadine,  45  Mo.  App. 

38 581 

Gentry  y.  Field,  143  Mo.  309.. 

82,  252,  320,  562,     954 
Gentry  y.  Harper,  65  N.  C.  177. 

37,  70,  136,  753,  796 
Gentry  y.  Kelley,  49  Kan.  82.. .  946 
Gentry  y.  Lanneau,    54    S.    C. 

514 349,  910,     977 

Gentry    y.    Robinson,    55    Mo. 

260 207,     217 

George  y.  Bussing,  15  B.  Mon. 

(Ky.)   558 149 

George    y.    Kimball,    41    Mass. 

234 237,     314 

George  y.  Milbank^  9  Ves.  Jr. 

190 349 

George  y.  Tufts,  6  Colo.  161 .. .     433 
George  v.  Williamson,    26    Mo. 

190 634,   758,   1029,  1035 

Georgia   R.    &   Banking   Co.   y. 

Tice,  124  Ga.  459 105 

Gerald  y.  Gerald,  28  S.  a  442. 

366,    514 
Gere  v.  Dibble,  17  How.  Pr.  (N. 

Y.)   31 204,     765 

Geringer  v.  Heinlein,  6  Ohio  S. 

&  C.  PI.  Dec.  26 110 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxv 


PAGE 

Gerker  t.  Bowen,  6  Phila.  (Pa.) 

548 144 

€i«Tman  American  Nat.  Bank  v. 

Hoffman^  120  HI.  App.  363 . .     458 
German-American       Bank       t. 

Magill,   102  WiB.  582 595 

German-American       Bank       v. 

Schurer,  102  Wis.  682 275 

German-American   Seminary    v. 

Saenger,  66  Mich.  249 358 

German    Bask    v.    Haller,    101 

Temu   83    833 

German  Ins.  Bank  t.  Ntmes,  80 

Ky.   334    413 

German    Ins.    Co.    ▼.    Bartlett, 

188  111.   165    513,    661 

German  Nat.  Bank  v.  Gunther, 

3  Ohio  8.  k  G.  PI.  Dec  686. . 

366,  367 
German  Nat.  Bank  v.  Leonard, 

40  Neb.  676   1027 

Gerrish  ▼.  Maoe,  75  Mass.  236. 

206,  987 
GetteLman  ▼.  Gits,  78  Wis.  439 

763,  808 
Getsler  t.  Saroni,  18  111.  511.. 

67,  634,  741,  763,  780,  788 
GeTers  y.  Farmer,  109  Iowa,  468  916 
Ghormley  ▼.  Smith,  139  Pa.  St. 

584 418,  422,  423,     424 

Gibbons  ▼.  Darrill,  12  Ont.  Pr. 

478 819 

Gibbons     v.     Pemberton,      101 

Mieh.  397    849 

Gibbons  ▼.  Wilson,  17  Ont.  App. 

1 626 

Gibbs  V.  Chase,  10  Mass.  125 . . 

660,  668 
Gibbe  T.  Hodge,  65  Ala.  366. . .  1050 
Gibbe  v.  Linslc^,  13  Vt.  208 .. .  666 
Gibbs  T.  Patten,  2  Lea  (Tenn.), 

180 lCf6 

Gibbs  y.  Thayer,  60  Mass.  30..     208 
Gibbe  t.  Thompson,  26  Temi.  179 

294,  414,    448 
Gibson  ▼.  Barrett  (Ark.),  87  S. 


PAGE 
W.  436    163 

Gibson  v.  Bennett^  79  Me.  802.  324 

Gibson  t.  Dobie,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

5,394 1167 

Gibson  t.  Gibson,  82  111.  61 . . .  955 
Gibson   ▼.    Hammang,    63   Neb. 

349 408 

Gibson  v.  Hill,  21  Tex.  226. .. .  623 
Gibson  v.  Hill,  23  Tex.  77 410 

Gibson  v.  Jenkins,  97  Mo.  App. 

27 660 

Gibson    y.    Kimmitt,     113    111. 

App.   611    397 

Gibson  y.  Loye,  4  Fla.  217 

15,  16,  93,  206,  620,  672,  985,     998 
Gibson  y.  McCormick,  10  Gill  & 

J.    (Md.)   65 864 

Gibson  y.  National  Park  Bank, 

98  N.  Y.  97    68,     733 

Gibson  y.  Seymour,  4  Vt.  618. . 

261,     443 
Gibson  y.  Trowbridge  Furniture 

O).,  93  Ala.  679 846,     856 

Gibson  y.  Walker,  33  N.  C.  327 .     302 

Gicker's   Adm'r    y.    Martin,    50 

Pa.  St.  138   148,     361 

Giddens  y.  Boiling,  93  Ala.  92.  662 
Giddings    y.    Dodd,    Fed.    Cas. 

No.    6,406    1093,  1157 

Giddings    y.    Sears,    116    Mass. 

606 460,     492 

Gifford  y.  Ford,  5  Vt.  532 ... .  33 
Giggs  y.  Chase,  10  Mass.  126 . .  726 
Gilbert  y.  Bate,  86  N.  Y.  87 . . .  30 
Gilbert  y.  Decker,  63  Conn.  401  662 
Gilbert  y.  Glenny,  76  Iowa,  613 

39,  898,     974 
Gilbert    y.    Hoffman,    2    Watts 

(Pa.),  66   42 

Gilbert  y.  Merrill,  12  Me.  74..  443 
Gilbert   y.    Stockman,    81    Wis. 

602 634,  740,  753,     792 

793,  794,  796,  799,     804 
Gilbert    y.     Washington     Ben., 

etc.,  Assoc.,  10  App.  Cas.  (D. 

C.)    316    1081 


CXVl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

Oilcreast  ▼.  Bartlett   (N.  H.)» 

64  Atl.  767    786 

Giles  V.  Pratt,  1  HUl   (S.  C), 

239 765 

Gilhom    V.    Locke,    9    Ves.    Jr. 

(Eng.)    612    296 

Gilhooly    v.    American     Surety 

Co.,   87  Hun    (N.  Y.),  395..     881 
Gilkerson-Schloss       ConuniBsion 

Co.  V.  Carnes,  66  Ark.  414..     467 

Gilkey  v.  PoUock,  82  Ala.  603 

88,  330,  332,  371,    693 

Gill  V.  Griffith,  2  Md.  Ch.  270.     266 

Gill  T.  Henry,  95  Pa.*  St.  388 

637,    640 

Gillan  v.  Metcalf ,  7  Cal.  137 . .     346 

Gilleland  v.  Bhoads,  34  Pa.  187     154 

Gillet  T.  Phelps,  12  Wis.  392 . . 

703,    943 

Gillett  V.  Bate,  86  N.  Y.  87 . . 

117,  118,    686 

Gillette    v.    Stoddart,    30    111. 

App.  231    626,     528 

Gillespie  v.   Allen,   37   W.  Va. 

675 689,    604 

Gillespie  v.  Brown,  16  Neb.  467     163 
Gillespie    v.    Cammack,    3    La. 

Ann.   248    698 

Gillespie    t.    Cooper,    36    Neb. 

776 436,  445,  836,  837,     838 

Gillespie    v.    Gillespie,   2    Bibb. 

(Ky.)    89    634 

Gillespie    v.    Van    Egmondt,    6 

Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  633 217 

Gillies   V.   How,    19   Grant   Ch. 

(U.  C.)   32   441 

Gilligan  ▼.  Lord,  61  Conn.  662 

397,  632,  649 
GiUiland  ▼.  Fenn,  90  Ala.  230. 

220,  648,  737 
Gilliland  v.  Jones,  144  Ind.  662  686 
Gillis  V.  Dansby,  26   La.  Ann. 

711 86 

Gillum  V.   Kirksey,  29  Ky.   L. 

Kep.   422 437,  637,     639 

Gllmore  v.  Bangs,  66  Ga.  403 . .   1234 


PACW 

Gilmore  t.  Butts,  68  Kan.  61..  917 
Gllmore    t.    Colcord,    96    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    368 587.     614 

Gilmore  ▼.  Ham,  55  Hun    (N. 

Y.),   613    937,     938 

Gilmore     v.     North     American 

Land  Co.,   10  Fed.  Cas.   No. 

6,448 626 

Gilmore    v.    Swisher,    69    Kan. 

172 409,     895 

Gilmour  v.  Heinze,  86  Tex.  76.  916 
Gilreath    ▼.    Union    Bank,    etc., 

Co.,  121  Ala.  204 1049 

Gilson  ▼.  Dobie,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

5,394 1093 

Girard  Nat.  Bank  v.  Maguire, 

16   Phila    (Pa.)    313 748 

Gist  V.  Barrow,  42  Ark.  521.. 

611,  478,     504 

Githens,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Shifiler  & 

Bros.,  7  Am.  B.  R.  453 

1082,  1090,  1130 

Gjeniess  v.  Fladeland,  27  Minn. 

320 725 

Gladney    y.    Manning,    48    La. 

Ann.  316   302,    833 

Glake  v.  Howard,  1 1  Me.  202 . .     948 

Glaister  y.   Hewer,  8  Ves.  Jr. 

196 92 

Glascock  T.  Brandon,  36  W.  Va. 

84 329,     358 

Glaser    t.    Carroll,    20    N.    Y. 

Supp.   766    9W 

Glasgow  Milling  Co.  ▼.  Burns, 

144  Mo.   192    227 

Glasgow    T.    Turner,    91    Tenn. 

163 383 

Glass  T.  Zutavem,  43  Neb.  334 

899,    897 

Glaze  Y.  Blake,  56  Ala.  379. . . 

106,  106,    362 

Gleason  t.  Day,  9  Wis.  498...     523 

Gleason  v.  Gage,  7  Paige   (N. 

Y.),  121 847 

Gleason  t.  Wilson,  48  Kan.  600 

866,  859,     892 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxvn 


PA<HB 

Gleiaes    ▼.    McHatton,    14    La. 

Ann.    560    447 

Gleite  ▼.  Schuster,  168  Mo.  298 

409,  703,    968 
Glenn  ▼.  Glenn,  17  Iowa,  498.. 

223,  244,  247,  250,  257,     260 
Glenn  v.  Grover,  3  Md.  212.. 

469,  539,  626,  902,  907 
Glenn  ▼.  McNeal,  3  Md.  Ch.  349  942 
Glccn  ▼.  Randall,  2  Md.  Ch.  220 

6,  441,  588 
Glenn  v.  Glenn,  17  Iowa,  498. .  246 
Glenny  ▼.  Langdon,  08  U.  S.  20 

1169,  1199,  1207,  1223 
Glidden  ▼.  Taylor,  16  Ohio  St. 

509 113,     116 

Globe  Casket  Mfg.  Co.  ▼.  Wol- 

oott,   106  Mich.    151 305 

Globe  Ins.  Co.  y.  Cleyeland  Ins. 

Co.,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  6,486 

1082,  1098,  1139 
Globe  Iron  Roofing,  etc.,  Co.  v. 

Thatcher,  87  Ala.  458 856 

Glorieux  v.  Schwartz,  53  N.  J. 

Eq.  231    804,  1045 

Gloyer  y.  Austin,  23  Mass.  209  443 
Gloyer  y.  Flowers,  101  N.  C.  34  1001 
Gloyer     y.     Hargardine-McKit- 

trick  Dry  Goods  Co.,  62  Neb. 

483 820 

Gloyer  y.  Lee,  140  ni.  102....  458 
Gloyer  y.  Walker,  107  Ala.  540 

639,  658,     662 
Gnitchel    y.    Jewell    (Ch.),    41 

Atl.  (N.  J.)  227... 231,  330,  354 
Goad  y.  Moulton,  67  Cal.  536 . .  645 
Qoard  y.  Gimn,  2  Colo.  App.  66  528 
G.  Ober  &  Sons  Co.  y.  Phillips 

Buttorff    Mfg.    Co.,    40    So. 

(Ala.)   278  309 

Godbold    y.    Lambert,    8    Rich. 

Eq.  (S.  C.)  155.... 37,  136,  414 
Godehanx  y.   Mulford,   26   Cal. 

316 441,  536,  537,     538 

Goddard    y.    Diyoll,    42    Mass. 

413 42 


Goddard    y.    Fischel-Schlichten 

Importing  Co.,  9  Colo.  App. 

306 

Goddard   y.   Weil,   165   Pa.   St. 

419 233,  353,  533, 

Godding  y.  Brackett,  34  Me.  27 

40, 
Godfrey    y.    Germain,    24    Wis. 

410 

Godfrey  y.  Hays,  6  Ala.  501.. 

109,  380, 
Godfrey  v.  Herring   (Ark.),  85 

S.  W.  232    

Goembel  y.  Amett,  100  111.  34. 
Goetter    y.    Norman,    107    Ala. 

585    309,  394,  457, 

Goetter  y.  Smith,  104  Ala.  481 

309,  417,  430,  457, 

492.  506,  507, 

Goff  y.  Alexander,  20  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)   498   '..7, 

Goff  y.  Dabbs,  4  Baxt.   (Tenn.) 

300 37, 

Goff  y.    Landon,   5    (^lo.   App. 

452 

Goff  V.  Rogers,  71  Ind.  459... 

226,  227,  238, 

378,  509,  986, 

Goff  y.  Stem,  12  Mo.  App.  115. 

Goldberg  y.  Cohn,  119  N.  C.  59. 

Goldberg    y.    Harlain,    33    Ind. 

App.   465    

Goldberg  y.  McCracken   (Tex.), 

8  S.  W.  676  

Golden  State,  etc..  Iron  Works 

y.  Angell,  89  Cal.  643 

Golden  y.  Gillam,  51  L.  J.  Ch. 

503 408, 

Golden  y.  Goode,  76  Miss.  400.. 
Goldenson  y.  Lawrence,  15  Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)    489 

Goldfrank   y.   Hslff    (Tex.   Ciy. 

App.),  26  S.  W.  778..: 

Golding  y.  Brackett,  34  Me.  27 

36, 


PAQB 

801 

541 

136 

240 

381 

563 
773 

593 

471 

642 

310 

136 

526 

317 

992 

461 

1001 

1133 

945 

882 

582 
902 

938 

940 

753 


CXVUl 


Table  of  Cases* 


PAQB 

GoUober  ▼.  Martin,  33  Kan.  252 

613,    619 
Gollobitseh     v.     Rainbow,     84 

Iowa,   667    162 

Goldman  ▼.  Biddle,  118  Ind.  402    731 
Goldman  ▼.  Smith,  1  Am.  B.  R. 

266 1089,  1094,  1118 

Ooldnamer  ▼.  Robinson,  11  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  630   214 

Goldshy    v.    Johnson,    82    Mo. 

224 247 

Goldsmith  v.  Erickson,  48  Neb. 

48    245,  598,  605,    986 

Goldsmith  v.  Fuller,  30  Neb.  563     141 
Goldsmith  v.  Goldsmith,  146  N. 

Y.  313    644 

Goldstein  v.  Morgan,  122  Iowa, 

27 923,     940 

Goldstein  v.  Nunan,  66  Cal.  542 

536,    638 
Gomez    v.    Hagaman,    84    Hun 

(N.  Y.),   148    466,     469 

Gomila  v.  Wilcombe  (C.  C.  A.), 

18  Am.  B.  R.  143 1168 

Gonzales  ▼.  Adoue,  94  Tex.  120 

191,  917,  1002 

Gooch's  Case,  6  Coke,  60a 16 

Good  V.  Biewitt,  13  Ves.  Jr.  397     864 
Goodale  v.  Wheeler,  41  Or.  190 

392,  706,     896 
Goodbar  v.  Locke,  66  Ark.  314 

33,  467 
Goodbar  v.  Locke,  66  Ark.  314  467 
Goode  T.  Garrity,  76  Iowa,  713 

770,    773 
Goodell  ▼.  Fairbrother,  12  R.  I. 

233 622 

Goodenow   v.    Friott,    89   Iowa, 

671 308 

Goodenough      v.      Spencer,      2 

Thomp.  AC.   (N.  Y.)   508...     644 
Goodfellow  V.  LeMay,  15  Wash. 

684 180 

Goodgame   v.    Clifton,    13    Ala. 

683 918 

Goodgame  v.  Cole,  12  Ala.  77 . .  940 
Goodier  v.  Barnes,  2  Am.  B.  R. 

328 1208 

Goodlander-Robertson      Lumber 

Co.  T.  Atwood  (C.  C.  A.),  18 

Am.  B.  R.  510 1091,  1168 

Goodman  v.  Wineland,  61  Md. 

449 

264,  279,  343,  344,  585,  861,  902 
Goodnow  V.  Parker,  112  Cal. 

437 836 

Goodrich   v.   Dore    (Mass.),   80 


PAOB 

N.    E.   480 1115 

Goodrich  ▼.  Downs,  6  Hill   (N. 

Y.).  438 71,420,472,    983 

Goodwell    ▼.    Minchew,    26    La. 

Ann.   621    240 

Goodwin  v.  Goodwin,  90  Me.  23    536 
Goodwin   v.   Hamill,   26    N.   J. 

£q.  24 474,  500,  601,    695 

Goodwin  v.  Hammond,   13  Cal. 

168 696 

Goodwin  v.  Kerr,  80  Mo.  276 . .     553 
Goodwin  v.  McMinn,  204  Pa.  St 

162 304 

Goodwin  ▼.  Williams,  5  Grant 

Ch.    539    343 

Goodwyn    ▼.   Goodwyn,   20   Ga. 

600    620,  639,  646,    665 

Googins  y.  Gilmore,  47  Me.  9 . .     621 
Goothye  ▼.  DeLatour,   111    La. 

766   247,  959,     966 

Gordon     ▼.     Alexander     (Mich. 

1899),  80  N.  W.  978 297 

Gordon  v.  Alexander,  122  Mich. 

107 986 

Gordon  v.  Anderson  (Miss.),  44 

So.   67    836,     840 

Gordon  ▼.  Clapp,  113  Mass.  336    663 
Gordon  v.   Haywood,   2   N.   H. 

402 722 

Gordon    v.    Mcllwain,    82   Ala. 

247 392,    973 

Gordon    v.    Preston,    1    Watts 

(Pa.),  385 227,  238,    317 

Gordon    ▼.    Proctor,    20    Ont. 

(Can.)    53    217 

Gordon  ▼.  Reynolds,  114  111. 

123 181,  384,  871,  874 

Gordon  ▼.  Ritenour,  87  Mo.  64.     722 
Gordon  ▼.  Tweedy,  71  Ala.  202 

106,  232,  364,  358,  359,     690 
698,  700,  701,  897,     942 
Gordon  ▼.  Webb,  13  Mass.  215.   1039 
Gordon  ▼.  Worthley,  48  Iowa, 

429 612,    797 

Gorham  y.  Herrick,  2  Me.  87 . .     304 
Gorman   y.    Glenn,    26    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  756    886,  1028 

Gorman  y.  Urquhart  (Can.),  2 

N.  Bninsw.  Eq.  42  299 

Gormerly  y.   Chapman,   51   Ga. 

421    67,   737,     739 

Gormley  y.  Potter,  29  Ohio  St. 

697    799,    807,     853 

Gorrell  y.  Dickson,  26  Fed.  454 

117,    385 
Goshorn   y.    Snodgrass,    17    W. 

Va.  717 225,  243,  589,     712 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxix 


PAGB 

716,  89S,  894,    964 
OoBhom's    Ex'r    ▼.    Snodgrus, 

17  W.  Va.  717   240 

<3o08  y.  Neale,  6  Moore  C.  P. 

19 468 

€}ottlieb   ▼.   Thatcher,   34   Fed. 

435 .. .  197,  225,  393,  399,  962,  964 
<3ott8tein  v.  Wist,  22  Wash.  581  321 
Gottwalls  y.  Mulholland,  16  U. 

C.  C.  P.  62 570 

Goudy  y.  Gebhard,  1   Ohio  St. 

262 662 

Goudy  y.  Werbe,  117  Ind.  154.     152 
€k>ugh  y.  Edelen,  6  Oill  (Md.), 

101 635 

Gould  Paper  Co.  y.  Frank,  56 

N.  Y.  Supp.  747 976 

Gould  y.  Huntley,  73  Cal.  399 

534,  536 
Gould  y.  Hurto,  61  Iowa,  45..  306 
Gould   y.  New  York   Life  Ins. 

Co.,  13  Am.  B.  R.  233 1191 

Gould  y.  Steinburg,  84  111.  170 

67,  737,  738 
Gould  y.  Ward,  21  Maas.  104..  521 
Gould  y.  Ward,  4  Pick.  (Mass.) 

104 254 

Gourdain    y.    Baylies,    10    La. 

Ann.  691    905 

Goye  y.  Campbell,  62  N.  H.  401 

168,  275,  280,    340 
Goye  y.  Morton  Trust  Co.,  12 

Am.  B.  R.  297 1116 

Goyemor  y.  Campbell,  17  Ala. 

566 579 

Gowan  y.  Gowan,  30  Mo.  472. .     652 
Gowing  y.  Rich,  23  N.  C.  553 

13,  36,  70,     753 
Gowing    y.    Warner,    30    Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)    393 

578,  587,  608,  980,     992 
Grabill   y.   Moyer,   45    Pa.    St. 

530 366,     368 

Graff  y.  Bonnett,  31  N.  Y.  9. . 

90,  134,     137 

Graff  y.  Fitch,  58  UL  373 565 

Gragg     y.     Mastin,     12     Allen 

(Mass.),   498    104,    242 

Graham  y.  Lockhart,  8  Ala.  9.     918 
Graham  y.   LaCrosse,  etc.,  Co., 

102  U.  8.  148..  186,  189,  194,  347 
Graham    y.    Morgan,    83    Miss. 

601 366,     662 

Graham  y.  O'Keefe,  16  Ir.  Ch.  1     974 
Grahem    y.    Rooney,    42    Iowa, 

567 299,     382 

Graham   y.   Smith,   25   Pa.   St. 


PAOB 

323 986 

Graham  y.  Stark,  10  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  5,676  258,  1164 

Graham  y.   Thurber,    14   C.   B. 

410 -..     518 

Graham  y.  Townsend,  62  Neb. 

364 418 

Grainger  y.  Edwin,   91   N.   W. 

(Neb.)    592    613 

Grainger  y.  Erwin,.  3  Neb.  204.     595 
Grambling  y.  Dickey,  118  N.  C. 

986 894,     895 

Grand    Island    Banking   Co.    y. 

Costello,  45  Neb.   119 

235,  316,  461,     473 
Grandin    y.    First    Nat.    Bank 

(Neb.),  98  N.  W.  70 

92,  700,  794,  799,  812,  829,    908 
Grady  y.  Baker,  3  Dak.  296.. 

528,  538 
Grannis  y.  Smith,  22  Tenn.  179  296 
Grant  y .  Bank,  97  U.  S.  80 . . . 

1165,  1168 
Grant  y.  Lewis,  14  Wis.  487.. 

428,  432,  442,  443,  447,  623 
Grant  y.  Libby,  71  Me.  427 .. .  948 
Grant  y.  Sutton,  90  Va.  771.. 

106,  898 
Grant  y.   Ward,  64  Me.  239.. 

339,  398 
Graser  v.  Stellwagen,  25  N.  Y. 

316 176 

Grassly  y.  Reinbach,  4  111.  App. 

341 744 

Grasswitt  v.  Connally,  27  Gratt. 

(Va.)    19    661 

Grayier's  Curator  v.  Carraby's 

Ex'r,  17  La.  118 336 

Grayes  y.  Atwood,  52  Conn.  612 

178,  278,  382 
Grayes  y.  Blondell,  70  Me.  190 

6,  210,  299,  300,  449 
Grayes  y.  Dayenport,  60  Fed. 

881 397 

Graves  y.   Winans,  4  Atl.   645 

713,  724 
Grayey    y.    Moore,    12    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  732  148 

Grayier  v.  Brandt,  1  Mart.  N. 

S.  (La.)  165 892 

Gray  v.  Brunold,  140  Cal.  616 

341,  848,  851,  860,  861,  969,  1126 
Gray  y.  Chase,  184  Mass.  444, . 

339,  341,  586 
Gray  y.  Chase,  57  Me.  568.  .36,  136 
Gray    y.    Craighead,    46    App. 

Div.  614    283 


cxx 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Gray  v.  Folwell,  67  N.  J.  Eq. 

446 191,   193,   691,  695,     760 

Gray  v.  Galpin,  98  Cal.  633. . . 

74,  78,  407 
Gray  v.  Patterson,  66  Ark.  273  169 
Gray  v.  Schenck,  4  N.  Y.  460. . 

822,  826,  1017 
Gray  ▼.  Simon,  1  Phila.   (Pa.) 

Gray  ▼.  Sulllyan,   10  Ney.   416 

629,  630,  634,     638 
Gray  v.  St.  John,  36  111.  222.. 

464,  693,     923 
Gray      ▼.      Tappan,       Wright 

(Ohio),   117  217 

Graham  ▼.  Townsend,  62  Neb. 

364 193 

Gray   ▼.   Trent    (Pa.),    16   Atl. 

107 634,  986,    990 

Grayson  v.  George,  86  Va.  908.     386 
Graysons      ▼.      Richards,       10 

Leigh   (Va.),  67   670 

Greathouse   ▼.    Brown,    21    Ky. 

280 667 

Greathouse  v.  Moore  (Tex.  Civ. 

App.),  23  S.  W.  226 893 

Greeley  v.  Sample,  22  Iowa,  338     979 
Green    &    Sons    v.    Weems,    86 

Miss.   666    263,    804 

Green  County  Bank  ▼.  Epper- 
son, 74  Mo.  App.   10 746,     783 

Greene,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Remington, 

72  Wis.  648 463,     477 

Green  v.  Adams,  69  Vt.  602.. 

200,  202 
Green  ▼.  Banks,  24  Tex.  608. . .  623 
Green  v.  Banks,  24  Tex.  622. . .  246 
Green  v.  Branch  Bank,  33  Ala. 

643 426 

Green   v.    Buckler,    19    Ky.    L. 

Rep.    286    106 

Green  v.  Doughty,  6  N.  H.  672     744 

Green  v.  Early,  39  Md.  223 711 

Green  v.  Emens,  136  Ala.  663.     970 
Green  ▼.  Green,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

260 358,   378,   408,  410,     706 

Green    v.    Huggins,    62    S.    W. 

(Tenn.)    676    964 

Greene  v.  Keene,  14  R.  I.  388. .       99 
Greene    v.    Kimble,    6   Blackf. 

(Ind.)    662    766 

Green  v.  Komegay,  49  N.  C.  66 

344,  686 
Green  v.  McCrane,  65  N.  J.  Eq. 

436 461,  463,  466,  473,     489 

Green    v.    O'Brien,    36    W.    Va. 

277 349 


PAOB 

Greene    v.    Root,    62    Fed.    191 

169,  166 
Green    v.    Rowland,    16    Gray 

(Mass.),    58    636 

Green    v.    Salmon,    23    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  517    833,    836 

Green     v.     Stames,     1     Heisk. 

(Tenn.)    682    182 

Green  v.  Tanner,  49  Mass.  411 

249,  266,  339,  411,  460,  680,     721 
Green  v.  Tantum,  19  N.  J.  Eq. 

106 99 

Green  v.  Trieber,  3  Md.  11 987 

Greene  v.  Van  Buskirk,  72  U. 

S.   307    86,       88 

Green     v.     Veder     (Tenn.     Ch. 

App.),  67  S.  W.  519 439 

Greenbank  v.  Ferguson,  68  Fed. 

18 216,     639 

Greenleaf  v.  Edes,  2  Minn.  264    672 
Greenleaf      v.      Mumford,      60 

Barb.    (N.  Y.)    643 746,     784 

Greenleaf  v.  Perin,  8  N.  H.  273     684 
Greenleve  v.  Blum,  59  Tex.  124 

446,  462,  466,     471 
490,  493,  604,     593 
Greenman  v.  Greenman,  107  111. 

404 834,     957 

Greenough  v.  Greenough,  32 

App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  631 1017 

Greenough     y.     Greenough,     21 

Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)   727.. 329,     621 
Greenthal  y.  Lincoln,  68  Conn. 

384 656,  1061 

Greenthal  v.  Lincoln,  67  Conn. 

372 883 

Greenwald  y.  Wales,  174  N.  Y. 

140 6,  614,     994 

Greenwalt  y.   Austin,    1   Grant 

(Pa.),    169    474,    683 

Greenwalt  y.  Mueller,  126  Cal. 

636 366 

Greenway  y.  Thomas,  14  111.  271 

773,  788 
Greenwell  y.  Nash,  13  Ney.  286  613 
Greenwood      y.      Brodhead,      8 

Barb.   (N.  Y.)    597 20,      98 

Greenwood  v.  Coleman,  34  Ala. 

150 631,  635,     646 

Greenwood  y.  Ingeraoll,  61  Neb. 

785 751,     953 

Greer    y.    Baughman,    13    Md. 

257 280 

Greer  v.  Cagle,  84  N.  C.  386..     813 
Greer  y.  O'Brien,  36  W.  Va.  277 

193,  255,  910,  1027 
Greer  v.  Richardson  Drug  Co., 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxxi 


661 

32 

244 

708 


PAQB 

I  Tex.  Civ.  App.  634 902,  929 

Greer  v.  Wright,  6  Gratt.  (Va.) 

164  680,  817,  1021,  1023 

Greffin  v.  Lopez,  6  Mart.   (La.) 

146 

Gregg  v.  Cleveland,  82  Tex.  187 
Gregg  V.  Lee,  37  La.  Ann.  164. 
Gregg  V.  Sayre,  33  U.  8.  244. . 
Gregory  v.  Atkinaon,  11  Am. 

B.  IL  495 1206,  1211,  1213 

Gregory  v.  Clabrough,  129  Cal. 

476 243 

Gregory    v.    Filbeck,    12    Colo. 

379 203,  1051 

Gregory  v.  Frothingham,  1  Nev. 

263 

Gregory  v.  Gray,  88  Ga.   172. 

240,  393, 
Gregory  v.  Harrington,  33  Vt. 

241 476,  477, 

Gregory    v.    Haworth,    26    Cal. 

663 

Gregory  v.  Lamb,  101  Ky.  727 

187, 

Gregory  v.  Perkina,  16  N.  C.  50  441 
Gregory  v.  Rosenkrans,  78  Wis. 

461 

Gr^^ry   v.   Sitlington,  64   Mo. 

App.  60 229, 

Grevils  v.  Smith,  29  Tex.  Civ. 

App.    160    369 

Gribb  v.  Bagley,  83  Ga.  105. . .     448 
Gribble    v.     Ford,    52     S.     W. 

(Tenn.)    1007    376 

Grider    v.    Graham,     4     Bibb. 

(Ky.)    70    658 

Gridley  v.  Bingham,  61  111.  153 
Gridley  v.  Watson,  63  HI.  186 

278 
Gridley  v.    Wynant,    64    U.    S. 

500 641,  642,     708 

Grieb  v.  Caraker,    69  111.  App. 

236 29,  30,  32,  306,  386, 

Griffin   v.   Cranston,   23   N.   Y. 

Super.  Ct.   1   226,  430, 

Griffin  V.  Doe,  12  Ala.  783 

Griffin  v.  HaU,  129  Ala.  289 . . 
Griffin  v.  Marquardt,  21  N.  Y. 

121 

Griffin  v.  Mutual  Life  Ins.  Co., 

II  Am.  B.  R.  622 

Griffin  v.  Nitcher,  67  Me.   270 

762, 
753,  774,  783,  795,  796,  842, 

Griffin  v.  Stanhope,  Cro.  Jac. 
(Eng.)    454 265 

Grittin  v.  Stoddard,  12  Ala.  783     509 


681 


966 
697 
219 
300 


775 


332 


579 


339 


999 

448 
220 
560 

927 

1234 


845 


PAOB 

Griffin  v.  Wolf,  31  111.  App.  654     579 
Griffis  V.  Griffis,  89  Ga.   142.. 

961,  967 
Griffith  V.  Cox,  79  Ky.  562..  569 
Griffith     V.     Frederick    County 

Bank,  6  Gill  &  J.   (Md.)   424 

185,  303 
Griffith  V.  Frellsen,  11  La.  Ann. 

163 520 

Grigg  V.   Swindal,   67  Ala.   187     769 
Grimes  v.   Farrington,  19  Neb. 

44 235,  316,     473 

Grimes  v.  Portman,  99  Mo.  229     160 
Grimes  v.  bherman,  25  Neb.  843     304 
Grimes  Dry  Cjoods  Co.  v.  Shaf- 
fer, 41  Neb.  112 

434,   441,   445,     986 
Grimmett  v.  Midgett,  67  S.  W. 

(Tenn.)  399 378 

Grimsley  v.  Hooker,  56  N.  C.  4     804 
Grisham  v.  Bodman,    HI   Ala. 

194 177 

Griswold  v.   Nichols,    126   Wis. 

401 523,     911 

Griswold  v.  Nichols,   117   Wis. 

267 911 

Griswold  v.  Sheldon,  4  N.  Y.  581  1002 
Griswold  v.  bundback,  6  S.  D. 

269 208,     749 

Griswold  v.  Sundback,  4  S.  D. 

411 , 805 

Groat  V.  Rees,  20  Barb.  (N.  Y.) 

26 911,  912,  985,     993 

Grocers*    Bank    v.    Murphy    60 

How.  Pr.    (N.  Y.)   426 117 

Groetzinger     v.     Wyman,     105 

Iowa,  674 260,     561 

Groff     V.     Cooper,     6     Houst. 

(Del.)   36 638 

Grogan  v.  Cooke,  2   Ball  &  B. 

(Eng.)   234 ..250,     509 

Gross  V.  Daly,  5  Daly  (N.  Y.), 

540 784 

Gross  V.  Eddinger,  85  Ky.   168 

113,   116,     397 

Gross  V.  Gross,  94  Wis.  14 633 

Grosse  v.  Sweet,  188  111.  555. . 

636,  638 
Grosshaus  v.  Gold,  49  Neb.  599  594 
Grote  V.   Meyer,    6   Ohio   Dec. 

1025 461,893,     942 

Grove  v.  Gilbert,  5  Phila.  ( Pa. ) 

135 961 

Grover  v.  Wakeman,   11   Wend. 

(N.  Y.)    187 465,     575 

Grover,  etc.,  Sewing  Mach.  Co. 

v.  Radcliff,  03  Md.  496... 339,     368 


CXXll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGK 

Orow  V.  Ballard,  Fed.  Gas.  No. 

5,848 1172 

Orubbs  V.  Greer,  45  Tenn.  160 

523,  567,     910 
Gruber  v.   Boyles,   1  Brev.    (S. 

G.)    266    264,     022 

Grumbles  v.  Sneed,  22  Tex.  565 

710,  833 
Gruner  v.  Brooka,  126  Mich.  465  066 
Gruner  v.  Scholtz,  154  Mo.  415 

107,  111,  114,     807 
Grunafeld  v.  Brownell  (N.  M.), 

76  Pac.  310 845  852,  1068 

Gninaky  v.  Perlin,  110  Gal.  170     570 
Guardian  Assur.  Go.  v.    Avon- 
more,  Ir.  R.  6   325 

Gudgel   V.   Kitterman,    108   111. 

50 386,    823 

Guebert  v.  Zick,  31  111.  App.  300 

944,  046 
Guernsey  y.  Lazear,  51  W.  Va. 

328 135,  146,     147 

Guest  V.   Barton,  32  N.  J.  Eq. 

120 646 

GuflSn  y.   l^irst  Nat  Bank,  74 

111.  250 381,     382 

Gugen  y.  Sampson,  4  F.  &  F. 

(Eng.)  974 188 

Guggenheimer  v.  Brookfield,  00 

N.  G.  232 461,    977 

Guggenheimer  y.  Lockridge,  39 

W.  Va.  457 .647,  778,  1035 

Guggenheimer's  Appeal,    1   Pa. 

Gas.  526 651 

Guice  y.  Sajiders,  21  La.  Ann. 

463 520 

Guidry  y.   Grivot,   2  Mart.   N. 

S.    (La.)    13 641 

Guignard  y.  Aldrich,    10  Rich. 

Eiq.   (S.  G.)   253   657 

Guild  v.  Holbrook,  28  Mass.  101  746 
Guild  y.  Leonard,  35  Mass.  511  305 
Guill  V.  Hanny,  1  111.  App.  490  116 
Guillander  y.  Howell,  35  N.  Y. 

657 87 

Guilmartin   y.   Middle  Georgia, 

etc.,  R.  Co.,  101  Ga.  565 1041 

Gullett  V.    ikmberton,    6    Ark. 

100 422 

Gulley  y.  Macy,  84  N.  G.  434. 

251,  441 
Gullickson  y.  Madsen,   87   Wis. 

19 761,  795,  802,     873 

Gully  V.  Hull,  31  Miss.  20...  641 
Gumberg  y.  Treusch,  110  Mich. 

451 590,     613 

Gumberg  v.  Treusch,   103  Mich. 


PAOO 

543 571,  744,  748,  015,    051 

Gunn  y.  Butler,  35  Mass.  248. .     382 
Gunn  y.  Hardy,  130  Ala.  642. . 

200,     203 
Gunn  y.    Omdorff,   23   Ky.   L. 

Rep.  2360 1020 

Guras  v.  Porter,  0  Am.  B.  R. 

271 1116 

Gurofski    y.    Hajrris,     23    Ont. 

App.  717 463,  501,     610 

Gustin  y.  Mathews,    25   Utah. 

168 293,  341,  376,     620 

Guthrie  y.  Bacon,  107  N.  C.  337 

658,    666 
Gutta  Percha  Rubber  Mfg.  Go. 

y.   Kansas    Gity    Fire  Dept. 

Supply  Go.,  149  Mo.  538 690 

Gutterson  y.   Morse,   58   N.   H. 

529 172,  681,  684,     746 

Gutzwiller  y.  Lackman,  23  Mo. 

168 37,  84,  136,  213,     557 

Guy  y.  Graighead,  46  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  614 278 

Guy  y.  Graighead,  21  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  460 00,  04,     252 

Guy  y.  Mcllree,  26  Pa.  St.  02    474 
Guy  B.  Waite  Go.  y.  Otto   (N. 

J.  G.),  54  Atl.  425 186,     781 

Guyton  y.  Ghasen,  101  S.  W. 

(Ter.)  200 989 

Guyton  y.  Terrell,   132  Ala.  66 

337,  603,  763,  1039 
Gwaltney  y.  Searcy,  68   S.  W. 

(Tex.)  304 1003 

Gwyer  y.  Figgins,  37  Iowa,  517 

330,  706,  806 
Gwynn  v.  Butler,  17  Golo.  114. 

275,    685 
H 
Haak's  Appeal,  100  Pa.  St.  50 

351,    633 
Haas  y.  Haas,  35  La.  Ann.  885 

26,  42,     56 
Haas  y.  Kraus,  75  Tex.   106.. 

604,  628,  096 
Haas  V.  O'Brien,  66  N.  Y.  597.  1108 
Haas  y.  Sternbach,  156  111.  44  572 
Habeggar  y.  Kipp,  90  Minn.  456  468 
Haben  y.  Harshaw  49  Wis.  379  490 
Habenieaty.  Lissak,  78  Gal.  351  117 
Hack  V.  Stewart,  8  Pa.  St.  213  381 
Hackett  y.  Manloye,  14  Gal.  85  638 
Hackney  y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  98 

N.    W.    (Neb.)    412 722 

Hackney  y.  Hargreaves,  13  Am. 

B.  R.  164 1152,  1164 

Hackney     y.     Raymond     Bros. 


Table  of  Cases. 


CXXlll 


PAGB 

Ciarke  G6.,  10  Am.  B.  R.  213 

1074,  1160,  1165,  1166 
Hackworth  v.  Johns,  10  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  568 374 

Hadden  y.    Spader,    20   Johns. 

(N.  Y.)  554 20,98,     101 

Haddock  y.  Hill,  75  Tex.  193.. 

582,  1000 
Hading  y.  Oolon,  123  Mass.  299  667 
Hadley  y.  Adait,  3  Kan.  App. 

122 604 

Hadley  y.  Hood,  94  Ind.  119.. 

311,  1021 
Hadley  y.  Morrison,  39  111.  392 

688,  867 
Hadley  y.  Stutz,  139  U.  S.  417  101 
Haefer  y.  Mullison   (Iowa),  57 

N.  W.  893 156 

Hafner  y.  Irwin,  26  N.  G.  520 

774,  956 
Hafner  y.  Irwin,  23  N.  C.  490 

72,  253, 

255,  333,  415,  416,  489,  600,     602 
Hagaa  y.  Walker,  14  How.   (U. 

8.)  29 766,     790 

Hagany  y.  Herbert,    3    Houst. 

(Del.)   628 394 

Hage  y.  Campbell,  78  Wis.  572 

272  973 
Hager  y.  »hindler,  29  Gal.  47 

336,  677,     798 
Hager   y.   Shindler,   29    Gal.   48 

287,  739 
Hagerman  y.  Buchannan,  45  N. 

J.  Eq.  292 366,     910 

Haggerty   y.   Nixon,    26    N.    J. 

Eq.  42 37,  70,  136,  753,     774 

Hagy  y.  Poike,  3  Pa.  Diet.  792  984 
Hagy  y.  Poike,  160  Pa.  St.  522  997 
Hahlo  y.  Cole,  15  Am.  B.  R.  591  1234 
Hahn  y.  Penney,  60  Minn.  437  945 
Hahn  y.  Salmon,  20  Fed.  801 . .  783 
Haigh  V.  Kaye,  L.  R.  7  Ch.  469  652 
Haines  y.  McKinnon,  35  Oreg. 

573 132,     522 

Hairston  y.  Hairston,  35  S.  C. 

298 512 

Halbert  y.  Pranke,  11   Am.  B. 

620 i;i33,  1205 

Haldeman  y.  Michael,  6  Watts 

ft  S.   (Pa.)    128 474,     904 

Halderman     y.     Stillington,    63 

Mo.  212 544,  552,     893 

Hale    y.     Metropolitan    Saloon 

Omnibus  Co.,  4  I>rew,  492..     517 
Hale  y.  Stewart,    7    Hun    (N. 

Y.),  591 456 


PAGE 

Hale  y.  Sweet,  40  N.  Y.  97 . . . .  628 
Halff   y.   Goldfrank,  49  S.   W. 

(Tex.)  1095 315,  603,  1001 

Halfman  y.  Ellison,  51  Ala.  543  789 
Halifax   Banking   Go.    y.   Gled- 

hill,  1  Ch.  31 582 

Halifax   Joint    Stock    Banking 

Co.  y.  Gledhill,  1  Ch.  31 723 

Hall   y.   Arnold,    15   Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   599 600,  578,     596 

Hall  y.  Black,  21  111,  App.  293 

789,  790 
Hall  y.  Callahan,  66  Mo.  316. . 

209,  641,     766 
Hall  y.  Carter,  74  Iowa,  364 . . 

1000,  1001,  1052 
Hall  y.  Edrington,  47  Ky.  47  265 
Hall    y.    Frith,    51    Misc.    Rep. 

(N.  Y.)  600 263,  734,    737 

Hall  y.  Gambrill,  92  Fed.  32..  846 
Hall  y.  Gaylor,  37  Conn.  650. .  535 
Hall  V.  Greenly,  1  Del.  Ch.  274 

760,  1014 
Hall  y.  Hamlin,  2  Watts  (Pa.), 

354 42,  43,       53 

Hall   y.    Harrington,     7     Colo. 

App.  474 202,     810 

Hall  y.  Henderson,  126  Ala.  449  866 
Hall  y.  Heydon,  41  Ala.  242..31,     696 

Hall  y.  Joiner,  1  S.  C.  186 796 

Hall   y.   Kissock,    11    U.   S.   Q. 

g    g  g23 

Hali  y.'  Nash,  58  N.  J.  L.  664 

794,  796 
Hall  y.  Parsons,  15  Vt.  358..  998 
Hall  y.  Parsons,   17  Vt.  271.. 

630,  533,     990 
Hall  y.  RichardEM>n,  22  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  444 661 

Hall  y.  Sands,  52  Me.  356.... 

91,  201,  986,  997 
Hall  V.  Snowhill,  14  N.  J.  L.  8  622 
Hall  y.  Stroufe,  52  111.  421.171,  669 
Hall  V.   Stryker,  29  Barb.    (N. 

Y.)    106 783,     784 

Hall  V.  Stryker,  27   N.  Y.  596 

208,  749,  931,  1045 

Hall  y.  Tay,  131  Mass.  192 654 

Hall  y.  Tuttle,  8  Wend.  (N.  Y.) 

375 12,     519 

Hall    ft     Farley     y.    Alabama 

Term.  &  Imp.  Co.    (Ala.),  39 

So.  285 100,     768 

Hallett  y.  Parrish,  5  Ida.  496.  626 
Hallgarten     y.      Oldham,      135 

Mass.  1 87,       88 

Hallack   v.     ITitch,     Fed.    Cas. 


OXXIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

5,966 1207 

Hallock  y.  Alvord,  61  Conn.  194 

927,  944,    967 
Halloran  v.   Halloran,   137   111. 

100 664 

Halloran  v.  Holmes,  101  N.  W. 

310 609 

Hallyburton  v.  Slagle,  130  N.  C. 

482 341,  648,  1127 

Halser  v.  McGrath,  58  Pa.  St. 

458 916 

Halsey  v.  Connell,  HI  Ala.  221     381 
Halverson  v.  Brown,   75  Iowa, 

702 716,    722 

Ham  v.  Gilmore,  7  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)  596 7,     953 

Ham  y.  HerriniAn,  1  Mart.  N. 

S.    (La.)   535 392 

Hambleton  y.  Hayward,  4  Harr. 

A  J.   (Md.)  443 521 

Handi>rick  y.  Jones,  64  Miss.  240     879 
Hamburg  y.  Paletjs   (Tenn,  Ch. 

App.),  42  8.  W.  807 741 

Hamburg  y.  Wood,  66  Tex.  168    946 
Hamet  y.  Dundass,  4  Pa.  St.  178 

182,  232,  365,     934 
Hamett  y.  Dundass,  4  Pa.  St. 

181 9 

Hamill  y.  Augustine,  81  Iowa, 

302 62,     113 

Hamdll  y.  England,  67  Mo.  App. 

106 969 

Hamill  y.  Wright,  18  Ohio  6.  A, 

C.  P.  Dee.  467 234,     355 

Hamilton-Brown    Shoe    Go.    y. 

Whitaker,   4   Tex.   Ciy.  App. 

380 695,     939 

Hamilton  Nat.   Bank    y.    Hal- 

sted,  134  N.  Y.  520 

686,  687    695,    698 
Hamlen  y.  McGillicuddy,  62  Me. 

268 796,     866 

Hammett  y.  Harrison,  1  Phila. 

(Pa.)    349 462,     971 

Hanmiond      y.     Hammond,      2 

Bland  (Md.),  306 864 

Hammond  y.  Hopkins,  143  U.  S. 

224 866 

Hammond     y.     Hudson    Biyer 

Iron,  etc.,  Co.,  20  Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   378  

768,   763,  816,  819,  823,    870 
Hammond  y.  Stanton,  4  L.  R. 

I.  66 840 

Hampson  y.  Fall,  64  Ind.   382 

..721,     727 
Hams  y.  Barnett,  62  Tex.   130    224 


PAGE 

Hamilton  y.  Bradley,  6  Hayw. 

(Tenn.)    127    349 

Hamlin  y.  Bridge,  24  Me.   146    418 
Hamilton    Buggy    Co.    y.    Iowa 

Buggy  Co.,  88  Iowa,  364 924 

Hamilton  y.  Combs,  22  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  1263 346,     532 

Hamilton  y.  Cone,  99  Mass.  478 

70,  580,  742,     762 
Hamilton  y.   Gilbert,  49   Tenn. 

680 663 

Hamilton  y.   Greewood,    1    Bay 

(S.   C),    173    669,   627,     987 

Hamilton  y.   Hamilton,  2  Rich. 

Eq.    355    ( S.   C. ) 284 

Hamilton  y.  Lightner,  53  Iowa, 

470    62,    112,     113 

Hamilton    y.    Menominee    Falls 

Quarry  Co.,   106  Wis.  362.. 

840,    970 
Hamilton    y.    Mississippi    Col- 
lege, 52  Miss.  66 802 

Hamilton  y.  Russell,   I   Cranch 

(U.  S.),  309 12,   13,     433 

Hamilton   y.   Russell,    5    U.    6. 

309 627 

Hamilton  y.  Scull,  26  Mo.  165.     662 
Hamilton  y.  Staples,  34  (Donn. 

316 582 

Hamilton  y.  Steele,  22  W.  Va. 

348 141,     146 

Hamilton  y.  Wagner,  9  Ky.  333    930 
Hamlin  y.  Wright,  26  Wis.  60 

716,     724 
Hamlin  y.  Wright,  23  Wis.  491 

205,  824,     870 
Hamilton-Brown    Shoe    Co.    y. 

Cameron,    23    S.    W.    (Tex.) 

525 595 

Hamilton-Brown    Shoe    Co.    y. 

Kellum,  23  S.  W.  (Tex.)  624     695 
Hamilton-Brown    Shoe    (Do.    y. 

Lastinger    (Tex.   Ciy.   App.), 

26   S.  W.  924 484 

Hanby  y.  Logan,  1  Duy.   (Ky.) 

242 94,     178 

Hanby  y.  Logan,  62  Ky.  242. . .       85 
Hanchett  y.  Goetz,  26  111.  App. 

445 603,     892 

Hanchett  y.   Kimbark,    118  111. 

121 615 

Hancock  y.  Elmer,  61  N.  J.  Eq. 

568 337,     590 

Hancock  y.  Horan,  15  Tex.  507 

499,     564 
Hancock  v.  Wooten,  107  N.  C. 

9 826,  1031 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxxv 


PAGE 

Hand  v.  Hitner,  140  P.  St.  166 

285,  315,  931,     902 
Handy  y.  Philadelphia,  etc.,  R. 

Co.,  1  Phila.   (Pa.)   31 636 

Hanel     v.     Mintaser,     1    Handy 

(Ohio),  376 

461,  466,  4V4,  481,  482 
Haney  y.  Nugent,  13  Wis.  283  382 
Hanford  v.  Artcher,  1  Hill.  (N. 

Y.)  347  .  .  .c 1004 

Hanford  v.  Artcher,  4  Hill.   (N. 

Y.)    271 619,  911,  1002 

Hanford  y.  Obrecht,  49  111.  146  667 
Hank  y.  Van  Ingen,  196  111.  20  080 
Hanks  y.  Hanke,  76  Vt.  273 .. .  788 
Hanna  y.  Aebker,  84  Ind.  411. . 

683,     763 
Hanna  y.  Charleston  Nat.  Bank, 

66  W.  Va.   186   299 

Hanna  y.  flnley,  33  Mo.  App. 

645 72,     996 

Hanna  y.  Pritchard,  6  La.  Ann. 

730 736 

Hanna  y.  Towers,  3  Har.  ft  J. 

(Md.)    147    290 

Hannah  y.  Hannah,  109  Mo. 

236 166 

Hannah     t    Hogg    y.     Richter 

Brewing  Co.   (Mich.),  112  N. 

W.  713    176 

Hannan's    Lessee    y.    Reese,    1 

Browne    (Pa.) ,   11    308 

Hannay    y.    Maxwell,    24    La. 

Ann.   49    900 

Hannis  y.  Hazlett,  64  Pa.  St. 

133 939 

Hanoyer  Bank  y.   Moyses,   186 

U.  S.  181   1069 

Hansoom  y.  Buffiim,  66  Me.  246  469 
Hanselt  y.  Vilmar,  2   Abb.  N. 

Cas.    (N.  Y.)   222 466,    491 

Hansen  y.  Dennison,  7  111.  App. 

73 83 

Hanson  y.  Bean,  61  Minn.  546. 

227,    318 
Hanson  y.  Buckner,  34  Ky.  261 

343,  346,     348 
Hansen  y.  Gregory,   73  N.   W. 

(Iowa)  478 330 

Hanson  y.  Mauley,  72  Iowa,  48  367 
Hanson  y.  Power,  38  Ky.  91 . . 

196,  199,    977 
Hanson  y.  Stephens,  11  Am.  B. 

R.    172    1186 

Hapgood  y.  Fisher,  34  Me.  407 

248,  382,  383,  426,  449 
iiarbottle    y.    Rawlins,    11    Ha- 


PAOB 

waii,  106   234,    366 

Harbaugh   y.    Butner,    148   Pa. 

St.    273    638,    663 

Hard  v.  Foster,  98  Mo.  297 .. . 

47,  49,  474,     476 
Hardaway  y.  Semmes,   38  Ala. 

657 86 

Harden  y.  Wagner,  22  W.  Va. 

366 79 

Hardenburgh  y.  Blair,  30  N.  J. 

Eq.    646    134 

Harder  y.   Rohn,   43   111.   App. 

366 697 

Hardin  y.  Baird,  16  Ky.  340..     957 
Hardin  y.  Dolge,  46  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)   416 262,  253,     661 

Hardin  y.  Kelley,  114  Fed.  353 

43,       47 
Hardin  y.   Osborne,   60   111.   93 

413,    418 
Hardin  y.  Sisson,  36  111.  App. 

383 662 

Hardin  y.  Wagner,  22  W.  Va. 

366 408,  463,     491 

Harding  y.  Bunnell,  14  Pa.  Co. 

Ct.   417    849,     880 

Harding    y.    Elliott,    12    Misc. 

Rep.  (N.  Y.)  521.... 68,  733,     743 
Harding  y.  Elliott,  91  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  502 30,  282,  336,     743 

Hardson  y.  Newton,  63  Oa.  163    770 
Hardt  y.  Deutsch,  30  App.  Diy. 

(N.   Y.)    689 81 

Hardt  y.  Deutsch,  22  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    66... 233,  363,   433,     463 
Hardt  y.  Schuylkill,  etc.,  Co.,  8 

Am.  B.  R.  479 1146 

Hardwick  y.  Qettier,  43  Wash. 

644 174 

Hardt  y.  Heidweyer,  162  U.  S. 

647 72,  238,    866 

Hardt  y.  Schwab,  72  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  109   27,  44,  46,     671 

Hardy  y.  Gray,   16  Am.  B.  R. 

387 1168 

Hardy  y.  Mitchell,  67  Ind.  486 

346,     986 
Hardy  y.  Moore,  62  Iowa,  66 . . 

924,  925,  934 
Hardy  y.  Potter,  76  Mass.  89..  644 
Hardy  y.  Simpson,  36  N.  C.  132  986 
Hardy  v.  Skinner,  31  N.  C.  191  522 
Hargadine  y.  Dayis,  34  S.  W. 

(Tex.)    342    1008 

Hargadine  y.  Dayis,  26  S.  W. 

(Tex.)    424    1003 

Hargadine  -  McKittrick        Dry 


CXXVl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Goods    Co.    ▼.    Belt»    74    111. 

App.  581    086 

Hargadine  -  McKittrick        Dry 

Goods   Co.   y.   Bradley    (Ind. 

T.),  69  S.  W.  862 856 

Hargardine  •  McKittrick      Dry 

Goods    Co.    V.    Camahan,    79 

Mo.  App.  219 479 

Hargardine     McKittrick,     etc., 

Co.  V.  Kriig,  2  Neb.  62 624 

Hargreayes  v.  Tennis,  63  Neb. 

366   686,  687,  690,     763 

Hargrove  v.  Turner,  112  Ga. 

134 632,  533 

Hargroves  y.  Meray,  2  Hill  Eq. 

(S.  C.)    222   293,    328 

Haring  y.  Hamilton,   107  Wis. 

112 463 

Harker  y.  Glidewell,  23  Ind.  219  779 
Harkins  y.  Bailey,  48  Ala.  376 

249,  264,  271,    272 
Harkness  y.  Smith,  2  Ida.  962 

629,  559 
Harlan  y.  Barnes,  35  Ky.  219. .  956 
Harlan  y.  Maglaughlin,  90  Pa. 

St.  293 188,  191,  193,    350 

Harley  v.  Adsit>  3  Kan.  App. 

122 71 

Harlow  y.  Hall,  132  Miss.  232.  529 
Harlow  y.  Tufts,  58  Mass.  448.  1039 
Harman  y.  Anderson,  2  Campb. 

243 541 

Harman  y.  May,  40  Ark.  146 . . 

753,  804 
Harman    y.    Reese,    1    Browne 

(Pa.),  11    462 

Harman  y.  Richards,  10  Hare, 

81 589,     627 

Harmon  y.  Harmon,  63  111.  512 

69,    631 
Harmon  y.  Hawkins,  18  Mont. 

525 525 

Harman   y.   Hoskins,    56   Miss. 

142 555,     572 

Harmon  y.  McRae,  91  Ala.  401 

307,  311,  407,    417 
Harmon  y.   Osgood,   151   Mass. 

501 748 

Harmon    y.    Reese,    1    Browne 

(Pa.),  11    597 

Harmon  y.   Richards,    10  Hare 

(Eng.),  81  337 

Harmon  y.  Ryan,  10  La.  Ann. 

661 323 

Harmon's    Lessee    y.    Reese,    1 

Browne    (Pa.),   11    378 

Harms  v.  Silyia,  91  Cal.  636. . .     638 


PAGB 

Harney  y.  Pack,  4  Sm.  &  M. 

(Miss.)   229 312,594,     986 

Harper  y.  Clayton,  84  Md.  346 

99,     150 
Harper     y.     Culbert,     5     Ont. 

(Can.)    162    215 

Harper  v.  Harper,  85  Ky.  160. .  644 
Harper  y.  Scott,  12  Ga.  125. . . 

16,  16,  93,     326 
Harper    v.    Trent     (Tenn.    Ch. 

App.),  63  S.  W.  246 256,     882 

Harr  v.  Shaffer,  52  W.  Va.  207  898 
Harral  y.  Leverty,  50  Corm,  46  623 
Harrell  y.  Beale,  17  Wall.   (U. 

S.)   690   1206 

Harrell  v.  Kea,  37  S.  C.  369..  279 
Harrell  y.  Mitchell,  61  Ala.  270  387 
Harrington  y.  Blanchard,  70  N. 

H.   697    622 

Harrington  y.  Johnson,  7  Colo. 

App.   483    913 

Harrington  y.  Upton,  78  Mich. 

28 971 

Harris  y.  Alcock,  10  Gill  &  J. 

(Md.)    226    475,     942 

Harris  y.  Brink,  100  Iowa,  366  300 
Harris    y.    Buchner,    35    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)   594 .136,     442 

Harris  y.  Bums,  50  Cal.  140.. 

571  985  992 
Harris  y.  Carlisle,  12  Ohio,  169  828 
Harris  y.  Daugherty,  74  Tex.  1 .  930^ 
Harris  y.  DeGraffenreid,  33  N. 

C.  89   221 

Harris  y.  Dennison,  8  La.  543.  707 
Harris  y.  De  Wolf,  29  U.  S.  147  639 
Harris  y.  Fly,  7  Paige  (N.  Y.), 

421 877 

Harris    y.    Harris,    23    Gratt. 

(Va.)   737   200,    63a 

Harris    y.    Harris,    10    Ky.    L. 

Rep.   819    278 

Harris  y.  King,  16  Ark.  122. . .  90 
Harris    y.    Meredith,    106    Mo. 

App.  686    163,     165 

Harris  y.  Moore,  72  Ala.  507 . . 

819,    821 
Harris    y.    Osnowitz,    35    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    594 654,  1048 

Harris  y.  Powell,  93  Ala.  59..  457 
Harris  v.  Rankin,  4  Manitoba, 

116 898 

Harris  y.  Russell,  93  Ala.  59 . , 

226,  331,  334,  483,     495 
.496,  599,  602,  603,  1003 
Harris  v.   Schuttler    (Tex.   Civ. 

App.),  24  S.   W.  989 940 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxxvii 


HarriB   ▼.    Sledge    (Miss.),    21 

So.  783   4S0 

Harris  ▼.  Smith,  132  GaL  316. .     640 
Harris    ▼.     Sumner,     2     Pick. 

(Miss.)    129  430 

Harris  y.  Taylor,  15  Cal.  348.. 

178,  806,    855 
Harris  ▼.  Weir-Shugart  Co.,  51 

Neb.   483    986 

Harrison  v.  Calyert,  23  Ky.  L. 

Rep.   890    958 

Harrison   ▼.    Campbell,   36   Ky. 

263 800,     973 

Harrison  v.   Carroll,    11    Leigh 

(Va.).  476 329,  358,     359 

Harrison  v.  Douglass,  4  U.  C. 

Q.  B.  410 113 

Harrison  v.   Farmers'   L.  &  T. 

Co.,  94  Fed.  728 846 

Harrison  ▼.  Foster,  62  Mo.  App. 

603 544 

Harrison  v.  Hallum,  45  Tenn. 

525 819,  824,     870 

Harrison    t.    Hatcher,    44    Ga. 

638 719 

Harrison    v.    Jaquess,    29    Ind. 

208 848,     860 

Harrison     t.     Obermeyer,     etc., 

Brewing  Co.,  64  App  Diy.  (N. 

Y.)  499 1023,  1024 

Harrison  ▼.  Perea,    168    U.    S. 

311 869,     876 

Harrison   v.   Phillips   Academy, 

12  Mass.  456 

251,  443,  460,  473,  475,    580 

594,     986 
Harrison  ▼.    Thatcher,    44    Ga. 

638 642 

Harrisonburg    Harness    Co.    v. 

National        Furniture        Co. 

(Va.),  55  S.  E.  679 261 

Harrow  ▼.  Johnson,  60  Ky.  578    358 
Harshaw  t.  Woodfin,  64  N.  C. 

668 416 

Hart  V.  Albright,  18  N.  Y.  Supp. 

718 1039,  1040 

Hart  V.  Bates,  17  S.  C.  35 717 

Hart  V.  Bowie,  34  La.  Ann.  323  853 
Hart  V.  Brierley,  189  Mass.  598. 

174,  175,  598 
Hart  V,  Dogge,  27  Neb.  256... 

686,  1051 
Hart  T.  Farmers',  etc..  Bank,  33 

Vt  252 527,  558,  664 

Hart  V.  Flinn,  36  Iowa,  366...  381 

Han  V.  Hart,  6  Watts,  106 199 

Hart  T.  HaH,  52  Ga.  375 1044 


PAOB 

Hart  V.  Hart,  109  N.  C.  368. . .     640 
Hart  V.   Heidweyer,   152  U.   S. 

547 317 

Hart  V.  Leete,   104  Mo.  315... 

37,  142,  146,  149,  160,  361,     366 
Hart  V.  McFarland,  13  Pa.  St. 

182  .  . 418,    422 

Hart  V.  Mead,  84  Ol.  244  ....     528 
Hart  V.   Roney,   93   Md.   432.. 

890,     979 
Hart  V.  Sandy,  39  W.  Va.  644 

246,  604,  625 
Hart  ▼.  Schency,  32  N.  J.  Eq. 

148 885 

Hart  V.  Ten  Eyck,  2  Johns.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)  62 885 

Hart  V.  Wing,  44  111.  141.  .541,  543 
Harter  v.  Donahoe  (Cal.),  9 

Pac.  651 524 

Hartfeid  r.  Simmons,  59  Tenn. 

263 691 

Harting  v.  Jockers,  31  111.  App. 

67 761,     813 

Harting  y.  Jockers,  136  111.  627 

281,  283,  299,  339,     397 
Hartlepp  v.  Whiteley,  129  Ind. 

579 1009 

Hartley  v.  McAnulty,  4  Yeats 

(Pa.),  95 633 

Hartiey  y.  Millard,  167  Pa.  St. 

322 560,     996 

Hartman  y.  Allen,  77  Tenn.  L. 

657 237,     319 

Hartman  y.   Commonwealth,   5 

Pa.  St.  60 1063 

Hartman  y.   Hosmer,   65    Kan. 

595 894 

Hartman  y.   Peters  A   Co.,    17 

Am.  B.  R.  61 1090 

Hartman  y.  Vogel,  41  Mo.  670    910 
Hartman  y.  Weiland,  36  Minn. 

223 133,  193,  675,     966 

Harton  y.  Lyons,  97  Tenn.  180 

216,  221,  443 
Harts  y.  Jones,  21  III.  App.  150  650 
Hartshorn    y.    Eames,    31    Me. 

97 874,  879.  910,     911 

Hartshorn    y.    Eames,    31    Me. 

93 225,  240,  245,  260, 

469,   567,  692,  694,  699,  626, 

752,  769,  761,  801,  842,  845,     977 
Hartshorn  y.  Williams,  31  Ala. 

149 261,  440,     930 

Hartwell  y.  McDonald,    69   111. 

293 162 

Haryey  y.  Alexander,   1   Rand. 

(Va.)  219 328,358,     361 


CXXVUl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PACK 

Hanrey  v.  Anderson,  24  S.   E. 

(Va.)  014  ..  .  .226,  304,  428,     575 
Harvey  v.  Golding,   109  N.  W. 

(Neb.)  220 340 

Harvey  v.  Harrison,    89  Tenn. 

410 126,     154 

Harvey  v.  Hunt,  119  Mass.  279  499 
Harvey  v.  McDonnell,  113  N.  Y. 

526 208,  209,  766,     790 

Harvey  v.  Mix,  24  CJonn.  406. .  479 
Harvey  v.  Flack,  12  Miss.  229. .  992 
Harvey  v.  Smith    7  Am.  B.  R. 

497 1120,  1134 

Harvey  v.  State,  123  Ind.  260. .  809 
Harvey  v.  Steptoe,  17  Gratt. 

(Va.)  289 290 

Harvey  v.  Varney,  98  Mass.  118 

632,     642 
Harvin  v.  Weeks,  11  Rich.   (S. 

C.)   601 637,  656,     662 

Haxwidc    v.     Weddington,     73 

Iowa,  300 941,    955 

Hastbrouck   v.    Rich,     113   Mo. 

App.  889 417 

Hasbrouck  v.  Schuster,  4  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  285 873 

Haseltine  v.  Espey,  13  Or.  301 

251,    443 
Hasie  v.  Connor,  53  Kan.  713. . 

459,  494,  594,     904 
Haskell  v.  Bakewell,  49  Ky.  206 

187,    351 
Haskell  v.  Wynne,  3  Ky,  L.  Rep. 

54 797 

Haskett  v.  Auhl,  3  ELan.  App. 

744 613 

Haskins  v.  Kelley,  1  Rob.    (N. 

Y.)  170 648 

Haas  V.  Sternbach,  156  111.  44. .  252 
Haasam  v.   Barrett,   116  Mass. 

266 444,     654 

Hastings  v.  Baldwin,  17  Mass. 

562 744,     748 

Hastings  v.  Belknap,  1  Den.  (N. 

Y.)  190 775,     785 

Hastings  v.    Claflin,    14   N.   Y. 

Supp.  757 601 

Hastings  v.  Qaflin,    133  N.  Y. 

539 1063 

Hastings  v.  Orossland,   13  Mo. 

App.  692 264,  282,     570 

Hastings  v.  Sproul,  10  Pa.  Su- 
per. Ct.  82  539 

Hastings  v.  Thurston,  10  Abb. 

Pr.  (N.  Y.)  418 857,    859 

Hastings  Malting  Ck>.  v.  Heller, 

47  Minn.  71 ...     619 


PAcn 
Haston  v.  Costner,  31  N.  J.  Eq. 

697 344 

Haston  v.  Caetner,  29  N.  J.  Eq. 

536 789 

Haswell  v.  Lincks,  87  N.  Y.  637 

794,  802 
Hatch  V.  Bates,  54  Me.  136.  .69,  177 
Hatch  V.  Bayley,  66  Mass.  27.. 

907,  962 
Hatch    V.    dark,  Rice  (8.  C), 

268 762 

Hatch  V.  Curtin,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

629 1209 

Hatch  V.  Dana,  101  U.  S.  205. .  101 
Hatch  V.  Daugherty,  145  Mich. 

569 185 

Hatch  V.  Fowler,  28  Mich.  205.  521 
Hatch  V.  Jordan,  74  111.  414. . .  579 
Hatch  V.  Smith,  5  Mass.  42.  .78,  460 
Hatcher  v.  Crews,  83  Va.  371. . 

162,  167 
Hatchett  v.  Blanton.  72  Ala.  423  83 
Hatfield  V.  Merod,  82  111.  113. .  182 
Hathaway  v.  Brown,  22  Minn. 

Hathaway  v.  Brown,   18  Minn. 

414 690,  907,  920,     946 

Hatstat  V.  Blakeslee,  41  Conn. 

301 526 

Hauk  V.  Van  Ingen,  196  111.  20 

342,  373,  376,     966 
Hauselt  v.  Vilmar,  2  Abb.  N.  C. 

(N.  Y.)  222 491 

Hauamann  v.  Hope,  20  Mo.  App. 

193 581 

Haven  v.   Bliss,   26   N.   J.   Eq. 

323 90 

Haven  &  Geddes  Co.  v.  Pierek,  9 

Am.  B.  R.  669 1218 

Havtti  V.  Richardson,  5  N.  H. 

113 255 

Havens  v.  Extein,  5  N.  Y.  Supp. 

736 430 

Havens,  etc.,  Co.  v.  First  Nat. 

Bank,  162  HI.  36 474 

Hawes  v.  Mooney,  39  Conn.  37 . 

331    332,     744 
Hawk  V.  Hawk,   4  Am.   B.   R. 

463 1188 

Hawker  v.  Moore,  40  W.  Va.  49 

186,     206 
Hawkins  v.  Alston,  39  N.  C.  (4 

Ired.  Eq.)   137 230,     957 

Hawkins  v.  Cramer,  63  Tex.  99     378 
Hawkins  v.  Kansas    City,  etc., 

Brick  Co.,  63  Mo.  App.  64..     542 
Hawkins    v.    K.   C.    Hydraulic 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxxix 


Press  Brick  Co.,  63  Ma  App. 

64 650 

Hawkins  y.  ijamed,    64  N.  H. 

Hawkins  v.  Moffitt,  49  Ky.  81.     299 
Hawkinsville  Bank,  etc.,  Co.  y. 

Walker,  99  6a.  242 

231,  354,    376 
Hawley  v.  Griffith,  187  Pa.  St. 

306 370 

Hax    V.    Acme  Cement  Plaster 

Co.,  82  Mo.  App.  447 480 

Hay  den  ▼.  Alkire  Grocery  Co., 

88  Mo.  App.  241. . .  .229,  322,  954 
Hayden  ▼.  Demets,  53  N.  Y.  426  542 
Haydeny.  Denslow,  27  Oonn.335  670 
Haydock  v.  Coope,  53  N.  Y.  68. .  466 
Hayes  v.  Brenard,  38  111.  297.  986 
Hayes  y.  Clarke,   12   La.   Ann. 

666 1051 

Hayes  y.  Crockett,  7  La.  Ann. 

645 618 

Hayes  y.  Heidelberg,  9   Pa.  St. 

203 738 

Hayes  y.  Johnson,  6  D.  C.  174 

67,  734 
Hayes  y.  March,  123  Iowa,  81     658 
Hayes  y.  Montgomery,  118  Ind. 

91 300 

Hayes  y.  Moore,  5  Ohio  S.  &  C. 

PI.  Dec.  520 377 

Hayes  y.   Reger,   102  Ind.  524.     139 
Hayes  y.  Reilly,  49  N.  Y.  Super. 

Ct.  334 687 

Hayford  y.  Wallace  (Cal.),  46 

Pac.  293 409 

Haymaker's  Appeal,  53  Pa.  St. 

306 297,  669,     726 

Hayner  y.  Fowler,  16  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)  300 204 

Haynea  y.  Hunsicker,  26  Pa.  St. 

58 542,543,     551 

Haynes  y.  isline,  64  Iowa,  308.     368 
Haynes  y.  Ledyard,  33  Mich.  319 

208,  749,     989 
Haynes  y.  Bogers,    111    h,   C. 

228 979,     996 

Hays  y.  Heidelberg,  9  Pa.   St. 

203 28,  53,  67,     673 

Hays  y.  Hostetter,  125  Ind.  60    428 
Hays  y.  Marsh,  123  Iowa,  81 . . 

636,     710 
Haya  y.  Montgomery,  118  Ind. 

91 821 

Hays  y.  Windsor,  130  Cal.  230.     647 
Hayward  y.  Clark,  50  Vt.  612 

153,     156 
Hazard  y.  Coyle,  22  R.  I.  435 . .     633 
i 


PAGE 

Hazelwood'  y.  Porrer,  94  Va.  703 

696,    967 
H.  B.  Claflin  Co.  y.  Amheim, 

87   Hun    (N.  Y.),   236 

241,  600,     502 
H.  B.  Claflin  Co.  y.  Grashom, 

99   Wis.   366    695 

H.   B.   Claflin  Co.  .y.   Lass,    17 

Colo.  App.   166 64 

H.  B.  Claflin  Co.  y.  Rodenberg, 

101  Ala.  213    29,  259,     940 

Heacock  y.  Durand,  42  III.  230  796 
Head     y.     Bracht,    40     S.     W. 

(Tex.)    630    596 

Head  y.  Harding,  166  III.  363. 

82,  314,  343,     696 
Head  y.  Harding,  62  III.  App. 

302 685 

Headington     y.     Langland,     66 

Iowa,  276   1003 

Headley  Grocer  Co.  y.  Walker, 

69  Mo.  App.  653 180,     343 

Healey  y.  Butler,  66  Wis.  9 . . . 

744,     745 
Heard    y.    McKinney,     1     Tex. 

Unrep.  Cas.  83 766,  813,     821 

Heard  y.  Murray,  93  Ala.  127 . .  1047 
Hearn  y.  Due,  79  Mo.  App.  322.  615 
Hearn  y.  Lander,  74  Ky.  669..  364 
Heath  y.   First  Nat.   Bank,    19 

Tex.  Ciy.  App.  63. .  .172,  188,  349 
Heath  y.  Koon,  130  Mich.  54..  923 
Heath  y.  Page,  63  Pa.  St.   108 

13,  172,  182,     201 
282,  703,  744,     746 
Heath  y.  Shaffer,  2  Am.  B.  R. 

98 1222,  1228 

Heath   y.   Slocum,    115   Pa.   St. 

549 141,  918,  937,     983 

Heath  y.  Wilson,  139  Cal.  362 . .  472 
Heaton    y.    Ainley    (Iowa),    74 

N.  W.  766 84,     187 

Heaton  y.  Nelson,  74  Mich.  199.  1051 
Heaton    y.    Shanklin,    115    Ind. 

695 343,   346,   585,     964 

Heaton  v.  White,  85  Ind.  376.  140 
Hecht  V.  Koegal,  25  N.  J.  Eq. 

135 337 

Heck  y.  Fisher,  78  Ky.  643 

130,     689 
Heckelman    y.    Rupp,    85    Ind. 

286 861 

Hedge  y.  Glenny,  75  Iowa,  513 

106,  362,     405 
Hedges    v.    Polhemus,    9    Misc. 

Rep.   (N.  Y.)   680 171 

Hedman    y.    Anderson,    6    Neb. 


cxxx 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

392 681,     583 

Hedrick  v.  Gregg,  10  Ohio  S.  & 
C.  PI.  Dec.  462 190,     192 

Hedrick  v.  Hall,  155  Ind.  371 . . 

151,    579 

Hedrick  y.  Strauss,  42  Neb.  485 

588,  610,  705,    706 

Hedrick  v.  Walker,  17  W.  Va. 
916 589 

Haffley  v.  Hunger,  54  Neb.  776.     896 

Heeren  v.  Kittson,  28  111.  App. 

259 110,     381 

Heflin  v.  Riser,  88  Ga.  306 1001 

Heiatt  y.  Barnes  Adm'r,  35  Ky. 

219 244,     782 

Heiatt  y.  Barnes,  5  Dana  (Ky.), 

219 342 

Heiber   y.   Neary,   7    Pa.    Dist. 

596 318 

Heidelbach   y.   Carter,   34   Tex. 

Civ.  App.  579   163,     161 

Heilbronner  y.  Lloyd,  17  Mont. 

299 389 

Heileman  y.  Eisner,  52  N.  J.  L. 

378 648 

Heiler    y.    Walsh,     47    N.    Y. 

Super.  Ct  269    989 

Heineman  y.   Newman,   55   Ga. 

262 662 

Heim  y.  Chapel,  62  Minn.  338 

228,  238,  317,     909 
Heim  y.  Heim,  90  Minn.  497 . . 

996,  1053 
Heiney    y.    Anderson,    9    Lane. 

Bar    (Pa.),   13    

301,  804,  318,  474,  569,     603 
Heintze  y.  Bentley,  34  N.  J.  Eq. 

562 227,     318 

Heinz  y.  White,  105  Ala.  670. . 

191,  350,  647,     668 
Heisch  y.  Bell  (N.  M.),  70  Pac. 

572 163,     160 

Helden  y.  Hellen,  80  Md.  616. .     197 

Helfrich  y.  Stem,  17  Pa.  St.  143 

296,  681,  916,     920 
922,  934,  936,     960 
Helgert      y.      Stewart      (Colo. 

App.) ,  77  Pac.  1091 525,     528 

Helm    y.    Newland,    2    Blackf. 

(Ind.)    233    931,     933 

Helms  V.  Green,  106  N.  C,  251 

223,  247,  396,     686 
Helser  y.  McGrath,  59  Pa.  St. 

458 994 

Helton  y.  Cunnagim,  64  S.  W. 


PAGE 

(Ky.)    851    635,  639,     641 

Hemingway  y.  McDeyitt,  4  N. 

J.  343    893 

Hemphill  y.  Hemphill,  34  Miss. 

68 668 

Hempstead  y.  Johnson,  18  Ark. 

123 78,  80,  508,  520,     573 

697,  892,  917,     926 
Henderson  y.  Adams,   15  Utah, 

30 462,     500 

Henderson  y.  Brooks,  3  Thomp. 

&  C.   (N.  Y.)    446 iri,     681 

Henderson    y.    Dickey,    50    Mo. 

161 216 

Henderson  y.  Dodd,  Bailey  Eq. 

(S.  C.)    138 183,  188,  266,     349 

Henderson     v.      Downing,      24 

Miss.   106    572 

Henderson  v.  Farley  Nat.  Bank, 

123  Ala.  547. .  .337,  798,  807,     843 
Henderson    y.    Hall,    134 '  Ala. 

456 99 

Henderson     y.     Henderson,     55 

Mo.  634 247,  460,  584,     594 

Henderson    v.    Henderson,     133 

Pa.  St.  399    376 

Henderson     y.      Henderson,      9 

Gratt.    (Va.)    394    826 

Henderson   v.   Hoke,    21    N.    C. 

110 67,  173,     739 

Henderson     y.      Kendrick,      72 

Minn.   263    333 

Henderson  y.  Mabiy,  13  Ala.  713     999 
Henderson   y.    McVay,    32   Ala. 

471 7oe 

Henderson  y.  Morgan,  4  Mart. 

N.  S.   (La.)   649 598 

Henderson    v.     Perryman,     114 

Ala.  647... 58,  311,  313,  448,     593 
Henderson     y.     Thornton,     37 

Miss.  448   56,  66,  86,     178 

Hendly   y.    Hendly    (Tenn.    Ch. 

App.),  46  S.  W.  1016 980 

Hendon  y.  Morris,  110  Ala.  106 

275,  321 
Hendon  y.  White,  62  Ala.  697.  285 
Hendrick  v.  Dillion,  62  Vt,  430  300 
Hendricks  v.  Mount,  5  N.  J.  L, 

738 ....632,  665 

Hendricks  y.  Robinson,  2  Johns. 

Ch.  (N.  Y.)  283 302,  390,  467 

466,  763,  793,  816,     958 
Hendricks  v.  Walden,  17  Johns. 

(N.  Y.)  438 302,  390,  465 

Hendrickson  y.  Winne,  3  How. 

Pr.  (N.  Y.)  127 1013,  1021 

Hendrie,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Col- 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxxxi 


PAGE 

lins,  29  Colo.  102 545 

Hendrie,     etc.,     Mfg.     Co.     ▼. 

Piatt,  13  Colo.  App.  16 

122,  124,  127 
Henebery  y.  Johnson,  96  III. 

App.  537 196 

Heneiy  v.  Harrell,  67  Ark.  669.     317 
Henery  v.  Henry,  8  Barb.    (N. 

Y.)    688 966 

Henney    Buggy    Co.    v.    Ashen- 

f alter,  60  Neb.  1 603 

Henny   Buggy   Co.  v.   Patt,  73 

Iowa,  485   272 

Hennon  ▼.  McClane,  88  Pa.  St. 

329 298,  299,  414,  426,     992 

Henrie    v.   Henderson,    16    Am. 

B.  R.  617    1209,  1213 

Henry  ▼.  Allen,  161  N.  Y.  1. . .   1169 
Henry   v.    Fullerton,    21    Miss. 

631 360 

Henry  v.  Fullerton,   13  Sm.  & 

M.  (Miss.)  631  187,  193 

Henry  v.  Harrell,  67  Ark.  669. 

226,  716,  909 
Henry  v.  Henry,  27  Ohio  St. 

121 .• 322 

Henry    ▼.    Hinman,    26    Minn. 

199 6,    299 

Henry  v.  Hyde,  6  Mart.  N.  S. 

(La.)   633    187,    848 

Henry  v.  Murphy,  64  Ala.  246 

64,      66 
Henry  y.  Stevens^  108  Ind.  281 

69,  631,    646 
Henry  y.  Vemdllion  R.  O.,  17 

Ohio,  187   101 

Henshaw     y.     Dowty,     39     La. 

Ann.  608 371 

Henshaw  y.   Sumner,   23   Pick. 

(Mass.)   446    472,    473 

Hensley  y.  Hensley,  66  111.  App. 

195 404,    613 

Heppe  y.  Speakman,  3  Brewst. 

(Pa.)    648    34 

Hepp  y.  T(»ige,  9  Hare  (Eng.), 

90 291 

Hepworth  y.  Union  Ferry  Co., 

62  Hun   (N.  Y.),  257 200 

Herla  y.  Miesel,  62  Atl.  (N.  J.) 

999 379 

Herkelrath  y.   Stookey,   63  HI. 

486 579 

Herold   v.   Barlow,   47   W.   Va. 

760 692 

Herold  y.  State,  21  Neb.  60. . . 

1061,  1066 
Heroy   y.   Kerr,   2   Keyes    (N. 


PAOB 

Y.),  682  13,     722 

Herman  y.  McKenney,  47  Fed. 

768 604 

Hemdon  y.  Reed,  82  Tex.  647. 

*  635,     636 

Heme  y.  Meeres,    1    Vem.   Ch. 

(Eng.)    466    .232,     265 

Herrick  y.  Attwood,  2  DeG.  k 

J.   (Eng.)  21    217 

Herrick    y.    Henderson,    Walk. 

(Miss.)    486   460 

Herrick  v.  Lynch,  150  111.  283. 

644,  656 
Herrick  y.  Osborne,  39  Me.  231 

1065,  1069 
Herriman   y.   Townsend    (Me.), 

6  Atl.  267    839 

Herrin  y.  Henry   (Ark.),  87  S. 

W.  430    400 

Herrin  y.  Morford,  39  Ky.   (9 

Dana)   460   

223,  231,  240,  244,  247,  264,     260 
Herring    y.    Richards,    3    Fed. 

439 347 

Herring  y.  Wickman,  29  Gratt. 

(Va.)    628    323 

Herring-Hall-Maryin      CJo.       y. 

Kroeger,   23   Tex.    Ciy.    App. 

672 186 

Herrington    y.    Herrington,   27 

Mo.  660   70,    763 

Herschfeldt  y.  George,  6  Mich. 

466 190,  192,    691 

Hershy    y.    Latham,    42    Ark. 

306 66,  329,  343,     368 

686,  683,  734,  753 
Hershy  y.  Latham,  46  Ark.  542  397 
Hershey  y.  Weiting,  60  Pa.  St. 

240 640 

Herstein  y.  Walker,  85  Ala.  37     196 
Herzog  y.   Weiler,   24    W.    Va. 

199 824 

Hess  y.  Final,  32  Mich.  515. . . 

637,  639 
Hess  V.  Hess,  117  N.  Y.  306. . .  784 
Hess   y.    Horton,    2    App.    Cas. 

(D.  C.)    81 770,   773,     853 

Hesse  y.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202. . . 

452,  461,  466,  477,  496,     609 
Hesseltine  y.  Hodges,  188  Mass. 

247 367 

Hesseltine  y.  Prince,  2  Am.  B. 

R.  600  1188 

Hesser  y.  Black,  6  Mart.  N.  S. 

(La.)   96   187,    348 

Hessing   y.   McCloskey,    37    111. 

341 262,  309,  458,  674,     579 


CXXXll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAQI 

Hester    ▼.    Thomson,    68    Miss. 

108 984 

Hester  v.  Wilkinson,  25  Tenn. 

215 192,  269,     349 

Hesthal  ▼.  Myles,  53  Cal.  623. .     990 
Hetterman  Bros.  Co.  v.  Young 
(Tenn.  Ch.  App.),  52  S.  W. 

532 256,  894,  907,    980 

Hewett    ▼.    Griswold,    43    111. 

App.  43    526,     542 

Hewitt      V.      Berlin      Ifachine 

Works,  194  U.  S.  296..  1185,  1193 
Hewitt  V.  Commercial  Banking 

Co.,  40  Neb.  820 986 

Hewitt  v.  Gibson,  93  111.  App. 

427 407 

Hewitt  V.  Price,  99  Ma  666. . .     314 
Hewitt  ▼.  Williams,  48  La.  Ann. 

686 371 

Hews  V.  Kenney,  43  Keb.  815. .     141 
Heyer  v.  Bromberg,  74  Ala.  524. 

436,     457 
Heyneman     v.     Dannenberg,     6 

Oal.   376 843.    1041,  1046 

HcTWOod  V.   Brooks,   47   N.   H. 

231 746 

Herzog  ▼.  Weiler,    24    W.    Va. 

199 898 

Hiatt  V.  Wade,  30  N.  C.  340.. 

15,   16,  218,    220 
Hibbard    v.    Heckadrt,    88    Mo. 

App.  544 114,  400,     538 

Hibben  v.  Sqyer,  33  Wis.  319.. 

830,  878,     884 
Hibemia  Ins.  Co.  v.  St.  Louis, 

etc.,  Transp.  Co.,  13  Fed.  516.      57 
Hickerson  v.  Blanton,  2  Heisk. 

(Tenn.)   160 46 

Hickerson     v.     Parrington,     18 

Ont.  App.  635   619 

Hickey  v.  Coschina,  133  Cal.  81. 

528,     537 
Hickey    v.     Davidson      (Iowa), 

105  N.  W.  678 249 

Hickey  v.  Ryan,  15  Mo.  63 . . . 

249,  265,  340 
Hickley  v.  Farmers',  etc.,  Bank, 

5  Gill  ft  J.    (Md.)   377 460 

Hickman   v.   Perrin,    46    Tenn. 

135 188,  349,     351 

Hickman    v.     Quinn,     6     Yerg. 

(Tenn.)  96 309 

Hickman  v.  Trout,  83  Va.  478. 

222,  224,  225,  232,  240,     247 
249,  250,  253,  267,     296 
Hickok  v.  Buell,  61   Iowa,  655. 

525,    533 


PAGE 

Hickoz  V.  Elliott,  22  Fed.  13 . .     834 
Hicks  v.  Langherst,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

178 1171 

Hicks  V.  Knost,  178  U.  S.  541.    1211 

Hicks  V.  Mack,  19  Neb.  339 166 

Hicks   ▼.   McLachlan,   94   Mich. 

278 974 

Hicks  V.  Sharp,  89  Ga,  311... 

941,  1003 
Hicks  V.  Stone,  13  Minn.  434.. 

93,   571,   718,     976 
Hicks  Co.  ▼.   Thomas,   114   La. 

219 736 

Higgenbottom     v.     Peyton,      3 

Rich.  Eq.   (S.  C.)   398 149 

Higginbotham  y.  Holme,  12  Rev. 

Rep.  146 414 

Higgins   ▼.    Crichton,    63   How. 

Pr.   (N.  Y.)    354 812 

Higgins  V.  Curtis,  63  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  630 979 

Higgins  V.  Gilleeheimer,  26  N. 

J.  Eq.  308 206 

Higgins  y.  Higgins,  219  111.  146 

336,     839 
Higgins  y.  White,  118  HI.  619. 

192      339 
High  y.  Neims,  14  Ala.  360. . . .' 

66,  337,  675,   737,     934 
Higham  y.   Vanoedol,    126   Ind. 

74 386 

Highland  y.   Anderson's   Adm'r, 

13  Ky.  L.  Rep.  710 228 

Highland  y.  Highland,  5  W.  Va. 

63 204 

Highley  y.  American  Exch.  Nat. 

Bank,  86  III.  App.  48 953 

Highley  y.  American  Exch.  Nat. 

Bank,   186  111.  665 

179,  348,  434,     441 
Mildebrand  y.  Willig,  64  N.  J. 

249..  190,  352,  632,  634,  641,     650 
Hildebrand  y.  Tarbell,  97   Wis. 

446 839 

Hildeburn  y.  Brown,  17  B.  Mon. 

(Ky.)   779 252,     265 

Hildinger  y.  Tootle,  9  Kan.  App. 

582 722 

Hildreth  y.  Fitts,  63  Vt.  684..     527 
Hildreth  y.  Sands,  2  Johns.  (N. 

Y.)    Ch.  36 252,  585,  952,     960 

Hiler  y.  Hetterick,  6  Daly   (N. 

Y.),  33 780 

Hill  y.  Ahem,  136  Mass.  158..     215 
Hill   y.   Barlow,   6   Rob.    (La.) 

J42 837 

Hill  y.  Bowman,  35  Mich.   ioi. 

202,  460,     613 


Table  of  Cases. 


CXXXlll 


PAQB 

Hill  ▼.  Gannon,  6  Kj.  L.  Rep. 

591 796,  1050 

Hill  V.  Oarcoran,  15  OdIo.  270.  1001 
Hill  V.  Dennenj,  106  Iowa,  726.  863 
Hill  Y.  Ezter,  2  Taunt   (Eng.) 

69 336 

Hill  V.  Fouse,  32  Neb.  637.... 

284,  208,  309,    405 
Hill  y.  Hanney,  15  La.  Am.  654. 

520,  548 
Hill  y.  Mallorr,  112  Mich.  387. 

507,  601 
Hill  y.  Meinhard,  39  Fla.  111. . 

140,  405,    513 

Hill  y.  Moone,  104  Ala.  353 869 

Hill  y.  Pine  Riyer  Bank,  45  N. 

H.  300 68,     754 

Hill   y.   Rogers,    Rioe    Eq.     (S. 

C.)  7 474 

HiU  y.  Ruffner,  3  W.  Va.  538 . .  582 
Hill  y.  Rutledge,  83  Ala.  162.. 

929,  1003 
Hill   y.   Ryan  Grocery  Co.,   78 

Fed.  21 878 

Hill  y.  Smuck,  65  Neb.  173 376 

Hill  y.  Taylor,  81  Ga.  516 655 

Hillard  y.  Taylor,  114  La.  883.  858 
Hillboldt  y.  Waugh,  47   S.  W. 

(Tex.)   829 582 

Hilliard  y.  Gagle,  46  Miss.  309. 

255,  521,  560 
Hilliker  y.  Kuhn,  71  Cal.  214. .     535 

Hills  y.  Eliot,  12  Mass.  26 

916  929 
mils  y.  Hoitt,  18  N.  H.  603. . .'  924 
Hills  y.  Sherwood,  48  Cal.  386 . 

789,  956,  1021 
Hills  y.  Stockwell,  etc..  Furni- 
ture Co.,  23  Fed.  432 457,    986 

Hillyer  y.  Leroy,.  84  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    129   678,  1143 

HUlyer  y.  Le  Roy,  179  N.  Y.  369 

759,  792,  1183 
Hilton  y.  Morse,  75  Me.  258..  352 
Hilzheim  y.    Drane,     18    Miss. 

556 754,     804 

Himan  y.  Thorn,  32  W.  Va.  507. 

836,  905,  042 
Himstedt  y.   German  Bank,  46 

Ark.  537 746 

Hinchman   y.   Parlin,   etc.,   Co., 

74  Rjd.  698. .  .  .397,  508,  513,     991 
Hinde  y.  Longworth,  11  Wheat. 

(U.  S.)   199. . .  .278,  338,  343,     344 

347,  920 
Hindman  y.  Dill,  11  Ala.  689..  428 
Hinds  y.  Hinds,  80  Ala.  225 .. .     869 


PAGE 

Hinds  y.  Keith,  57  Fed.  10. . . . 

619,  907,  946 
Hinds  V.  Moore   (C.  O.  A.),  14 

Am.  B.  R.   1    1215 

Hine  v.  Bowe,  114  N.  Y.  350. . . 

305,  427,  430,  506,  507,     593 

989,  1000 
Hiner  y.  Hawkins,  59  Ark.  303.  914 
Hines  y.  Dresher,  93  Ind.  551 . .  1032 
Hines  y.  Parry,  25  Tex.  443 .. .  994 
Hiney  y.  Thomas,  36  Mo.  377 . . 

883,  955 
Hinkle    y.    Broadwater    (Ark.), 

84  8.  W.  510 151,     169 

Hinkle  y.   Downing,    116   Iowa, 

693 291 

Hinkle  y.  Gale,  11  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

126 683,     827 

Hinkle  y.  Wilson,  53  Md.  287.. 

330,  691,  897 
Hinkley  y.  Reed,  182  111.  440. . .  57 
Hinman  y.  Parkis,  33  Conn.  188. 

88,  105,  362 
Hinman  y.  Siloos,  91  Md.  576.  141 
Hinsdale  y.  Thorton,   75  N.   C. 

Hinson  y.  Walker,  65  Tex.  103. 

294,  938 
Hint  y.  Doyal   (Ga.),  57  S.  E. 

4gg 

Hinton  v.  kilisi  27  W.  Va.  422 '. 

680,  690,  1024,  1032 
Hinton  y.  Greenleaf,  118  N.  C. 

7 895 

Hipp  y.   Sawyer,     1    Rich.  Eq. 

Cas.    (S.   C.)    410 

76,  76,  227,  240,  318,  664,  588 
Hiriar  y.  Roger,  13  La.  126...  588 
Hiriatt  y.  Roger,  13  La.  126. . .  721 
Hirsch  y.  Fudicker,  43  La.  Ann. 

886 29,    257 

Hirsch  y.  Israel,  106  Iowa,  498. 

763,  1047 
Hirsch  y.  Richardson,  65  Miss. 

227 594,  1004 

Hirsh   V.   Wenger,    182   Pa.    St. 

246 939 

Hisoock  V.  Mertens,  17  Am.  B. 

R.  484 1191,  1192,  1201 

Hiscock  y.  Varick  Bank,  206  U. 

8.  28 1179 

Hise  V.  Hartford  Life  Ins.  Co., 

90  Ky.  101 ... .  122,  124,  126,  300 
Hisey  y.  Gkwdwin,  90  Mo.  366. .  921 
Hisle's     Adm'r     y.  Rudasill,  89 

Va.  519 300 

Hitchcock    y.    Kiely,    41    Conn. 

611 586 


CXXXIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAcn 
Hitesman  y.   DonneU    40    Ohio 

St.  287 366 

Hitt  V.  Ormsbee,  14  111.  233 .. . 

98,  101,    278 
Hitt  V.  Sterling-Goold  Mfg.  Co., 

Ill   Iowa,  468   189 

Hitz  V.   National    Metropolitan 

Bank,  111  U.  S.  722 367 

Hixon  V.  George,   18  Kan.  263. 

163,  168 
H.   Kriscb   &   Co.   v.   Kentucky 

Jeans    Clothing    Co.     (Ky.), 

102  S.  W.  803 861 

Hobart  v.  Tyrell,  68  Cal.  12 203 

Hobgood  T.  Brown,  2  La.  Ann. 

323 663 

Hoboken  Sav.  Bank  y.  Beekman, 

36  N.  J.  Eq.  83 243 

Hobbft  ▼.  Oarr,  127  Mass.  632. . 

636,  647 
HobbB  T.  Davis,  60  Ga.  213... 

310,  986 
Hobbs  ▼.  Greenfeild,  103  Ga.  1 .  1000 
Hodge  V.  Morgan,  2  Mart.  N.  S. 

(La.)  61 698 

Hodges  V.  Cobb,  8  Rich.  (S.  C.) 

60 114 

Hodges  y.  Coleman,  76  Ala.  103. 

224,  265,  692,  693,     616 
617,  623,  943,     948 
Hodges  y.  Hurd,  47  HI.  363...     644 
Hodges  y.  Silver  Hill  Min.  Co., 

9  Or.  200   797 

Hodges  v.  Taylor,  67  Tex.  196.  197 
Hodgkins  v.  Hook,  23  Cal.  681.  990 
Hodgson  V.  Butts,  7  U.  S.  140.  560 
Hoeller  v.  Haffner,  166  Mo.  689.  963 
Hoerr    v.    Meihofer,     77    Minn. 

228 933,     936 

Hoeser  v.  Kraeka,  29  Tex.  460.  647 
Hoey  y.  Pierron,  67  Wis.  262.. 

76,  76,    987 
Hoff  V.  Larinore,  106  HI.  A<pp. 

689 587 

Hoffman  ▼.  Ackerman,   110  La. 

1070 736,     820 

Hoffman  v.  Fleming,  43  W.  Va. 

762 807 

Hoffman  v.  Gundrum,  15  N.  T. 

Supp.  98 998 

Hoffman  v.  Henderson,  146  Ind. 

613 687,    924 

Hoffman  v.  Junk,  61  Wis.  614. 

19,  189,  201,    240 
Hoffman  v.  Kiefer,  19  Ohio  Cir. 

Ct.  401 124,     209 

Hoffman  v.  Nolte,  127  Mo.  120. 


PAGE 

^  _  339.  340,     968 

Hoffman  v.  Title,  etc.,  Co.,  198 

111.  462 1126 

Hoffer  V.  Gladden,  76  Ga.  632 . . 

32.  240,  244.  989,  1004 
Hoffner    v.     Clark,     6     Whart. 

(Pa.)    546 627.     531 

Hogan  v.  Burnett,  37  Miss.  617. 
_  796,     860 

Hogan  V.  Cowell,  73  Cal.  211..  552 
Hogan  V.  Robinson,  94  Ind.  128  902 
Hoke   y.    Henderson,    14   N.    C. 

12 67,  70,  180,     721 

Hbloomb  v.  People's  Sav.  Bank, 

92  Pa.   St.  338 107 

Holden  v.  Bumham,   63  N.   Y. 

74 290,     337 

Holden  v.  Bumham,  2  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  678 139 

Holden  v.  Bumham,  5  Thomps. 

&  C.    (N.  Y.)    195 140 

Holden  v.  McLaury,  60  Tex.  228  200 
Holden  v.   Stratton,    198  U.   8. 

202 1191,  1201 

Holdrege  v.  Gwynne,    18  N.  J. 

Eq.  26 804 

Holdship  V.  Patterson,  7  Watts 

(Pa.),  642 135,     138 

Hollaoher  v.  O'Brien,  5  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  277 1006 

Holland  v.  Cruft,  37  Mass.  321.  813 
Holland  v.  Grote,  66  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    370    828,     854 

Holland  v.  Holland,   121   Mich. 

109 202 

Holland  v.  Moody,  12  Ind.  170.  148 
Holliday  Case,  27  Fed.  830 ... . 

612.  615,    933 
Holliday  v.  Holliday,   10  Iowa, 

200 .' 639 

HoUingsworth      v.      Napier,     3 

Caines   (N.  Y.),  182 640 

Hollins  v.  Brierfleld  Coal,  etc., 

Co.,  150  U.  S.  371.. 773,  776,     846 

Y.),  226 1008 

Hollis  y.  Sales,  103  Ga.  75.679,  1001 
Holliway  v.   Holliway,    77    Mo, 

342 644 

Holloeter  v.  Loud,  2  Mich.  309.  669 
HoJloway  Seed  Co.  v.  City  Nat 

Bajik,  47  S.  W.  (Tex.)  77..  613 
Holman  v.  Klliott,  65  Ind.  78  . .  1007 
Holman  v.  Martin,  12  Ind.  663  988 
Holmes  v.  Barbin,  16  La.  Ann.. 

563 64,557,     736 

Holmes  v.   Braidwood,    82    Mo. 

610 594 


Tabus  of  Casb8. 


CXIUlV 


PA€» 

Holmes  v.  dark,  48  Barb.  237 . . 

344,    578,    590,     848 
Holmes  y.  Gardner,  50  Ohio  St. 

167 722,    724 

Holmes  ▼.  Penny,  3  Jur.  N.  S. 

(Eng.)  80 188,    260 

Holmes  y.  Sullivan,  9  Ohio  Dec. 

499 294 

Holmesly  y.  Hogue  47  N.  C.  391  931 
Holt  Y.  Bancroft,  30  Ala.  193. .  845 
Holt  Y.  Creamer,  34  N.  J.  £q. 

181 6,  604,     613 

Holt  Y.  EYerall,  2  Ch.  D.  266. 

125,  129 
Holyoke  Envelope  Co.  y.  Heag- 

ler,  63  Pac.  (Kan.)  450 311 

Hood  Y.  Bank,  3  Neb.  (Unoff.) 

432 1183 

Hood  Y.  Eahnestock,    8  Watts. 

(Pa.)  489 722 

Hood  Y.  Gibson,  8  Kan.  App.588 

132,  613 
Hood  Y.  Jones,  5  Del.  Ch.  77. .  863 
Hoofsmith  y.  Cope,    6    Whart. 

(Pa.)  53 , 527,    529 

Hook  Y.  Mowre,  17  Iowa,  195. 

85,    189 
Hooker  y.   Blount     (Tex.     Civ 

App.),  97  S.  W.   1083 1168 

Hocks  Y.  Aldridge   (O.  C.  A.), 

12  Am.  B.  R.  658   1102 

Hooks  Y.  Pafford,  34  Tex.  Civ. 

App.  616 617,     945 

Hooser  y.  Hunt>  65  Wis.  71.613,  987 
Hoot  Y.  Sorrell,  11  Ala.  386.. 

113,  329 
Hoover  v.  Wise,  91  U.  S.  308. .  1169 
Hombeck  v.  Vanmetre,  9  Ohio, 

153 35 

Homes  y.  Crane,  19  Mass.  607 . .  541 
Homestead  Min.  Co.  v.  Reynolds, 

30   Colo.   330    291,     820 

HoUowell  Y.  Simonson,  21  Ind. 

398 358 

Holman  v.  Dunkle,  57  Ind.  374.  278 
Holman  v.  Martin,  12  Ind.  553.  154 
Holmes  v.  Clark,  48  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)  237 278,    877 

Holmes  v.  Harshberger,  31  W. 

Va.  516 366 

Holmes  v.  Little,  86  Hun   (N. 

Y.)    226    1008 

Holmes  v.  Marshall,  78  N.  C. 

262 273,     414 

Holmes  v.  Penny,  3  Jur.  N.  S. 

80 349,     427 

Holmes  v.  Tallada,  125  Pa.  St. 


PAOB 

133 155 

Holmes  v.  Winchester,  133  Mass. 

140 285,     358 

Holmes    Bros.  v.  Ferguson-Mc- 

Kinney      Dry      Goods      Co. 

(Miss.),  39  So.  70  893 

Hombs  Y.  Corbin,  34  Ma  App. 

393 153,     157 

Hombs  Y.  Corbin,  34  Mo.  App. 

393 890 

Home  Bank  v.  J.  P.  Brewster, 

17  Misc.  Rep.    (N.  Y.)   442. 

958,  960 
Hombeck  v.  Vanmetre,  9  Ohio. 

153 622 

Homes  v.  Crane,  19  Mass,  607.     521 
Homestead    Min.    Co.    v.    Rey- 
nolds, 30  Colo.  330 977 

Hood  v.  Frellsen,  31  La.  Ann- 

577 650 

Hood  V.  Jones,  5  Del.  Ch.  77. .  366 
Hook  V.  Mowre,  17  Iowa»  196. 

348,  418 
Hooker  v.  Sutcliffe,  71  Miss.  792  466 
Hoover  v.  Hawks,  21  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

190 469,     476 

Hooser  v.  Hunt,  65  Wis.  71. . .  898 
Hopkins  v.  Bishop,  91  Mich.  328  621 
Hopkins  v.  Buck,  5  La.  Ann.  487  348 
Honegger  v.  Wettstein,    94  N. 

Y.  252 827 

Hope  V.  Valley  City  Salt  Co.,  25 

W.  Va.  789 32 

Hope  Lumber  Co.  v.  Foster,  etc., 

Hardware  O.,  68  Ark.  196..  649 
Hopkins  v.  Beebe,  26  Pa.  St.  86.  595 
Hopkins  v.  Bishop,  91  Mich.  328 

634,  636,  1003,  1004 
Hopkins  v.  Buck,  5  La.  Ann.  487  196 
Hopkins  v.  Joyce,  78  Wis.  443. 

405,  801 
Hopkins  y.  Langton,  30  Wis.  379 

582,  616 
Hopkins  v.  Soott,  20  Ala.  179. . 

482,  999 
Hopkins  v.   Webb,   9   Humphr. 

(Team.)  519 186,  216,    774 

Hopkins  v.  Randolph,    12    Fed. 

Ciis.  No.  6,698.. 96,  197,  337,  338 
Hoppock  V.  Donaldson,  12  How. 

Pr.    (N.  Y.)    141 49 

Hopson  V.  Payne,  7  Mich.  334. 

187  192 
Horbach  v.  Hill,  112  U.  S.  144 

180,  189,    863 
Herd's  AdniVs  v.  Rust,  7  Ky.231     329 
Horn  V.  Volcano  Water  Co.,  13 


CXX3CV1 


Table  of  Cases. 


Horner  v.  Henning,  93  U.  8.  228 
Homer-Gaylord  Co.  v.  Fawcett, 

50  W.  Va.  487 196, 

Homer-Gaylord  Co.  v.  Miller,  17 

Am.  B.  R.  257 

Hornthall  v.  Schonfield,  79  Ala. 

107 

Horskins  v.  Sanderson,  13  Am. 

B.  R.  101 

Horstman  v.  Kaufman,  97  Pa. 

St.  147 

Horstman  v.  Little    (Tex.  Oiv. 

App.),  88  S.  W.  286  .  . .  .741, 
Horton  v.  Dewey,  63  Wis.  410 

013, 
Horton  v.  Kelly,  40  Minn.  193 . 
Horton  v.   Williams,  21   Minn. 

187 

Hopkirk  v.  Randolph,    12  Fed. 

Cas.  No.  6,698,  2  Brock.   (U. 

S  )   132       278 

Horbach  v.  Hill,  112  U.  S.  144 

Horn  V.  Ross,  20  Ga.  210 

Horner   v.   Zinmierman,   46   111. 

14 631, 

Horner-Gaylord  Co.  v.  Miller  & 

Bennett,  17  Am.  B.  R.  267 . . 

890,  1211, 
Horton  v.  Dewey,  63  Wis.  410 

376,  894, 
Horton  v.  Kelly,  40  Minn.  193 

162,   160, 
Homsby     v.     City    Nat.    Bank 

(Tenn.  Ch.  App.),  60  S.  W. 

160 

Houck  T.  Heinzman,  37  Neb.  463 
Hough  T.  Dickinson,  68  Mich.  89 
Hough  V.  Ives,  1  Root  (Conn.), 

492  .    

Houseman  v.  Grossman,  177  Pa. 

St.  453 414, 

Houston  y.   Blockman,  66  Ala. 

559 

Houston  V.  Bogle,  32  N.  C.  496 
Houston  V.  Maddox,  179  111.  377 
How   V.    Camp,  Walk.    (Mich.) 

427 460,  695,  698,  699, 

Howard  v.  Dwight,  8  8.  D.  398 
Howard  v.  Rynearson,  60  Mich. 

307 378, 

Howard  v.  Stoddard,  9  St  Rep. 

Howard  v.  Tenney,  87  Ky.  62 . . 
Howard  v.  Williams,  1   Bailey 

(8.  C),  675 284, 

Howe  V.  Colby,  19  Wis.  683 .. . 


PAOB  PAQB 

846      Hosfeldt  v.  Dill,  28  Minn.  469.     114 
864      Hoskins  v.  Carroll,  16  Tenn.  506     987 

Hosmer    v.    Tiffany,    64  Misc. 
760  Rep.   (N.  Y.)   402 327,  1181 

Hotop  V.  Neidig,    17    Abb.  Pr. 
(N.  Y.)  332 1017 

Houck  V.  Christy  (C.  C.  A.),  18    . 
593  Am.  B.  R.  330 1128,  1132 

Houck  V.  Hienzman,  37  Neb.  463 
1205  962,  968,     986 

Hough  V.  DicKinson,  58  Mich.  89     590 
1040       Hough  V.  Ives,  1  Root,  492 251 

Houseman  v.  Grossman,  179  Pa. 
924  St.  463 766 

Houston  V.  Blackman,    66   Ala. 

971  669 293,821,941,     942 

95       Houston  v.  Bogle,  32  N.  C.  496     340 

Houftton  V.  Howard,  39  Vt.  64. .     527 
569       Houston  t.  Maddux,  179  111.  377 

125,   126,     790 

Houston   T.    New   Orleans  City 
675          Bank,  6  How.   (U.  S.)   486..    1072 
350      Houston,  etc.,  R.  Co.  v.  Shirley, 
348  89  Tex.  95  . 909,     915 

Houston,  etc.,  R.  Co.  v.  Shirley, 

634  24  S.  W.   (Tex.)   809 

574,  1000,1005,  1052 

Hovey  v.  Holcomb,   11   111.   660     569 
1213      How  V.  Dorscheimer,  31  Mo.  349       49 

How  V.  Field,  5  Mass.  390 746 

898       How   V.    Johnson,    117    Cal.    37.. 540 

How  V.  Taylor,  52  Mo.  592 544 

649      Howard  v.  Compton,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  6,758 1179 

Howard  v.  Corey,  126  Ala.  283     737 
436      Howard  v.  Crawford,    21    Tex. 

434  399 241 

961      Howard  v.  Cunliff  (Mo.  App.), 

10  Am.  B.  R.  71 1121 

442      Howard  v.  Duke,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

2008 737 

426      Howard  v.  Dwight,  8  S.  D.  398     655 

Howard  v.  Raymers,  64  Neb.  213     763 
356      Howard  v.   Sheldon,    11    Paige 

274  (N.  Y.),  558 771 

273      Howard  v.  Snelling,  32  Ga.  195     225 

Howard  v.  Stoddard,  9  St.  Rep. 

700  (N.  Y.)  429 930 

526      Howard  v.  Tenney,  87  Ky.  62. .       39 

Howard  v.  Williams,    1    Bailey 
384  (S.  C.),575 632,     533 

Howd  V.  Breckenridge,  97  Mich. 

519  65 204 

400      Howe  ▼.  Bishop,  44  Mass.  26 

70,  753 
523  Howe  t.  Colby.  19  Wis.  583. . .  148 
361       Howo  V.  Keeler,  27  Conn.  538. .      961 


Table  of  Cases. 


czxxvii 


PAa 

"Hcfwe  V.  lillard,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

298 667 

Howe  ▼.  Reed,  12  Me.  616.  .924,    926 
Howe  T.  Sommers,  22  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)  417 699 

Howe  V.  Ward,  4  Me.  195 

13,  182,  205,  588 
Howe  y.  Waysman,  12  Mo.  169  219 
Howe  V.  Whitney,  66  Me.  17.. 

..777,     842 
Howe  Mach.  Co.  v.  dayboum,  6 

Fed.  438 678,     986 

Howell  y.  Bowman,  99  Ala.  100 

597,  914,  928,     938 
Howell  y.  Garden,  99  Ala.  100 

907,  940,   941,     986 
Howell  y.  Cooper,  37  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)  6^2 796 

Howell  y.  South,  1  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

416 187 

Howell  y.  Thompeon,   96    Tenn. 

396 838 

Howerton  y.  Holt>  23  Tex.  62. . 

236,  314 
Howland  y.  Knox,  69  Iowa,  46 

647,  769,  1028 
Howse  y.  JudJson,  1  Fla.  133. . .  178 
Howse  y.  Moody,  14  Fla.  69 . . 

817,  818 
Hoxie  y.  Priee,  31  Wis.  82... 38,  1044 
Hoyt  y.  Godfrey,  88  N.  Y.  669. 

4,  90,  91,  95,       96 
Hoye  y.  Penn,  1  Bland.    (Md.) 

28 339 

Hoyt  y.  Shelden,  16  N.  Y. 

Super.  Ct.  267  623 

Hoyt  y.  White,  46  N.  H.  45 106 

Hoy    y.    Wright,    Brayt    (Vt.) 

208 216 

Hoagland   y.    Wilson,    16    Neb. 

320 367 

Hoaw  y.  Waysman,  12  Mo.  169     707 
HobbB  y.  Bibb,  2  Stew.    (Ala.) 

64 619 

Hobbs  y.  Dayis,  60  Ga.  213... 

413,  416,  418 
Hobbfi  y.  Hull,  1  Cox  Ch.  446.  367 
Hoboken  Bank  y.  Beckman,  33 

N.  J.  Eq.  63 378 

Hoboken  Say.  Bank  y.  Beekman, 

36  N.  J.  Eq.  83    408 

Hobson  y.  Noel    (Ky.)>  97  So. 

388 877 

Hodges  y.  Coleman,  76  Ala.  103 

257,  259,  457,     486 
496,  496,  498,     716 
Hodges    y.    Hickley,    67    Miss. 


PAOS 

716 160,     356 

Hodson  y.  Jordan,  108  N.  C.  10  279 
Hodges  y.  Spicer,  79  N.  C.  223  279 
Hodges  y.  Winston,  96  Ala.  614  159 
Hoes  y.  Royer,  108  Ind.  494..  613 
Hoeser  y.  Kraeke,  29  Tex.  460 

636,    664 
Hoey  y.  Pierron,  67  Wis.  262. . 

898,     899 
Hoff  y.  Larimore,  106  111.  App. 

689 711,     714 

Hoffer  y.  Gladden,  76  Ga.  532. .  259 
Hoffman  y.  Henderson,  145  Ind. 

613 367 

Hoffman  y.  Junk,  61  Wis.  613.  161 
HoffmajQ  y.   Susemihl,    15   App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)   405   466 

Hogan  y.  Robinson,  94  Ind.  138  369 
Hoke  y.  Henderson,  14  N.  C.  12 

676,    676 
Holberg    y.    Jaffray,    64    Miss. 

746 460,  474,     498 

Holbird   y.  Anderson,    6   T.   R. 

235 463,     475 

Holbrook  y.  Allen,  4  Fla.  87. . .  46a 
Holbrook  y.  Baker,  5  Me.  309. .  621 
Holbrook   y.    First  Nat.    Bank, 

10   111.   App.    140 

271,  468,   476,     496 
Holcombe    y.    Ray,    23    N.    C. 

340 441 

Holden  y.  Bumham,  63  N.  Y.  74  376 
HoUacher    y.    O'Brien,    5    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  277   619 

Holladay  y.  Towers,  20  D.  C.  677  360 
Holland  y.  Cruft,  37  Mass.  321 

695,     712 
Holland    y.     Grote,     66     Misc. 

Rep.   (N.  Y.)   370 874,     876 

Holliday   y.   McKinne,   22    Fla. 

163 620 

HoUinger    y.    Boatman's   Bank, 

69  Kan.  619  166 

Hollingsworth  y.  Johns,  92  Ga. 

428 473 

HoUis  y.  Morris,  2  Harr.  (Del.) 

128 649 

Hollis  y.  Rodgers,  106  Ga.  13.. 

612,  515,    076 
Hollister   y.   Lefeyre,   36   Conn. 

466 679 

Holloway  v.  Holloway,  103  Mo. 

274 963 

Holloway   y.  Millard,    1   Madd. 

414 349 

H.     T.    Clarke    Drug     Co.     y. 

Boardman,  50  Neb.  687 896 


CXXXVlll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAQS 

H.  T.  Simon-Gr^nory  Dry  Goods 
Co.  Y.  Hewman,  50  I^.  Ann. 

338 964 

H.  T.  Simon  Gregory  Dry  Goods 
Ck>.  y.  McM&han,  61  Mo.  App. 

499 332 

Howe  V.  Johnson,  117  Cal.  37. .     624 
Howe  V.  Sommers,  22  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)   417   497,     951 

Howe  V.  Ward,  4  Me.  195 348 

Howe  Mach.  Co.  v.  Clayboum, 

6  Fed.  438 413,     433 

Howell  V.  Elliott,  12  N.  C.  76. .     522 
Howell    V.    Smith,     1     Ky.    L. 

Rep.  415   382 

Howerton  v.  Holt,  23  Tex.  51. .     523 
Howse  V.  Judson,  1  Fla.  133 .. . 

278  282 
Hoxie  ▼.  Price,  31  Wis.  82.  .364,'  398 
Hubbard  y.  Abell,  59  Ala.  283.  345 
Hubbard  y.  Allen,  59  Ala.  283 

264,  285,  296,  311,  387,  394,     942 
Hubbard  y.  Hobeon,  14  La.  453 

85      892 
Hubbard   y.    Hubbard,    14   Md! 

356 1041 

Hubbard  y.  Little,  10  Atl.   (N. 

J.)    839   373 

Hubbard  y.  Remick,  10  Me.  140 

91,     146 
Hubbard  y.  Taylor,  5  Mich.  155 

75,    304 
Hubbard  y.  Turner,  12  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  6,819    317 

Hubbell    Y.    Currier,    92    Mass. 

333 679,     724 

Hubbell     Y.     Merchants'     Nat. 

Bank,  42  Hun  (N.  Y.),  200. .     819 
Huber  y.  Wiman,  18  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)  107   952 

Hubble  Y.  Osbom,  31  Ind.  249. .     753 
Hubbs  Y.  Bancroft,  4  Ind.  388. 

231,  233,  249,  264,  353,     354 
Hubbs   Y.   Brockwell,   35   Tenn. 

574 220 

Hudgins  y.  Kemp,  29  How.  (U. 

S.)   45.... 232,  240,  249,  264,     351 
Hudnal    y.   Wilder,    4    McCord, 

194 265 

Hudnal  y.  Wilder,  4  McCord  (S. 
C),  294. . .  14,  15,  16,  93,  216,     220 

269,  279,  338,     954 
Hudnal  y.  Teasd&ll,  1  McCord, 

227 266,    337 

Hudnit  y.  Tomson,  26  N.  J.  £q. 

239 353 

Hudnit's  Adm'rs  y.  Tomson,  26 


PAGE 

N.  J.  £q.  239   233 

Hudson  V.   Bauer  Grocery  Co., 

105  Ala.  200 585,  936,     945 

Hudson  Y.  Eisenmayer  Milling, 

etc.,  Co.,  79  Tex.  401 826 

Hudson  V.  Jordon,  108  N.  C.  10  588 
Hudson  V.  Plets,  11  Paiee    (N. 

Y.),   180    * 102 

Hudson  V.   Warner,  2  Harr.  A 

G.    (Md.)    415 35,     521 

Hudson  Y.  White,  17  R.  I.  519 

„  70,  177,     640 

Hudson    Y.    Willis,    28    S.    W. 

(Tex.)    913    1004 

Hudson  Y.  Willis,  87  Tex.  387.  1052 
Hudson  Y.  Wood,  119  Fed.  764.  «46 
Hudspeth  v.  Harrison,  6  Ky.  L. 

Rep.    304    165 

Huebler  y.  Smith,  62  Conn.  186 

526,  658 
Huels  Y.  Boettger,  40  Mo.  App. 

310 630,     556 

Huey's  Appeal,  29  Pa.  St.  219. . 

157,     632 

Huff  Y.  Roane,  22  Ark.  184 473 

Huffman  y.   Copeland,   86   Ind. 

Huffman  y.  Copeland,  139  Ind. 
221 147 

Huffman  y.   Leslie,   23   Ky.   L. 

Rep.  1981    590,  976,     980 

Huffman  y.  Mcllyaine,    13   Pa. 

Super.   Ct.    108 541 

Huffman  y.  Nolte,  127  Mo.  120.  902 
Huggins  y.  Perrine,  30  Ala.  396  350 
Hughes  Y.  Bell,  62  111.  App.  74.  513 
Hughes  Y.  Bloomer,  9  Paige  (N. 

Y.),  269    684 

Hughes  Y.  Corey,  20  Iowa,  405.  4 
Hughes    V.    Kelley,    30    S.    E. 

(Va.)    387    607,  915,  1002 

Hughes  Y.  Mattes,  104  La.  218.  520 
Hughes  y.  Monty,  24  Iowa,  499 

256,  618 
Hughes  Y.  Noyes,  171  111.  675. .  579 
Hughes  V.  Roper,  42  Tex.  116. . 

76,     387 
Hughes  y.  Shull,  33  Kan.  127. 

238,  317 
Hughes    Y.    Tennison,    3    Tenn. 

Ch.  641    811,     824 

Hughes  Y.  Winfrey,  5  La.  Ann. 

668 67 

Hughston  Y.  Cornish,.  59  Miss. 

372 955 

Hugo     &     Schmeltzer     Co.     y. 

Hirsch,  63  S.  W.  (Tex.)   163.     306 


Table  of  Cases. 


CZXXIX 


PAGE 

Hugimin    v.    Dewey,    20    Iowa, 

368 160 

HuguB  V.  Hardenburg,  19  Colo. 

App.  464  res 

Hugus  V.  Robinson,  24  Pa.  St. 

9 638,     666 

Huiskamp  v.  Moline  Wagon  Co., 

121  U.  S.  310.. 473,  489,  492,  693 
Hull  V.  Burr,  18  Am.  B.  R.  641 .  1212 
Hull  V.  Deering,  80  Md.  424. .  .  697 
Hull  V.  Hull,  48  Conn.  250 ... .  640 
Hull  V.  Sigsworth,  48  Conn.  258  626 
Hull  V.  William  Deering  Co.,  80 

Md.  424  330 

Hulley  V.  Chedic,  22  Nev.  127 . .     680 
Hulman    y.    McBryde,    80    III. 

App.  692    609,     620 

Hulse  v.  Mershon,  126  HI.  62 . . 

310,  468,     484 
Humbert   v.    Cincinnati    M.    £. 

Church,  Wright    (Ohio),  213 

341,     344 
Humbert  v.  Trinity  Church,  24 

Wend.   (N.  Y.)    611 23 

Hume  V.  W.  Co.  v.  Condon,  44 

W.  Va.  553    

263,  264,  279,  280,  328,     347 
Humes  v.  Scruggs,  94  U.  S.  22 

8,  373,     880 
Hummers   Estate,    161    Pa.   St. 

216 637 

Humphreys  v.  Atlantic  Milling 

Co.,  98  Mo.  542 ... .  760,  770,  788 
Humphrey    v.    Spencer,    36    W. 

Va.  11   130,  346,     376 

Humphrey  v.  Tatman,  198  U.  S. 

91 1114,  1116,  1117 

Humphries  v.  Freeman,  22  Tex. 

45 690,     613 

Humphries  t.  MeCraw,  9  Ark. 

91 532 

Hnndal  v.  Wilder,  4  McCord  (S. 

C),  294    569 

Hundley     v.     Webb,     3     J.     J. 

Marsh    ( Ky.) ,  643    626 

Hungerford    v.    Karle,    2    Vem. 

Ch.  (Eng.)  261   253 

Hungerford    v.    Cartwright,    13 

Hun   (N.  Y.),  647 421,     426 

Hungerford    v.    Greengard,    95 

Mo.  App.  663 599,  958,     986 

Hunnicutt  v.   Summey,   63   Ga. 

586 169 

Hunt  V.  Ahnemann  (Minn.),  102 

X.  W.  376   419 

Hunt   V.    Connor,    74   111.   App. 

298 187,     348 


PAOB 

Hunt  V.  Dean,  91  Minn.  96 

814,  820,     824 
Hunt  V.  Doyal    (Ga.),  67  S.  E. 

489 1203 

Hunt  V.  Field,  9  N.  J.  Eq.  36. . 

186,  774,  818,     864 
Hunt  y.  Hammel,  142  Cal.  466 

291,  628 
Hunt  V.  Hoover,  34  Iowa,  77..  381 
Hunt  y.  Knox,  34  Miss.  665 . . . 

426,  434,  445,  449,  1021 
Hunt  y.  Huffman,  41  Neb.  244.  461 
Hunt  V.  Hunt,  171  N.  Y.  296. . 

326,  327 
Hunt  y.  Johnston,  106  Iowa,  311  967 
Hunt  V.  Nance,  28  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1188 187,  348,     393 

Hunt  y.  Schier,  69  Mich.  286..     294 
Hunt  y.  Spenser,  20  Kan.   126. 

178,  278,     378 
Hunt  y.  Weiner,  39  Ark.  70.. 

773,  798 
Hunt  V.  Van  Denreer,  43  N.  J. 

Eq.  414   822 

Hunter  y.  Austin,  109  Ala.  311.   1019 
Hunter  y.  Bradford,  3  Fla.  269     875 

Hunter  y.  Case,  20  Vt.  196 746 

Hunter  y.  Foster,  23  Tenn.  211     978 
Hunter  y.  Hunter,   10  W.  Va. 

321 226,  836,  954,     960 

976,  977,  1017 
Hunter  y.  Magee,  31  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.   304    640 

Hunter    y.    Marlboro,    12    Fed. 

Cas.  No.  6,908    74,     668 

Hunsinger    y.    Hofer,    110    Ind. 

390 201,  609,  924,  931,     946 

Hunters    y.    Waite,    3     Gratt. 

(Va.)  26 24,  399,     424 

Huntington  y.  Jones,  72  Conn. 

45 846 

Huntley  y.  Kingman  &  Co.,  162 

U.  S.  627 428,  429,  433,     467 

Huntsinger   y.   Harper,    44   Pa. 

St.  204    926 

Hupp  V.  Hupp,  61  III.  App.  446     626 
Hurd  y.  Ascherman,  117  111.  501 

413,  434 
Hurd  y.  New  York,  etc.,  Steam 

Laundry    Co.,    52    App.    Div. 

(N.   Y.)    467    81 

Hurdt    y.    Courtenay,    6    Mete, 

(Ky.)    139 142 

Hurdt  y.  Courtenay,  61  Ky.  139. 

348,  361 
Hurlburd  y.  Bogardus,   10   Cal. 

618 646 


czl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAQB 

Hurlbut  ▼.  Hnrlbut,  49  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  189  986 

Hurley  y.  Derlin,  18  Am.  B.  R. 

627 1188 

Hurley  ▼.  OsUer,  44  Iowa,  642.     216 
Hurley  v.  Smith,   12  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  6,920 268 

Hurley  v.  Taylot,  78  Mo.  238..     681 
Hurwitz   V.    Hurwitz^    10   Misc. 

Rep.  (N.  Y.)   363 756 

HuBchle  Y.  Morris,  131  HI.  687. 

626,  014,  930 
Husc  V.  Preston,  61  Vt.  246...  915 
Husher  v.  Hazelton,  6  Me.  471.  184 
Hussey  v.  Caatle,  41  Cta,l.  239.  192 
Hussey    ▼.     Ricbardson-Roberts 

Dry  Goods  Co.,  17  Am.  B.  R. 

611 1089,  1164 

Huston's    Heirs  ▼.    Cantril,    11 

Leigh   (Va.),  136   325 

Hutching   ▼.    Gilchrist,    23    Vt. 

82 642 

Hutchins  v.   8prague,  4  N.   H. 

69 453 

HutchiuB  ▼.   Sprague,  4   N.   H. 

496 305,    653 

Hutchinflon  v.  Boltz,  35  W.  Va. 

764 898,  954,  961,     968 

Hutchinson  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 

133  Ind.  271    860 

Hutchinson  y.  Kelly,  1  Rob.  123     192 
Hutchinson  v.  Le  Roy,  8  Am.  B. 

R.  20 1185,  1186 

Hutchinson  v.  McClure,  20  Pa. 

St.  63 696 

Hutchinson  y.  Otis,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

382 1124 

Hutchinson  y.   Park.  82  S.  W. 

(Ark.)   843 644,     664 

Hutchinson  v.  Poyer,  78  Mich. 

337 998 

Hutchinson  y.    Smith,   7    Paige 

(N.  Y.),  26   815 

Hutchinson      y.      Watkins,     17 

Iowa,  476 469 

Hutchinson  Nat.  Bank  y.  Crow, 

56  m.  App.  668 434 

Hutmacher    y.    Anheuser-Busch 

Brewing  Co.,  71  111.  App.  164. 

236,  314,  333 
Hyatt   y.    Dusenbury,     12    Civ. 

Proc.  R.    (N.  Y.)    162 

800,  801,  806,  985,  1029 
Hyde  y.  Bloomingdale,  23  Misc. 

Rep.  (N.  Y.)  728. . .  .693,  603,     908 
Hyde  y.  Chapman,  33  Wis.  391. 

346,  753,     987 


PAOB 

Hyde     y.     Craddick,     10     Rob. 

(La.)   387 824 

Hyde  y.  Frey,  28  Fed.  819 US 

Hyde  y.  Houston,  77  Hun,  609.     377 
Hyde  y.  Houston,  29  N.  Y.  Supp. 

818 _     510 

Hyde  v.  Powell,  47  Mich.  156.. 

366,  613,  514 
Hyde  y.  Shank,  93  Mich.  635..  1001 
Hyde  v.  Tuffta,  45  N.   Y.  Sup. 

Ct.  66 1198 

Hyde  y.  Wolf,  31  App.  Div.   (N. 

Y.)    125 902 

Hyde  y.  Woods,  94  U.  S.  623 . . 

117,     134 
Hyman  v.  Bailey,   13  La.  Ann. 

450 939 

Hyman    y.    Schlenker,    44    La. 

Ann.  108 371 

Hyman  y.  Stadler,  63  Miss.  362. 

42,  65,  460,     476 
Hyslop  y.  Clarke,  14  Johns.  (N. 

Y.)   458 71,     676 


lauch  y.  De  Socarras,  56  N.  J. 

Eq.  638 139,  178,     180 

Ideal  Clothing  Co.  y.  Hazle,  126 

Mich.  262 760,     786 

Iglehart  y.  Willis,  68  Tex.  306. 

462,  4^2,  490,  491,     493 
Hey  y.   Niswanger,     1    McCord 

Eq.  (S.  C.)  518.193,  265,  491,  1031 
Illinois    Watch    Co.    y.    Payne, 

132  N.  Y.  697 47,       7^ 

Illinois  Watch  Co.  v.  Payne,  39 

App.  Diy.   (N.  Y.)   521 696 

Imhoff  y.  McArthur,    146    Mo. 

371 237,  318,  410,     603 

Imhoff's    Appeal,    119    Pa.    St. 

350 164 

Imperial   Woolen    Co.   y.   Long- 
bottom,    143   Fed.   483 413 

Importers  ft  T.   Nat.   Bank   y. 

Quackenbush,  143  N.  Y.  567. 

764,  776,  777,  797 
Ingals  y.  Brooks,  29  Vt.  398..  214 
Ingalls  y.  Herrick,    108    Mass. 

351 521,     636 

Ingersoll  y.  Weld,  103  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    654    644,     652 

Inglehart    y.    Thousand    Island 

Hotel  Co.,  109  N.  Y.  454.. 44,  997 
Inglehart  y.  Willis,  58  Tex,  308  .595 
Ingles  V.  Donaldson,    3    N.    C. 

222 522 


Table  of  Casbs. 


cxli 


PAcne 
Ingles    V.    Kew    England    Mut. 

L.  Ins.  Co.,  27  Fed.  249 126 

Ingraham   v.   Grigg,   13   Sm.   ft 

M.   (Miss.)   22   576 

Ingraham   ▼.   Wheeler,   6   Ck>nn. 

277 520,  626,  562,     653 

Ingram  v.  Osborn,  70  Wis.  184. 

463,  477,  479,  493.  506.     507 
Ingram  y.   Phillips,    5    Strohb. 

(S.  C.)  200....  193,  269,  274,  275 
Ingram  v.  Rankin,  47  Wis.  406.  85 
Ingram  v.  Robbins,  33  N.  Y.  409  49 
Inman  ▼.  Mead,  97  Mass.  310. . 

830,  883,  956 
Inman  v.  Schloss,  122  Ala.  461.  467 
Inman  ▼.  Sprague,  30  Or.  321 . .  461 
Inn  is  Y.  Carpenter,  4  Colo.  App. 

30 418,  433,     444 

Inhabitants  of  Canton  v.  Inhabi- 
tants of  Dorchester,  62  Mass. 

525 632 

Inliabitants  of  Pelham  ▼.  Aid- 
rich,  78  Mass.  515 241 

In  re  Abraham  Steers  Lumber 

Co.,  6  Am.  B.  R.  315... 1164,  1162 
In  re  Adamant  Plaster  Co.,  14 

Am.  B.  R.  815 1123 

In  re  Adams,  14  Am.  B.  R.  23.  1189 
In  re  Adams^  12  Am.  B.  R.  367.  1216 
In  re  Adams,  2  Am.  B.  R.  415.  1136 
In  re  Adams,  1  Am.  B.  R.  94..  1073 
1113,  1130,  1145,  1171,  1226,  1230 
In  T«  Adier,  18  Am.  B.  R.  240.  1226 
In  re  Alexander,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

376 1162 

In  re  Allen«  13  Am.  B.  R.  519. 

1202,  1203 
In  re  A.  L.  Robertshaw  Mfg. 

Co.,  133  Fed.  566 

58,  431,  446,  448 
In  re  Alyerson^  6  Am.  B.  R. 

856 1120,  1135 

In  re  Anderson,  2  N.  B.  N.  Rep. 

1000 1098,  1165 

In  re  Andrae  Co.,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

135 1115 

In  re  Andrews,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

387 1074,  1166 

In  re  Andrews.   14  Am.  B.  R. 

247 618 

In  re  Anrae  Co.«  117  Fed.  561. 

778,  1117 
In  re  Ansley  Bros.,  18  Am.  B. 

R.  457 1169 

In  re  Antigo  Screen  Door  Co., 

10  Am.  B.  R.  369.  .1116,  1117,  1218 
In  re  Antisdel,  1  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

490 1138 


PAGE 

In  re  Appeal  Surety,  6  Ohio  S. 

&  C.  P.  Dec.  67r. 267 

In  re  Appel,  4  Am.  B.  R.  722. .  1178 
In  re  Arkonia  Fabric  Mfg.  Co., 

18  Am.  B.  R.  470 1152 

In  re  Armstrong,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

583 1117,  1157,  1165 

In  re  Arndt,  4  Am.  B.  R.  773 . . 

1167,  1173 

In  re  Atkin,  133  Fed.  813 1073 

In  re  Babcock,  12  St.  Rep.  (N. 

Y.)  841 267 

In  re  Baber,  9  Am.  B.  R.  406. .  1223 
In  re  Bailey,  16  Am.  B.  R.  289. 

1143,  1170 
In  re  Bailey,  7  Am.  B.  R.  26..  1173 
In  re  Baird,  8  Am.  B.  R.  649. .  1214 
In  re  Baird,  7  Am.  B.  R.  448 . .  1223 
In  re    Baker-Ricketson    Co.,    4 

Am.  B.  R.  605....  1082,  1100,  1104 
In  re  Ball,  10  Am.  B.  R.  664. .  1123 
In  re  Barrett,  6  Am.  B.  R.  48, 

199 1135,  1162 

In  re  Basch,  3  Am.  B.  R.  236 . . 

1224,  1225,  1232 
In  re  Batchelder,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

1,098 1167 

In  re  Bates  Machine  Co.,  1  Am. 

B.  R.  129   1104 

In  re  Baudouine,  3  Am.  B.  R. 

661 1187 

In  re  Baughman,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

23 1226 

In  re  Baumann,  3  Am.  B.  R. 

196 1076,  1170,  1213 

In  re  Bear,  60  Pa.  St.  430 695 

In  re  Bear,  2  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

1,178 123 

In  re  Beaver  Coal  Co.,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  404 1142 

In  re  Beck  Prov.  Co.,  2  N.  B.  N. 

Rep.  632 1121 

In  re  Becker,  5  Am.  B.  R.  438.  1191 
In  re  Becker,  3  Am.  B.  R.  412.  1189 
In  re  Beede,  14  Am.  B.  R.  697. 

1116,  1118 
In  re  Beede,  11  Am.  B.  R.  387. 

1116,  1117,  1123 
In  re  Beerman,  7  Am.  B.  R.  431. 

1151,  1159,  1160 
In  re  Belding,  8  Am.  B.  R.  718. 

1151,  1158 
In  re  Belfast  Mesh  Underwear 

Co.,  la  Am.  B.  R.  620 1102 

In  re  Belknap,  12  Am.  B.  R. 

326 1081,  1084,  1088 

1096.  1097,  1161 
In  re  Bender,  6  Am.  B.  R.  632.  1218 


cxlii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

In  re  Benedict^  8  Am.  B.  R.  463. 

lUl,  1143 

In  re  Benjamin,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

351 1130,  1231 

In  re  Bennett  Shoe  Co.,  15  Am. 

B.  R.  497 1101 

In  re  Berry,  17  Am.  B.  R.  467.  1185 

In  re  Billing,  17  Am.  B.  R.  80.  1093 
In  re  Binford,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

1,411 33,  34 

In  re  Birck  &  Co.,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

694 1137 

In  re  Bishop,  18  Am.  B.  R.  635.  1122 

In  re  Biswick,  7  Am.  B.  R.  395.  1154 

In  re  Black,  2  Ben.  (U.  8.)  196  1081 
In  re  Blair,  6  Am.  B.  R.  206. . 

1143,  1144 

In  re  Blair,  4  Am.  B.  R.  220. .  1162 

In  re  Blake,  17  Amu  B.  R.  668.  1180 

In  re  Bloch,  15  Am.  B.  R.  751.  1130 

In  re  Bloch,  6  Am.  B.  R.  300. . 

1084,  1089,  1090,  1127 
In  re  Bloom,  3  Fed.   Cas.  Na 

1,557 32 

In  re  Blount,  16  Am.  B.  R.  97..  1070 
In  re  Blumberg,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

343 1092 

In  re  Blumberg,  1  Am.  B.  R.  633  1142 
In  re  Boardman,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

620 1190 

In  re  Bogen,  13  Am.  B.  R.  529. 

1082,  1089 
In  re  Boiling,  17  Am.  B.  R.  399 

1181,  1185 
In  re  Booth  (Or.),  3  Am.  B.  R. 

574 1113,  1118 

In  re  Booth,  2  Am.  B.  R.  770. .  1230 
In  re  Boothroyd,  3  Fed.  CajB.  No. 

1,652 168 

In  re  Boston,  3  Am.  B.  R.  388. . 

1118,  1202 
In  re  Bowne,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  1,741  1122 
In  re  Bozeman,  2  Am.  B.  R.  809.  1192 
In  re  Breslauer,  10  Am.  B.  R. 

33 1144 

In  re  Briakman,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

57 1214 

In  re  Brodbine,  2  Am.  B.  R.  53..  1189 
In  re  Brown,  1  Am.  B.  R.  107..  1182 
In  re  Brumbaugh,  12  Am  B.  R. 

204 1107 

In  re  Buckingham,  2  N.  B.  N.  R. 

617 1202 

In  re  Buelow,  3  Am.  B.  R.  389. .  1191 
In  re  Builders  Luinb<?r  Co.,    17 

Am.  B.  R,  449 1128,  1192 


PAGS 

In  re  Bullock,  8  Am.  B.  R.  646.  llb.> 
In  re  Burka,  5  Am.  B.  R.  12. . 

1178,  1179,  1184 
In  re  Burke,  19  Am.  B.  R.  51. .  1225 
In  re  Burkle,  8  Am.  B.  R.  542. .  1192 
In   re  Burlington   Malting  Co., 

6  Am.  B.  R.  369 1145,  1163 

In  re  Burnham,   15  Am.  B.  R. 

548 1116,  1123 

In  re  Bumstine,  12  Am.  B.  R. 

596 1100 

In  re  Burrell,  123  Fed.  414 1072 

In  re  Bush^  11  Am.  B.  R.  415..  1189 
In  re  Butler,  9  Am.  B.  R.  539..  1135 
In  re  Butterwick,  12  Am.  B.  R. 

536 1183,  1194 

In  re  Byrne,  3  Am.  B.  R.  268. .  1120 
In  re  Callister,  153  N.  Y.  294. .  363 
In  re  Cameron,  37  Ch.  Div.  32. .  215 
In  re  Cannon,  10  Am.  B.  R  64. .  1115 
In  re  Carpenter,  125  Fed.  831 . .  1204 
In  re  Carver,  7  Am.  B.  R.  539..  1229 
In  re  Cass,  6  Am.  B.  R.  721 .. .  1186 
In  re  Castleberry,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

528 1108,  1137,  1154,  1156 

In  re  Catherwood's   Estate,  29 

Wkly.  Notes  Cas.    (Pa.)    344 

418,  422,     423 
In  re  Ohadwick,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

159 1108,  1137,  1154,  1156 

In  re  Chambers,  3  Am.  B.  R.  537 

1221,  1224 
In  re  Chantler  Cloak  &  Suit  Co., 

18  Am.  B.  R.  498 1123,  1180 

In  re  Chaplin,  8  Am.  B.  R.  121. 

1151,  1183 
In  re  Chapman,  3  Am.  B.  R.  607  1098 
In  re  Chappell,  7  Am.  B.  R.  608  1152 
In  re  Chase,  10  Am.  B.  R.  677 .  1099 
In  re  Christenson,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

202 1173 

In  re  Clark,  Fed.  Cas.  2,812 1157 

In  re  Clifford,  14  Am.  B.  R.  281 

1124,  1162 
In  re  Coal,  etc.,  Co.,   131   Fed. 

769 1073 

In  re  Cobb,  3  Am.  B.  R.  129. . . 

1158,  1163,  1187 
In  re  Coddington,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

122 1106,  1202 

In  re  Coddington,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

243 1074 

In   re   Coe-Powers   Co.,    6    Am. 

B.  R.  1.   .   1121 

In  re  Coffey,  19  Am.  B.  R.  148.  1164 
In  re  Coffin,  16  Am.  B.  R.  682.  1187 
In  re  Cogley,  5  Am.  B.  R.  731.    120C 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxliii 


PAGB 

In  re  Gohn,  3  Am.  B.  R.  421.. .  1213 
In  re  Ck>le,  5  Am.  B.  R.  780. . .  1229 
In  re  Coleman,  14  Am.  B.  R.  461  1191 
In  re  Coleman  ft  tiberman,  8  Am. 

B.  R.  763 1198 

In  re  Collins,  2  Am.  B.  R.  1 . . . . 

1141,  1157 
In     re     Colion,     etc.,     Co.     8 

Am.  B.  R.267 1163 

In  re  Columbus  Buggy  Co.,  16 

Am.  B.  R.  750 1193 

In  re  Cook,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  3,151..  1120 
In  re  Conant,  Fed.  Cas.  3,086  . .    1235 

In  re  Conlan,  L.  R.  29 358 

In  re  ComielFs  EsUte,  13  Phila. 

(Pa.)  393 352 

In  re  Consumers'  Coffee  Co.,  18 

B.  R.  600 

In  re  Copper  King,  16  Am.  B. 

R.  148 :  1144 

In  re  Corbett,  5  Am.  B.  R.  224 

1174,  1178 
In  re  Cornell,  110  N.  Y.  361..  203 
In  re  Corputer,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

147 1194 

In  re  Cowles,  6  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

3,297 1083,  1084,  1130 

In  re   Coulter,    Fed.    Cas.  No. 

3,276 1120 

In  re  Cramond,  17  Am.  B.  R. 

22 1121,  1180 

In  re  Cranston,  9  Morr  Bankr. 

Cas.  160 620 

In  re  Crenshaw^  19  Am.  B.  R. 

602  .  . 1076 

In  re  Currier,  6  Am.  B.  R.  639 

1217,  1226 
In  re  Curtis,  1  Am.  B.  R.  440. ..  1140 
In  re  Cutting,  16  Am.  B.  R.  761  1092 
In  re  Dalpay,  41  Minn.  632. . .  87 
In  re  Dann,  12  Am.  B.  R.  27. . .  1182 
In  re  Darwin,  8  Am.  B.  R.  703 

1142,  1143 
In  re  Dauchy,  11  Am.  B.  R.  511  1107 
In  re  Dauchy,  122  Fed.  688. . .  433 
In  re  Davidscm,  6  Am.  B.  R.  628 

1083,  1136 
In  re  Davis,  9  Am.  B.  R.  670. .  1214 
In  re  Davis,  7  Am.  B.  R.  268. . 

276,  1187,  1194,  1197 
In  re  Davis,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  3,618  1112 
In  re  Davis   Tailoring  Co.,    16 

Am.  B.  R.  486 1217 

In  re  De  Lany  ft  Co.,  10  Am. 

B.  R.  634 1225,  1230 

In  re  De  Lue,  1  Am.  B.  R.  387 

1141,  1144 


PAGE. 

n  re  De  Long,  1  Am.  B.  R.  66.  1225 
n  re  Denell,  4  Am.  B.  R.  60. .  1133 
n  re  Dey,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  3,871. .  1120 
n  re  Diack,  3  Am.  B.  R.  723. .  1190 
n  re  Dibblee,  3  Ben.    (U.   S.) 

283 1073,  1081,  1091 

n  re  Dickinson,  7   Am.  B.   R. 

679  .   .       1154 

n  re  Diehl,  15  Fed.  234 1108 

n  re  Dillard,  Fed.  Cas.  3,912.    1200 
n  re  Dismal  Swamp  Contract- 
ing Co.,  14  Am.  B.  R.  175 

1134,  1154 
n  re  Dobson,  3  Am.  B.  R.  420. .  1141 
n  re  Docker- Foster  Co.,  10  Am. 

B.  R.  584   1106,  1152 

In  re  Dole,  7  Am.  B.  R.  21 1186 

n  re  Dondan,  1  Ir.  109 323 

n  re  Doscher,  9  Am.  B^  R.  647 

1074,  1076,  1077 
n  re  Dougherty,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

457 1122 

In  re  Dougherty,  9  Watts  ft  S. 

(Pa.)    189 43,  64,     755 

n  re  Douglass  Coal  ft  Coke  Co., 

12  Am.  B.  R.  639  .  .  .  .1101,  1161 
n   re  Downing   Paper   Co.,    17 

Am.  B.  R.  121 1194 

n  re  Drayton,  13  Am.  B.  R.  602  1219 
n   re  Dnimmond,   7   Fed.   Cas. 

No.  4,093 1084 

n  re  Ducker  (C.  C.  A.),  13  Am. 

B.  R.  760  .    1116 

n  re  Duffy,  9  Am.  B.  R.  358. .  1202 
n  re  Dunavant,  3  Am.  B.  R.  41 

1112,  1113,  1169 
n  re  Duncan,  17  Am.  B.  R.  283  1178 
n   re   Duncan,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

4,131 1118 

n  re  Dunday,  7  Am.  B.  R.  129.  1163 
n  re  Dunkerson,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

4,166 1120,  1124 

n  re  Dunlop,  19  Am.  B.  R.  361 

1186,  1210 
n  re  Dunn  Hardware  ft  Furni- 
ture Co.,  13  Am.  B.  R.  147. .    1117 
n  re  Durham,  8  Am.  B.  R.  115 

1120,  1135,  1211 
n  re  Easley,  1  Am.  B.  R.  716 

1141,  1185 
n  re  Eastern  Com.  ft  Imp.  Co., 

12  Am.  B.  K  305 1227 

n  re  Ebert,  1  Am.  B.  R.  340. .  1169 
n  re  Economical  Printing  Co., 

6  Am.   B.  R.  615 1116,  1119 

n  re  Eddleman,  19  Am.  B.  R.  45  1127 
n  re  Edelman.  12  AnT.  B.  R.  238  1092 


cxliv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

In  re  Eggert,  4  Am.  B.  R.   (K. 

Y.)  449 ^....     618 

In  re  Eggert,  3  Am.  6.  R.  541. .  1165 
In  re  Ehle,  6  Am.  B.  R.  476..  1187 
In  re  Eldred,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  4,328  1138 
In  re  Eliowich,  17  Am.  B.  R.  419  1198 
In  re  Elmira  Steel  Co.,  5  Am. 

B.  R.  484 1096,  1178 

In  re  Elsasser,  7  Am.  B.  R.  215  1162 
In  re  Empire  Metallic  Bedstead 

Co.,  3  Am.  B.  R.  675 1072,  1100 

In  re  Empire  Metallic  Bedstead 

Co.,  1  Am.  B.  K  136 1086 

In  re  Em  rich,  4  Am.  B.  R.  89. .  1189 
In  re  Emslie,  4  Am.  B.  R.  126. 

1097,    1098,    1120,  1222 
In  re  Engle,  5  Am.  B.  R.  372. . 

1112,  1143,  1178 
In  re  English,  11  Am.  6.  R.  674  1221 
In  re  Epstein,  6  Am.  B.  R.  60. 

1194,  1196 
In  re  Estes,  6  Fed.  60  ..68,  733,  740 
In  re  Evans,  8  Am.  B.  R.  730. .  1202 
In  re  Falconer,  6  Am.  B.  R.  657  1202 
In  re   Falls  City   Shirt  Co.,  3 

Am.  B.  R.  437 1121 

In  re  Feeny,   1  Hask.    (U.  S.) 

304 1046 

In  re  Fellerath,  2  Am.  B.  R.  40  1141 
In  re   Ferguson,   2    Am.  B.  R. 

686 1098 

On  re  Feuerlicht,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

660 1162 

In  re  Filer,  6  Am.  B.  A.  332. . .   1088 
In  re  First  Nat.  Bank  of  Can- 
ton, 14  Am.  B.  R.  180 

1114,  1117,  1124,  1137 
In  r«  First  Nat.  Baiik  of  Louis- 
ville, 18  Am.  B.  R.  766 1168 

In  re  Fisher,  25  Or.  64 537 

In  re  Fisher,  16  Am.  B.  R.  662  662 
In  re  Fisher,  3  Am.  B.  R.  406.  1189 
In  re  Fitchard,  4  Am.  B.  R.  609  1070 
In  re  Fixen,  4  Am.  B.  R.  10. . .  1157 
In  re  Fixen  &  Co.,  2  Am.  B.  R. 

822 1212 

In  re  Flanders,  14  Am.  B.  R.27  1193 
In  re  Flint  Hill  Stone  &  Con- 
struction Co.,   18  Am.  B.  R. 

1083,  1090 
In  re  Flynn  &  Co.,  11  Am.  B. 

R.  318  1216 

In  re  Forbes,  7  Am.  B.  R.  42. .  1188 
In  re  Fortunato,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

630 1230 

In  re  Fobs,  17  Am.  B.  R.  439. . .  1128 
In    re    Foster,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 


PAGE 

4,964 1153 

In  re  Francis  Valentine  Co.,  2 

Am.  B.  R.  188 1185 

In  re  Francis- Valentine  Co.,  2 

Am.  B.  R.  522    1213 

In  re  Franklin,   18  Am.  B.  R. 

218 1120,  1180 

In  re  Franklin,  6  Am.  B.  R.  286  1233 
In  re  Franklin  Lumber  Co.,  17 

Am.  B.  R.  443 1192 

In  re  Franks,  2  Am.  B.  R.  634 

1213,  1227,  1234 
In  re  Frasder,  9  Am.  B.  R.  21 

1126,  1192 
In  re  Freeman,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

6,082 1108 

In  re  Friedman,  18  Am.  B.  R. 

712 1127 

In  re  Friedman,   1  Am.  B.  R. 

510 1141 

In  re  Fritz,  160  Pa.  St.  166. . .     971 
In  re  Froelich  RuM>er  Refining 

Co.,  9  Am.  B.  R.  65  ...1195,  1196 
In  re  Fulton,  18  Am.  B.  R.  591  1179 
In  re  Gallagher,  19  N.  B.  R.  224  117 
In  re  Gallagher,  6  Am.  B.   R. 

256 1097 

In  re  Galt^  13  Am.  B.  R.  675. . 

1193,  1194,  1197 
In  re  Gait,  9  Am.  B.  R.  632. . . 
In  re  Gany,  4  Am.  B.  R.  676. .   1194 
In  re  Garcewich,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

149 1137,  1192 

In  re  Gardner,  5  Am.  B.  R.  432.  1187 
In  re  Gamer,  6  Am.  B.  R.  596. 

1186,  1188 
In  re  Gaylord,  7  Am.  B.  R.  196.  1190 
In  re  Gearing,  4  Ont.  App.  173  113 
In  re  Geister,  3  Am.  B.  R.  228.  1230 
In  re  Georgia  Handle  Co.,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  472   1124 

In  re  Geo.  W.  McKay,   1  Am. 

B.  R.  292   1137 

In  re  Gerdes,  4  Am.  B.  R.  346. .   1228 
In  re  Gesas  (C.  C.  A.),  16  Am. 

B.  R.  872   1164 

In  re  Gift,  12  Am.  B.  R.  244. .   1107 
In  re  Gilbert,  8  Am.  B.  R.  101 . 

1073,   1089,  1093,  llOO 
In  re  Gillette,  6  Am.  B.  R.  119 

1087,  1159 
In  re  Girdes,  4  Am.  B.  R.  346.  1221 
In    re    Globe    Cycle    Works,    2 

Am.   B.  R.  447 1226 

In  re  Gold,  etc.,  Co.,  Fed.  Cas. 

5,516 1143 

In  re  Goldman,  4  Am.   B.  R. 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxlv 


PAGS 

100  .  .  .- 1186 

In  re  Goldschmidt,  3  Ben. 

(U.  S.)  379  1084,  1085 

In  re  Goodhile,   12  Am.  B.  R. 

374 1167 

In  re  Goodwin,  2  N.  B.  N.  Rep. 

446 1174 

In  re  Gordon,  49  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

370 298 

In  re  Gosch,  12  Am.  B.  R.  149.  1117 
In  re  Gosch,  9  Am.  B.  R.  613. .  1121 
In  re  Grahs,  1  Am.  B.  R.  465 . . 

1130,  1138 
In   re   Granite   City   Bank,    14 

Am.  B.  R.  404 1210 

In  re  Grant,  5  Am.  B.  R.  837 . .  1089 
In  re  Gray,  3  Am.  B.  R.  647. . 

1099,  1139,  1171,  1183 
1184,  1205,  1222 
In  re  Gray,  47  App.  Div.  (N. 

y.)  564 1127 

In  re  Greater  American  Expo- 
sition Co.,  4  Am.  B.  R.  486. .   1230  . 
In  re  Great  Western  Mfg.  Co., 

18  Am.  B.  R.  259 

1153,  1179,  1180 
In  re  Green,  6  Am.  B.  R.  270 . . 

1216,  1218 
In  re  Green  ft  Rogers,  5  Am. 

B.  R.  848   1099 

In  re  Greene,  13  Am.  B.  R.  504.  1114 
In  re  Greenfields'  Estate,  14  Pa. 

St  489   340,     351 

In  re  Grevy,  7  Am.  B.  R.  459. .  1120 
In  re  Griffith,  1  N.  B.  N.  546. .  1222 
In   re  Grinnell,   Fed.   Cas.  No. 

5,829 1138 

In  re  Grist,  1  Am.  B.  R.  89. . .  1229 
In  re  Groetringer,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

399 1186 

In  re  Gross'  Estate,  6  Pa.  Co. 

Ct-  113   95,  281,     284 

In  re  Grundy,  17  Am.  B.  R.  206 

In  re  Gutman,  8  Am.  B.  R.  252  1224 

In  re  Gutwillig,   1  Am.  B.   R. 

78 1073,  1099,  1108,  1139 

In  re  G'^twilHijr,   1  Am.   B.   R. 

388  ..1082,  1085,  1099,  1225,  1228 
In  re  Habegger,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

198 1174 

In  re  Hadden  Rodee  Co.,  13  Am. 

B.  R.  604  1216 

In  re  Haensell,  1  Am.  B.  R.  286 

1198,  1234 
In  re  Hall,  4  Am.  B.  R.  671 .. . 

1078,  1150 
In  re  Hamilton,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

J 


PAGE 

643 1191 

In  re  Hamilton  Furniture,  etc., 

Co.,  9  Am,  B.  R.  65..., 1196,  1196 
In  re  Hammond,  1  Lowell    (U. 

S.),  381    1088 

In  re   Hannahs,   Fed.   Cas.  No. 

6,032 1108,  1186 

In   re  Hapgood,   Fed.   Cas.  No. 

6,044 1092 

In  re  Hark  Bros.,  14  Am.  B.  R. 

400 1085 

In  re  Harper,  5  Am.  B.  R.  667 

1095,  1097 
In  re  Harper  &  Bros.,  3  Am.  B. 

R.  804   1085,  1100,  1108 

In  re  Harpke,  8  Am.  B.  R.  535.  1162 
In  re  Harris,  2  Am.  B.  R.  359.  1179 
In  re  Harrison,  2  N.  B.  N.  Rep. 

541 1118 

In  re  Haupt  Bros.,  18  Am.  B. 

R.  585 1140 

In  re  Harvey,  13  Ch.  D.  216. . .  144 
In    re    Hawley-Dreser    Co.,    13 

Am.  B.  R.  94 1182 

In  re  Haynes,  10  Am.  B.  R.  715  1143 
In  re  H.  C.  King  Co.,  7  Am.  B. 

In  re  Head,  7  Am.  B.  R.  656. .  1134 
In  re  Heckman,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

500 1221 

In  re  Heckathom,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

467 1197 

In  re  Hedley,  19  Am.  B.  R.  409  1070 
In  re  Henkel,  2  Sawy.    (U.  S.) 

305 169 

In  re  Hemick,  1  Am.  B.  R.  713.  1191 
In     re     Hercular     Atkin     Co., 

Limited,  13  Am.  B.  R.  369..  1101 
In  re  Hess,  14  Am.  B.  R.  539. .  1181 
In    re    Hester,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

6,437 1188 

In  re  H.  G.  Andrea  Co.,    117 

Fed.  561    : .     797 

In  re  Higgins,  3  Am.  B.  R.  364 

1142,  1144 

In  re  Hildebrant,  10  Am.  B.  R. 

184 1196 

In  re  Hill,  16  Am.  B.  R.  499.. 

1117,  1126,  1130,  1134 
In  re  Hill  Co.^  12  Am.  B.  R. 

221 1169,  1196 

In  re  Hill  (Vt.),  8  Am.  B.  R. 

302 1118 

In  re  Hilton,  4  Am.  B.  R.  774.  1225 
In  re  Hines,  16  Am.  B.  R.  495 

612,  978,  1153,  1159,  1161,  1165 
In  re  Hines,  16  Am.  B.  R.  295 


cxlvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

1073,   1074,  1076 
In  re  Hinsdale,  7  Am.  B.  R.  85.   1192 

In  re  Hoadley,  3  Am.  B.  R.  780.  1187 

In  re  Hobbs,  16  Am.  B.  R.  544 

1210,  1218 
In   re   Holland    (1902),    2    Ch. 

360..8,  148,  327,  570,  571,  915,  1118 
In  re  Holloway,    1   Am.   B.  R. 

659 1228 

In  re  Home,  54  L.  T.  Rep.  N. 

S.  301    142 

In   re  Home  Discount  Co.,    17 

Am.  B.   R.   168 1179,  1182 

In  re  Hoover,  12  Montg.  Co.,  L. 

Rep.  (Pa.)  113 311 

In  re  HouBton,  2  Am.  3.  R.  107.  1229 

In   re  Howard,    10  Am.   B.  R. 

601 1216 

In  re  Howland,  6  Am.  B.  R.  495 

1137,  1192 
In  re  Hugill  Mercantile  Co.,  3 

Am.  B.  R.  686 1131,  1136 

In  re  Hull,  8  Am.  B.  R.  302. . .   1137 

In  re  Hull,  10  Pa.  Dist.  661 .. .   1069 

In  re  Hummers  Estate,  161  Pa. 

St.  215    641 

In  re  Hunt,   12  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

6,881 258,  1165 

In   re   Hussman,    12    Fed.    Cas. 

No.  6,951    :  1082,  1088 

In  re  Huston,  7  Am.  B.  R.  92. .   1121 
In    re    Hutto,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

6,960 1120 

In  re  Hymes,  etc.,  Co.,  12  Am. 

B.   R.   477    1143 

In  re   International   Mahogany 

Co.,  16  Am.  B.  R.  797 1156 

In  re  Jacobs,  1  Am.  B.  R.  518. . 

1128,  1165 
In  re  Jackson,  2  Am.  B.  R.  501 .  1230 
In  re  Jamison,  183  Pa.  St.  219.  369 
In  re  Jersey  Island  Packing  Co., 

14  Am.  B.  R.  689 1199 

In  re  Jewett,  3  Fed.  503 569 

In  re  Johann,  2  Biss.  (U.  S.) 

139 1139 

In  re  John  J.   Coffey,    19   Am. 

B.  R.  148...  1070,  1166,  1161,  1166 
In  re  Johnson,  118  Fed.  312., .  165 
In  re  Johnson,  6  Am.  B.  R.  202.  1146 
In  re  Jones,  10  Am.  B.  R.  513. .  1173 
'  In  re  Jones,  9  Am.  B.  R.  262. .  1158 
In  re  Jones,  4  Am.  B.  R.  563. .   1154 

In  re  Jones,  116  Fed.  431 1126 

In  re  Jones,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  7,446 .1108 
In  re  Jordan,  13  Fed.  Cas.  No. 


PAOB 

7,511 124.  126,     127 

In  re  Jordan,  0  Mete.    (Mass.) 
292 14 

In  re  Josephson,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

423 1117 

In  re  Kahley,  14  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

7,593 258 

In  re  Kahn,  65  Minn.  509 87 

In  re  Kane,  12  Am.  B.  R.  444. .  1214 
In  re  Kaplan,  16  Am.  B.  R.  267  1222 
In  re  Kams,  16  Am.  B.  R.  841.  1179 
In  re  Karstorp's  Estate,  158  Pa. 

St.  30    689 

In    re    Kasson,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

7,617 1098 

In  re  Kaupisch  Creamery  Co.,  5 

Am.  B.  R.  790 1147 

In  re  Keach,  14  R.  I.  671 118 

In  re  Keiler,  Fed.  Cas.  7,647..  1231 
In  re  Keller,  6  Am.  B.  R.  334. . 

1161,  1173 
In  re  Keller,  6  Am.  B.  R.  621. .  1162 
In  re  Kellogg,  104  N.  Y.  648. .  283 
In  re  Kellogg,  10  Am.  B.  R.  7. .  1218 
In  re  Kellogg,  7  Am.  B.  R.  623 

1185,  1218 
In  re  Kellogg,  7  Am.  B.  R.  270.  1192 
In  re  Kellogg.  6  Am.  B.  R.  389.  1130 
In  re  Kelly,  1  Am.  B.  R,  306..  1213 
In  re  Kelly  Dry  Goods   Co.,    4 

Am.   B.   R.   528 1104 

In  re  Kemp,  4  Am.  B.  R.  242. . 

1141,  1144 
In  re  Kenney,  5  Am.  B.  R.  355. 

1142,  1227 
In  re  Kenney,  3  Am.  B.  R.  353. 

1118,  1162 
In  re  Kenney,  2  Am.  B.  R.  494. 

1186,  1226 
In  re  Kern's  Estate,  4  Pa.  Dist. 

R.  73 377 

In  re  Kersten,  6  Am.  B.  R.  516.  1105 

In  re  Ketcham,  1  Fed.  840 117 

In  re  Kimball,  3  Am.  B.  R.  161. 

1186  1227 
In  re  Kindt,  4  Am.  B.  R.  148. .'  1154 
In  re  Kindt,  2  N.  B.  N.  R.  369.  1222 
In   re   Kirbv- Dennis,  2  Am.   B. 

R.  402.  .' 1121 

In  re  Kirtland,  10  Blatchf.   (U. 

S.)   515 1072 

In  re  Klapholz.  7  Am.  B.  R.  703  1120 
In   re  Kleinhaus,   7   Am.   B.  R. 

604 1224 

In  re  Kletehka,    1    Am.   B.    R. 

479. 1225 

In  re,  Klingam&n,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

254 1137 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxlvii 


PAGE 

In    re  Knickerbocker,    10    Am. 

B.  R.  381    1214 

In  re  Knigfat^  11  Am.  B.  R.  1. . 

1103,  1126,  1222 
In  re  Knopf,  16  Am.  B.  R.  432. 

622 1131,  1165 

In  re  Kohn.  2  N.  B.  N.  Rep.  367.  1162 

tn  re  Kolin,  13  Am.  B.  R.  531..  1180 

In  re  KriiiBky,  7  Am.  B.  R.  535  1230 

In  re  Kroee,  3  Am.  B.  R.  187. .  1174 

In  re  Kurte,  11  Am.  B.  R.  129.  1187 

In  re  Lackow,  14  Am.  B.  R.  514  1093 
In  re  Lady  Bryon  Mining  Co., 

Fed.  Om.  7,980   1232 

In  re  Lake,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  7.992. 

1179,  1206 
In  re  Lane  Fox,  2  Q.  6.  508. . . 

188,  340 

In  re  Lange,  3  Am.  B.  R.  231 . .  1162 

In  re  Lange,  1  Am.  B.  R.  189.  1201 
In    re  Laplum   Condensed  Milk 

Co.,  16  Am-  B.  R.  729 1178 

In   re  Leeds  Woolen  Mills,    12 

Am.  B.  R.   136    1218 

In  re  Legg,  96  Fed.  806 1113 

In  re  Leigh  Broe.,  2  Am.  B.  R. 

606 1113,  1137,  1192 

In  re  Lemmon,  7  Am.  B.  R.  291  1221 

In  re  Lesser,  187  U.  S.  165 1142 

In  re  Lesser,  5  Am.  B.  R.  320. 

1226,  1227 

In  re  Lesser,  5  Am.  B.  R.  326.  1145 
In  re  Lesser,  5  Am.  B.  R.  815. 

1141,  1225 

In  re  Lesser,  3  Am.  B.  R.  758. .  1231 

In  re  Levin,  11  Am.  B.  R.  446.  1193 

In  re  Lewin.  4  Am.  6.  R.  632.  1174 
In  re  Liberty  Silk  Co.,  18  Am. 

B.  R.  582 1125 

In  re  Lillington  Lumber  Co.,  13 

Am.   B.   R.    153 1120,  1124 

In  re  Lines,  13  Am.  B.  R.  318.  1228 

In  re  Linton,  7  Am.  B.  R.  676.  1152 

In  re  Little,  6  Am.  B.  R.  681.  1162 
In  re  Little  River  Lumber  Co., 

1  Am.  B.  R.  483 1134 

In  re  Locke,  1  Lowell   (U.  S.y, 

293 1072 

In  re  Long,  8  Am.  B.  R.  591 .. .  1202 
In  re  Longbottom,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

437 1130 

In  re  Lowenaohn,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

79 1120 

In  re  Lyon,  10  Am.  6.  R.  25. . .  1159 

In  re  Lyon,  7  Am.  B.  R.  412..  1163 
In  re  Luckenbill,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

455 1186 

In   re   Lukens,    14   Am.   B.   R. 


PAGE 

683 1117 

In  re  Macon  Grocery  Co.,  8  Am. 

B.  R.  751 1218 

In  re  Macon  Sash  &   Door  Co., 

7  Am.  B.  R.  66 

1071,  1100,  1108,  1216 
In  re  Maine  Construction  &  Dry 

Dock  Co.,  14  Am.  B.  R.  466.  1135 
In  re  Mallor^,  Fed.  Cas.  8,990.  1223 
In  re  Manning,   10  Am.  B.   R. 

500 1171 

In  re  Mapleback,  4  Ch.  Div.  150  503 
In  re  Marine,  etc.,  Co.,  16  Am. 

B.  R.  325 1123 

tn  re  Marine  Machine    Co.^    1 

Am.  B.  R.  421 1104 

In  re  Marks,  15  Am.  B.  R.  457.  1081 
In  re  Marsh,  8  Am.  B.  R.  576.  1187 
In  re  Martin-Vernon  Music  Co., 

13  Am.  B.  R.  276 1194 

In  re  Matthews,  6  Am.  B.  R.  96. 

1121,  1124 

In  re  May,  5  Am.  B.  R.  1 

1186,  1189 

In  re  May,  2  Fed.  845 195 

In  re  Mayer,  3  Am.  B.  R.  533.  11:^3 
In  re  Mendelsohn,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

9,420 1098 

In  re  Merchants'  Ins.  Co.,  Fed. 

Cas.   No.   9,441    1104 

In  re  Mero,  12  Am.  B.  R.  171 . . 

1085,   1098,   1120,  1124 
In  re  Mersman,  7  Am.  B.  R.  46. 

1154,  1170,  1171,  1223 
In  re  Mertens,    12   Am.   B.   R. 

608 * 1194 

In    re    Metcalf,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

4,494 1230 

In  re  Metzger,  etc.,  Co.,  8  Am. 

B.  R.  308   1163 

In   re   Metzger,    Fed.    Oas.  No. 

9,510 1118 

In  re  Meyer,  5  Am.  B.  R.  593. .  1179 
In  re  Meyer,  3  Am.  B.  R.  559. .  1100 
In  re  Meyers,  1  Am.  B.  R.  347. 

1185,  1230 
In  re  Meyers,  1  Am.  B.  R.  1 . . . 

1095,  1096 

In  re  Milgraum  v.  Ost,  12  Am. 

B.  R.  306   1108 

In  re  Miller,  14  Am.  B.  R.  439. 

1185,  1193 
In  re  Miller,  14  Am.  B.  R.  329.  1103 
In  re  Miller,  5  Am.  B.  R.  140.. 

1095,  1097 
In   re   Mingo   Valley   Creamery 

Assoc.,  4  Am.  B.  R.  67 1082 

In   re   Moench  &   Sons  Co.,    10 


cxlviii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOl 

Am.  B.  R.   666 1104 

In  re  Montage,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

18 1156 

In  re   Montgomery,    Fed.    Cas. 

No.  9,732 1158 

In  re  Moody,  14  Am.  B.  R.  272.  1131 
In  re  Moody,  12  Am.  B.  R.  718.  1219 
In  re  Moore,  6  Am.  6.  R.  175. . 

1112,  1142 
In  re  Moore,  6  Am.  6.  R.  151.  1218 
In  re  Moroney,  21  L.  R.  Ir.  27.  1057 
In  re  Morrow,  13  Am.  B.  R.  392  1173 
In  re  Morrow,  12  Am.  B.  R.  615  1118 
In  re  Morse,   17   Fed.  Cas.  No. 

9,851 312 

In  re  Moeier,  7  Am.  B.  R.  268.  1186 
In  re  Moyer.  1  Am.  B.  R.  577.  1095 
In  re  M.  Solomon  &  Oo.,  2   ... 

B.  N.  Rep.  460 1228 

In  re  Mullen,  4  Am.  B.  R.  224. 

1204,  1205 
In   re   Muller,   Deady    (U.   S.), 

613 1072 

In  re  Mueller,  Fed.  Cas.  9,912.  1073 
In  re  Muller,  118  Cal.  432....  487 
In  re  Mulligan,  9  Am.  B.  R.  8.  1187 
In  re  Muncie  Pulp  Co.,  18  Am. 

B.  R.  68    1125 

In  re  Mundle,  14  Am.  B.  R.  680  1217 
In  re  Murphy,  3  Am.  B.  R.  499.  1207 
In  re  Murrin,  17  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

9,968 128 

In  re  Muskoka  Lumber  Co.,  11 

Am.  B.   R.  758 1222 

In  re  Mussey,  3  Am.  B.  R.  592. 
In       re       Mutual       Mercantile 

Agency,  6  Am.  B.  R.  607 1106 

In   re   McArdle,   11    Am.   B.   R. 

358 1189 

In  re  McBride,   12   Am.  B.   R. 

81 1182 

In  re  McCallum,  7.  Am.  B.  R. 

596 1207,  1209,  1212,  1223 

In  re  McCormick,  3  Am.  B.  R. 

340 1133 

In  re  McDonald,  14  Am.  B.  R. 

797 1197 

In  re  McDonnell,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

230 1182 

In  re  McDonnell,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

92 1190 

In  re  McDonough,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

8,775 1165 

In  re  McGee,  5  Am.  B.  R.  262. . 

1091,  1094 
In  re  McHarry,  7  Am.  B.  R.  83  1186 
In  re  Mclntire,  16  Am.  B.  R.  80  1121 
In  re  Mcintosh,  18  Ajn.  B.  R. 


PAGB 

169 1156 

In  re  McKay,  1  Am.  B.  R.  292.  1192 
In  re  McKee,  1  Am  B.  R.  311 . .  1230 
In  re  McKenna,  15  Am.  B.  R.  4  1179 
In  re  McKenzie,   15  Am.  B.  R. 

679 1188 

In  re  McKibbin,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

8.859 1084,  1130 

In  re  McKown,  198  Pa.  St.  96. . 

120,  122,     376 
In  re  McLam,  3  Am.  B.  R.  245 

1128,  1129,  1130,  1151 
In  re  McMahon,  147  Fed.  658. .  1219 
Jn  re  McNamara,  2  Am.  B.  R. 

566 1182 

In  re  McNamara,  2  N.   B.  N. 

Rep.  341 1118,  1169 

In  re  Nassau,  15  Am.  B.  R.  793  1168 

In  re  Nathan,  92  Fed.  590 1229 

In  re  National  Hotel  &  Cafe  Co., 

15  Am.  B.  R.  69 1096 

In   re   Ne;tional   Valve   Co.,    15 

Am,  B.  R.  524 1124 

In  re  Naylor  Mfg.  Co.,  14  Am. 

B.  R.  284 1193 

In  re  Neal,  14  Am.  B.  R.  550. . .  1202 
In  re  Nechamkus,  19  Am.  B.  R. 

189  .    .   1158 

In  reNeely,  5  Ana.  B.  r1  836 . .'  1226 
In  re  Nelson,  1  Am.  B.  R.  63 . . 

1092,  1095,  1171 
In  re  New,  8  Am.  B.  R.  666. . .  1162 
In  re  Newton  &  Co.,  18  Am.  B. 

R.  567 1114,  1180 

In  re  N.  Y.  Economical  Printing 

Co.,  6  Am.  B.  R.  615 Ill8 

In  re  N.  Y.  Mail,  etc.,  Co.,  Fed. 

Cas.  No.  10,209 1120,  1124 

In  re  New  York,  etc.,  Water  Co., 

3  Am.  B.  R.  508 1072 

In  re  New  York  Wheel  Works, 

13  Am.  B.  R.  61 1214 

In  re  Noel,  14  Am.  B.  R.  715. . 

1124,  1156,  1158 
In  re  Noll,  2  N.  B.  N.  R.  789. . 

1202,  1203 
In  re  North  Carolina  Car  Co., 

11  Am.  B.  R.  488 1186 

In  re  Northrop,  1  Am.  B.  R.  427 

1226,  1230 
In  re  Nusbaum,  18  Am.  B.  R. 

698 1083,  1096 

In  re  Novak,  7  Am.  B.  R.  27. .  1186 
In  re  Oconee  Milling  Co.,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  475 1124 

In  re  O'Connor,  9  Am.  B.  R.  18  1196 
In  re  O'Connor,  7  Am.  B.  R.  428 

1194,  1197 


Table  of  Cases. 


czlix 


PAGE 

In  re  0'Ck>iinor,  05  Fed.  943. . .  1141 
In  re  O'Donnell,  12  Am.  B.  R. 

621 1081,  1093 

In  re  Ogles,  1  Am.  B.  R.  671. .  1227 
In  re  Ohio,  etc.,  Co.,  2  Am.  B. 

R.  775 ,   1193 

In  re  Oleson,  7  Am.  B.  R.  22. .  1186 
In  re  Olewine,  11  Am.  B.  R.  40.  1180 
In  re  Oliver,  6  Am.  B.  R.  626. .  1173 
In  re  Ouimette,  Fed.  Gas.  No. 

10,622 1165 

In  re  Page,  107  Fed.  89 117 

In  re  Park,  4  Am.  B.  R.  432. .  1202 
In  re  Parks,  18  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

10,765 169 

In  re  Parsons,  150  Mass.  343. .  298 
In  re  Pearson,  2  Am.  B.  R.  482 

1089,  1162 
In  re  Pearson,  3  Oh.  Div.  807  • .  414 
In  re  Pease,  12  Am.  B.  R.  66. . 

1083,  1086,  1105,  1135,  1165 
In  re  Pease,  4  Am.  B.  R.  547. .  1143 
In  re  Pease,  4  Am.  B.  K  578 . . 

1178,  1179 
In  re  Pekin  Plow  Co.,  112  Fed. 

308 797 

In  re  Pekin  Plow  Co.,  7  Am.  B. 

R.  369 1118,  1136 

In  re  Perlej,  15  Am.  B.  R.  54. .  1081 
In  re  Pettingill  A  Co.,  14  Am. 

B.  R.  758 1074 

In  re  PfaflSnger,  18  Am.  B.  R. 

807 

In  re  Phelps,  3  Am.  B.  R.  396 

1126,   1163,   1172,   1205,  1223 
In    re   Pierce,    Fed.    Cas.     No. 

11,141 1108 

In  re  Piper,  2  N.  B.  N.  Rep.  7.  1151 
In  re  Pittelkow,  1  Am.  B.  R.  472 

1222,  1227,  1228 
In  re  Plant,  17  Am.  B.  K.  272. .  1161 
In  re  Platts,  6  Am.  B.  R.  568. . 

1126,  1136 
In  re  Plattsville  F.  &  M.  Co.,  17 

Am.  B.  R.  291   1180,  1219 

In  re  Poore,  15  Am.  B.  R.  407.  1192 
In  re  Poore,  15  Am.  B.  R.  174. 

1192,  1197 
In  re  Porter,  6  Am.  B.  R.  259 

1228,1233 
In  re  Porterfield,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

11 1139,  1145 

In  re  Pratesi,  11  Am.  B.  R.  319  1124 
In  re  Press  Post  Printing'  Co., 

13  Am.  B.  R.  797 1117 

In  re  Press-Post  Publishing  Co., 

13  Am.  B.  R.  103 1192 


PAOB 

In  re  Price,  1  Am.  B.  R.  606 . .  1226 
In  re  Prime,  19  N.  Y.  Supp.  16  1035 
In  re  Proctor,  6  Am.  B.  R.  660.  1162 
In  re  Quackenbush,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

274 1087 

In    re    Queensland    Mercantile, 

etc.,  Co.,  1  Ch.  536 88 

In  re  Rabenau  (Mo.),  9  Am.  B. 

R.  180 1117 

In  re  Read,  7  Am.  B.  R.  111. .  1162 
In  re  Reichman,  1  Am.  B.  R.  17  1095 

In  re  Reis,  2  K.  B.  769 

323,  582,     908 
In  re  Remington  Auto  &  Motor 

Co.,  9  Am.  B.  R.  533 1225 

In  re  Rennie,  2  Am.  B.  R.  182. .  1179 
In  re  Reynolds,  18  Am.  B.  R. 

668 1155 

In  re  Rhoads,  3  Am.  B.  R.  380.  lUl 
In  re  Richard,  4  Am.  B.  R.  700  1187 
In  re  Richards,  2  Am.  B.  R.  518 

1141,  1157,  1165 
In  re  Ridler,  22  Ch.  D.  74.  .268,  342 
In  re  Riddle's  Sons,  10  Am.  6. 

R.  204 1162 

In  re  Riker,  5  Am.  B.  R.  720. .  1228 
In   re  Roalswick,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

752 1194 

In  re  Robinson  &  Smith  (C.  C. 

A.),  18  Am.  B.  R.  563 1122 

In  re  Rodcford,  etc.,  Co.,  Fed. 

Cas.  No.  11,978 1223 

In  re  Rochford,  10  Am.  B.  R.  608 

1214,  1218,  1219 
In  re  Rockland,  1  Am.  B.  R.  272  1213 
In  re  Rodgers,  125  Fed.  169..  528 
In  re  Rodgers,  11  Am.  B.  R.  79 

1183,  1204,  1218 
In  re  Rogers  Milling  Cd.   4  Am. 

B.  R.  540 1074 

In  re  Rogers,  1  Am.  B.  R.  541. .  1225 
In  re  Rf^rers,  13  Am.  B.  R.  75.  1123 
In  re  Rollins  Gold  &  Silver  Min. 

Co.,  4  Am.  B.  R.  327 1105 

In  re  Romanow,   1   Am.   B.   R. 

461 1140 

In   re   Rome   Planing   Mills,    3 

Am.  B.  R.  766 1074,  1089,  1106 

In  re  Rome  Planing  Mill,  3  Am. 

B.  R.  123..  1089,   1094,   1095,  1097 
In  re  Ronk,  7  Am.  B.  R.  31 . . 

1134,  1154 
In  re  Rooney,  6  Am.  B.  R.  478.  1186 
In  re  Rose,  14  Am.  B.  R.  345.  1196 
In  re  Rosenberg,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

624 , . . . .   1213 


cl 


Table  of  Casbs. 


PAGE 

In  re  Rosenberg,  7  Am.  B.  R. 

316 1077,  1164 

In  re  Rosenberg,  Fed.  Caa.  No. 

12,054 1178,  1225,  1230 

In   re  Rosenfeld,   20  Fed.   Cas. 

No.  12,067 1083 

In  re  Roeenthal,  5  Am.   B.  R. 

799 1233 

In  re  Rotiischiid,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

43 , 1202 

In  re  Rothchild,  5  Am.  B.   R. 

587 1169 

In  re  Royea,  16  Am.  B.  R.  141.  1187 
In  re  Rudwick,  4  Am.  B.  R.  531  1185 
In  re  Ruppel,  3  Am.  B.  R.  233.  1121 
In  re  Russell,  3  Am.  B.  R.  658 

1170 

1194,  1197,  1221.  1222,  1224,  1226 
In  re  Ryan,  Fed.  Cas.  Na 

12,182 1223 

In  re  Ryan,  5  Am.  B.  R.  396. .  1173 
In  re  Sabin,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  12,195  1210 
In  re  Sabine,  1  Am.  B.  R.  315. 

1227,  1228 
In  re  Salmon,  16  Am.  B.  R.  122 

1082,  1101 
In  re  Sanderlin,  6  Am.   B.  R. 

384 1158 

In  re  Sanderson,  18  Am.  B.  R. 

101 ,.   1191 

In  re  Sanford,  21  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

12,310 1083 

In   re   San  Qabriel   Sanitarium 

Co.,  7  Am.   B.  R.   206 

1217,  1224,  1228 
In   re  Sant  Qabriel   Sanitarium 

Co.,  4  Am.  B.  R.  197 1228 

In  re  SauthoflF,  8  Biss.   (U.  S.) 

35 168,     169 

In  re  Sawyer,  12  Am.  B.  R.  289  1134 
In  re  Schaeffer,  5  Am.  B.  R.  248  1188 
In   re   Scheerman,   2   N.   B.   B. 

Rep.  118 1199 

In  re  Scheld,  5  Am.  B.  R  102.  1201 
In  re  Scheinbaum,  5  Am.  B.  R. 

187 1216,  1217,  1218 

In  re  Schermerhorn,  16  Am.  B. 

R.  507 1215 

In  re  Sehenck,  8  Am.  B.  R.  727.  1130 
In  re  Schenekein,  7  Am.  B.  R. 

162 1163 

In  re  Scherber,   12  Am.   B.   R. 

616 1214 

In  re  Schlesinger,  3  Am.  B.  R. 

342 1133 

In  re  Schmitt,  6  Am,  B.  R.  150.  1119 
In  re  Schotield,   17  Am.   B.  R. 


PAcns 

916 1192 

In  re  Sciholtz,  5  Am.  B.  R.  782  1071 
In  re  Scott,  21   Fed.  Cds.   No. 

12,518 1068 

In  re  Sechler,  5  Am.  B.  R.  579  1173 
In  re  Seebold,  5  Am.  B.  R.  368. 

1218,    1226,  1227 
In  re  Sentenne  &  Greene  Co.,  9 

Am.  B.  R.  648 1118,  1122 

In  re  Sewell,  7  Am.  B.  R.  133. . 

1118,  1137 
In  re  Shapiro  &  Novick,  5  Am. 

B.  R.  839 1082,  1085 

In  re  Shaw,  17  Am.  B.  R.  196. . 

1115,   1130,  1181 
In  re  Shenberger,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

487.  .• 1186 

In  re  Sheukein,  7  Am.  B.  R.  162  1145 
In  re  Shepherd,  6  Am.  B.  R.  725  1131 
In  re  Sheridan,  3  Am.  B.  R.  554 

1153,  1162 
In  re  Shirley,  112  Fed.  301 ... . 

562,  1119 
In  re  Shirley,  7  Am.  B.  R.  299  1136 
In  re  Shoemaker,  7  Am.  B.  R. 

437 1227 

In  re  Shoesmith,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

645 1075 

In  re  Shuts  Printing,  etc.,  Co., 

14  Am.  B.  R.  -668 1192 

In  re  Sievers,  1  Am.  B.  R.  117 

1071,  1099,  1222 
In  re  Silberhom,  5  Am.  B.  R. 

568 1216 

In  re  Silverman,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

12,855 1091 

In  re  Simpson  Mfg.  Co.,  12  Am. 

B.  R.  212 1196 

In  re  Sims,  Fed.  Cas.  No.  12,888  1174 
In  re  Skinner,  3  Am.  B.  R.  163 

1138  1233 
In  re  Slingluff,  5  Am.  B.  R.  76  1191 
In  re  Sloan,  4  Am.  B.  R.  356..  1157 
In  re  Smith,  9  Am.  B.  R.  603. .  1228 
In  re  Smith,  9  Am.  B.  R  590. .  1226 
In  re  Smith,  3  Am.  B.  R.  95. .  1138 
In  re  Smith,  2  Am.  B.  R.  9. . .  1071 
In  re  Smith,  4  Ben.   (U.  S.)    1.   1084 

In  re  Smith,  9  Fed.  592 283 

In  re  Smith  &  Nixon  Piano  Co., 

17  Am.  B.  R.  636 1181 

In  re  Snell,  11  Am.  B.  R.  35..  Xl45 
In  re  Soldosky,  7  Am.  B.  R. 

123 1173 

In  re  Soudans  Mfg.  Co.,  8  Am. 

B.  R.  45... 1120,  1129,  1135,  1136 
In  re  Soudan  Mfg.  Co.,  113 


Table  of  Cases. 


cli 


PAGE 

Fed.  804   437 

In  re  Southern,  etc.,  Co.,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  633    1173 

In  re  Southern  Loan  &  Trust 

Co.,  3  Am.  B.  R.  9 1226 

In  re  Spalding,   14  Am.   B.  R. 

129 1103 

In  re  Spalding,  139  Fed.  244.. 

1073,  1103 
In  re  Spaulding,  134  Fed.  507.  1073 
In  re  Spitzer,  12  Am.  B.  R.  346.  1222 
In  re  St.  Albans  Foundry  Ck>., 

4  Am.  B.  R.  594 1225,  1230 

In  re  St.  John,  5  Am.  B.  R.  190.  1186 
In  re  Standard  Laundry  Co.,  8 

Am.  B.  R.  638 1120,  1134 

In  re  Standard  Laundry  Co.,  7 

Am.  B.  R.  254 1180 

In   re   Standard    Steel   Casting 

Co.,  10  Am.  B.  R.  694 1098 

In  re  Steam  Vehicle  Co.,  10  Am. 

B.  R.  386   1168 

In  re  Steege,  8  Am.  B.  R.  516. .  1077 
In  re  Steers  Lumber  Co.,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  315 1077,  1173 

In  re  Stein,  1  Am.  B.  R.  662 . .  1223 
In  re  Steininger  Mercantile  Co., 

6  Am.  B.  R.  68 1127,  1131 

In  re  Steuer,  6  Am.  B.  R.  46. . .  1217 
In  re  Stevenson,  2  Ank  B.  R.  66  1153 
In  re  Stoner,  6  Am.  B.  R.  402.  11.79 
In  re  Storck  Lumber  Co.,  8 

Am.  B.  R.  86 1071,  1101 

In  re  Storm,  4  Am.  B.  R.  601 . . 

1101,  1143 
In  re  Stout,  6  Am.  B.  R.  606. .  1143 

In  re  Strenz,  8  Fed.  311 674 

In  re  Strike,  1  Bland  (Md.), 

67 699,  700,  1028 

In  re  Stuyvesant  Bank,  49  How. 

Pr.  (N.  Y.)   133 1112 

In  re  Sullivan,  16  Am.  B.  R.  87.  1200 
In  re  Sullivan,  2  Am.  B.  R.  30.  1230 
In  re  Sutherland,  6  Biss.    (U. 

S.)   626   117 

In  re  Sweet,  20  R.  I.  667 712 

In  re  Swift,  7  Am.  B.  R.  374. . 

1162,  1186,  1186 
In  re  Swift,  6  Am.  B.  R.  232. .  1186 
In  re  Taft,  13  Am.  B.  R.  417. .  1187 
In  re  Talbott,  8  Am.  B.  R.  427 .  1202 
In  re  Tanner,  6  Am.  B.  R.  196.  1173 
In  re  Tatem,  6  Am.  B.  R.  426. . 

1118,  1137 
In  re  Taylor,  4  Am.  B.  R.  516. .    1106 

In  re  Taylor,  96  Fed.  956 1130 

In  re  Teachout,  16  Mich.  346. .   1063 


PAQE 

In  re  Teague,  2  Am.  B.  R.  168.  1127 
In  re  Terrill,  4  Am.  B.  R.  146 . . 

1072,  1163 
In  re   Teschmacher  &  Mrazay, 

11  Am.  B.  R.  547 1212,  1214 

In  re  Tetley,  68  L.  J.  Q.  B.  Ill  328 
In  re  Thomas,  4  Am.  B.  R.  571 

1095,  1097 
In  re  Thompson's  Sons,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  663   1173 

In  re  Tice^  15  Am.  B.  R.  97 . . 

1192,  1197 

In  re  Tice,  139  Fed.  62 417 

In  re  Tiffany,  17  Am.  B.  R.  296  1108 
In  re  Tiffany,  13  Am.  B.  R.  310  1146 
In  re  Tilden,  1  Am.  B.  R.  300.  1203 
In  re  Tollett,  5  Am.  B.  R.  606 

1182,  1202 
In  re  Tollett,  2  N.  B.  N.  Rep. 

1098 1174 

In  re  Tomlinson  Co.,  18  Am.  B. 

R.  691   1099 

In  re  Tonawanda  Street  Planing 

Mill,  6  Am.  B.  R.  38 1165 

In  re  Topliff,  8  Am.  B.  R.  241 . .  1173 
In  re  Tune,  8  Am.  B.  R.  285. . 

1141,  1213,  1217,  1227 
In  re  Twaddell,  6  Am.   B.   R. 

639 1186 

In  re  Tweed,  12  Am.  B.  R.  648 

1185,   1193,  1194 

In  re  Tweed,  131  Fed.  365 526 

In  re  Tyler,  6  Am.  B.  R.  152. .  1186 
In  re  Union,  etc.,  Co.,  7  Am.  B. 

R.  472   1162 

In  re  Van  Alstyne,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

42 1233 

In  re  Vastbinder,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

148 1226 

In  re  Vastbinder,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

118 1093 

In  re  Vetterman,  14  Am.  B.  R. 

245 1098 

In  re  Virginia  Hardwood  Mfg. 

Co.,  15  Am.  B.  R.  136 1165 

In    re    Waite,    Fed.    Cas,    No. 

17,044 1093,  1157 

In  re  Ward,  5  Am.  B.  R.  215. .  1225 
In   re   Warner,    16  Am.   B.   R. 

519 1153 

In    re   Warner,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

17,177 1157 

In  re  Waterbury  Furniture  Co., 

8  Am.  B.  R.  79 1163 

In    re   Waterloo    Organ    Co.,    9 

Am.  B.  R.  427 1216 

In  re  Watkinson,  17  Am.  B.  R. 


clii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

66 1159 

In  re  Watterson,  96  Pa.  St.  312  1188 
In  re  Waukesha  Water  Co.,  8 

Am.  B.  R.  716 1216 

In  re  Waxelbaum,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

120 1202 

In  re  Weil,  7  Am.  B.  R.  90 

1194,  1196,  1197 
In  re  Weldon's  Estate,  31  Pa. 

Super.  Ct.  47   408,     462 

In  re  Welling,  7  Am.  B.  R.  340 

1191,  1201 
In  re  Wells,  16  Am.  6.  R.  419.  1197 
In  re  Wells,  8  Am.  B.  R.  76. . .  1227 
In    re    Wells,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

17,388 1073 

In  re  Wertheimer,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

187 1163 

In  re  West,  11  Am.  B.  R.  782. .  1180 
In  re  West,  1  Am.  B.  R.  261 . . 

1086,  1101 

In  re  West  Norfolk  Lumber  Co., 

7  Am.  B.  R.  648 1120,  1162 

In  re  Wetmore,  4  Am.  B.  R.  335  1187 
In  re  White,  14  Am.  B.  R.  241 .  1085 
In  re  White,  6  Am.  B.  R.  451 . .  1202 
In  re  Wilkes,  7  Am.  B.  R.  674.  1118 
In  re  Williams,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

17,703 1075,  1130 

In   re  Williams,  I   Lowell    (U. 

8,),   406    1088 

In  re  Williams,   9  Am.   B.   R. 

741 1116,  1122,  1219 

In   re  Williams,   9   Am.  B.  R. 

731 1115 

In  re  Wilmington  Hosiery  Co., 

9  Am.  B.  R.  681 . .  1084,  1086,  1088 
In  re  Wilmington  Hosiery  Co., 

9  Am.  B.  R.  579 1105 

In  re  Wilson,  123  Fed.  20 

151,   169,  168,     169 
In  re  Winans,  6  Dem.   (N.  Y.) 

138 166 

In    re    Winn,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

17,876 1143 

In   re  Wittenberg,   etc.,   Co.,   6 

Am.  B.  R.  271    1162 

In  re  Wolcott,   15  Am.   B.   R. 

386 1202 

In  re  Wolf,  3  Am.  B.  R.  568. . .  1122 
In  re  Wolf,  3  Am.  B.  R.  565 .. . 

1083,  1092,  1134,  1168 
In  re  Wolf,  2  Am.  B.  R.  322..  1163 
In  re  Wolfskill,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

17,930 1108 

In  re  WoUock,  9  Am.  B.  R.  685.  1226 
In  re  Wood,  15  Anu  B.  R.  411 . .   1197 


PAGE 

n   re   Woodard,  2  Am.   B.   R. 

339 1186 

n  re  Woodbury,  3  Am.  B.  R. 

457 1222 

n  re  Wood  &  Malone,  9  Am. 

B.   R.   615    1186 

n  re  Woods,  13  Am.  B.  R.  240.    1179 
n  re  Wright,  2  Am.  B.  R.  364 

1118,  1155 
n  re  Wright,  3  Biss.    (U.  S.) 

359 168,     169 

n   re   Wright    Lumber    Co.,    8 

Am.  B.  R.  345 1089 

n  re  Wyly,  8  Am.  B.  R.  604. .   1165 
n    re    Wynne,    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

18,117 1178 

n  re  Young,  7  Am.  B.  R.  14. . 

1216,  1218 
n   re   Youngstrom,    18   Am.  B. 

R.  572 1179,  1181 

n  re  Yost,  9  Am.  B.  R.  153. . .   1202 
n  re  Yukon  Woolen  Co.,  2  Am. 

B.  R.  805.. 1118,   1137,    1182,  1192 
onia  County  Sav.  Bank  v.  Mc- 
Lean,  84  Mich.  625 

98,  120,  121,  122,     381 
owa   City   Bank   v.   Weber,    72 

Iowa,  137 974 

rby  V.  Henry,  16  S.  C.  617...     361 

rion  V.  Mills.  41  Tex.  310 312 

rish  V.  Bradford,  64  Iowa,  303.     381 

riah  v.  Clayes,  10  Vt.  81 705 

rish  V.  Daniels,  100  Minn.  189.     180 
ron,  etc.,   Co.   v.   Portner,    131 

Fed.  57 1073 

rvine    v.    Greever,    32    Gratt. 

(Va.)   411 265 

rvine   v.    Greever,    27    W.    Va. 

206 364 

rwin  V.  Freemen,  13  Grant  Ch. 

(Can.)  465 338 

rwin  V.  Hess,  12  Pa.  Super.  Ct. 

163 738,  789,     822 

rwin  V.   Longworth,    20    Ohio, 

681 669 

rwin  V.  McKnight,  76  Ga.  669.  1051 
rwin    Phillips   &   Co.    v.    Rule 

(Mo.  App.),  102  S.  W.  32...     259 
shell  V.  Jones  (Ark.),  88  S.  W. 

593 169 

selin    V.    Goldstein,    35    Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)   489   958 

seminger  v.  Criswell,  98  Iowa, 

382 367,  406,     972 

sgrigg  V.  Pauley,  148  Ind.  436. 

150,   160,  878.     884 
sham  V.  Schafer,  60  Barb.    (N. 

y.)   317 41,     130- 


Table  of  Cases. 


cliii 


PAGE 

lehmael  v.  Parker,  13  111.  324.  771 
Ismond  v.   Scougale,   120  Mich. 

353 937 

Israel  v.  Day,  17  Oolo.  App.  200  525 
Ivancovich  v.  Stern,  14  Nev. 

341 260 

Ives  V.  Hulce,  14  111.  App.  389.  179 
Izard    V.    Middleton,    1    Bailey 

Eq.  228  (S.  C.) 284,  840 

J 
Jack  V.  El  Paso  Fuel  Co.  (Tex. 
Civ.  App.),  38  S.  W.  1139.. 

920,     954 

Jack  V.   Greig,    27    Grant    Ch. 

(U.  C.)    6    Ill,     379 

Jack  V.  Kintz,  177  Pa.  St  571.  897 
Jackman    v.    Eau    Claire    Nat. 

Bank,   125  Wis.  465 623,     995 

Jackman   v.    Robinson,    64   Mo. 

289 820,  821,  823,     824 

Jacks  v.  Nichols,  5  N.  Y.  178. . 

878,     879 

Jacks  V.  Tunno,  3  Desaus.  Eq. 

(S.  C.)    1 284 

Jackson   v.    Andrews,    7    Wend. 

(N.   Y.)    152    1026 

Jackson  v.   Badger,   109   N.   Y. 

632 9^ 

Jackson  v.  Beach,  9  Atl.  (N.  J.) 

3g()    373 

Jackson  v.  Bowley,  C.  A  M.  97.  280 
Jackson    v.    Brush,    20    Johns. 

(N.  Y.)    5    428,  429,     445 

Jackson  v.  Cadwell,  1  Cow.  (N. 

Y.)  622 69,  197,     631 

Jackson  v.  Cleveland,  15  Mich. 

94 636 

Jackson  v.  Cornell,  1  Sand.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)    438    465,     519 

Jackson     v.     Dean,     1     Dougl. 

(Mich.)    519 621,     910 

Jackson     v.     Dutton,    3    Harr. 

(Del.)   98. 634,     649 

Jackson  v.  Forrest,  2  Barb.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)  676 682,     821 

Jackson  v.  Gamsey,   16  Johns. 

(N.  Y.)    189 635 

Jadcson  v.  Glace,  3  Okla.  143. 

581,  615,  621,     703 
Jackson  ▼.  Ham,  15  Johns.   (N. 

Y.)    261 ...98,   138,   143,     240 

Jackson  V.  Harby,  70  Tex.  410.  1000 
Jackson  v.  Hart,  11  Wend.   (^. 

Y. )   349 

Jackson    v.    Henry,    10    Johns. 

(N.  Y.)    185    .v:12,       16 

Jackson  v.  Holbrook,  36  AUnn. 


974 

94^ 
378 

651 


348 


589 
382 


982 


PAGE 

494 67,  734,  776,  748,  1035 

Jackson  v.  Leiwis,  34  S.  C.  1 . . 

275,  686,  972, 
Jackson  v.  Lewis,  32  S.  C.  693. 
Jackson  v.  Lewis,  29  S.  C.  193. 
Jackson   v.    Marshall,   5    N.    C. 

323 ...447, 

Jackson  v.  Mather,  7  Cow.    (N. 

Y.)  301 987,  1009 

Jackson  v.  McNabb,  39  Ark.  11.  1031: 
Jackson  v.  Miner,  101  111.  650. 

194,  293, 
Jackson  v.  Myers,  18  Johns.  -(N. 

Y.)    425.... 19,  200,  243, 

Jackson  v.  Parker,  9  Cow.    (N. 

Y.)    73 

Jackson  v.   Peek,  4  Wend.    (N. 

Y.)    300    265,  278,  281, 

Jackson  v.  Phyler,  38  S.  C.  496. 

349,  1052 
Jackson   v.    Robinson,    64    Mo. 

289 81& 

Jackson  v.  Sayler,  30  Ind.  App. 

72 806,  1012 

Jackson  v.  Seward,  5  Cow.   (N. 

Y.)   87 19,  182, 

Jackson  v.  Spivey,  63  N.  C.  261 
Jackson  v.  Terry,  13  Johns.  (N. 

Y.)  471. 

Jackson      v.      Timmerman,      7 

Wend.    (N.   Y.)    436 988, 

Jackson    v.     Von    Zedlitz,     136 

Mass.  342 423 

Jacob  V.  Continental  L.  Ins.  Co., 
1    Cine.    (Ohio),    Super.    Ct. 

519 129^ 

Jacob     Ehirth     Grocery     Co.     v. 

May,  78  Mo.  App.  323. . 

245,  893,     987 
Jaoobi  v.  Schloss,  47  Tenn.  385. 

67,  270,  633,  646,  732,  741,     742 
Jaooby    v.    Parkland    Distilling 

Co.,  41   Minn.  227 168 

Jacobs  V.  His  Creditors,  11  La. 

93 283 

Jacobs  V.  Jeflferson  Lumber  Co. 

(Tex.),  15  S.  W.  236 213 

Jacobs  V.  Morrison,  136  N.  Y. 

101 

Jacobs  V.  Totty,  76  Tex.  343 . . 

257, 
Jacobs   V.    Womack    (Tex.    Civ. 

App.),  26  S.  W.  431 

Jacobson  v.    Simmons,   60   Ala. 

186 

Jaoobstein  v.  Abrams,  41    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  272  

Jacquith  v.  Rowley,  9  Am.  B. 


268 

484 

589 
992 


614 
506 
514 
179 


803 


diT 


Tabi^  of  Caass. 


51 
908 


FAOB 

R.  52$. I2I6,  1233 

JFaeot  T.  Bojie,  18  How.  Pr.  (N. 

Y.I  106 811,823,     870 

Jmt^tr  w.  KftUtj,  91  N.  T.  274. 

232,  353,  578,  021 
Jaffnj  T.  GraenbaQBi,  04  lowm, 

492 525 

.Uffny  ▼.  McGehee,   107  U.  a 

361 17 

Jmffrmy  t.  Weatherbj,   12  Ohio 

Cir.  Ct.  206   

Jmffnj  ▼.  Wolfe,  4  OkU.  303.. 

321,  333,  608,  624 
jMffnj  T.  Wolfe,  I  OkbL  312.. 

461.  473.  845,  488 
JtJTnj    T.     Kathews,    120   Mo. 

317 460,  469,  472,  487,     488 

Jairrer  ▼.  McGo>iigh,  83  Ala.  202 

360.     578 
James  t.  Bird,  8  Leigh    (Va.). 

vlO.    «    .    •    •    u3.>,      04v 

Jameii    t.    Mallory,    89    S.    W. 

(Ark.)    472 

180,  273.  335,  570,     833 
Jameft   ▼.   Milwaukee,    etc.,    R. 

Co..  73  U.  S.  752 41, 

James   ▼.   Van   Duyn,   45    Wis. 

612 

James   Ooold    Co.   t.    Maheady, 

38  Hun    (N.  Y.).  294 684 

Jameson  ▼.  Dillej,  27  Ind.  App. 

429 308,     620 

JamiHon  ▼.  Bagoi.  106  Mo.  240. 

872,  921,  933,  972 
JamiNon  ▼.  Chestnut,  8  Md.  34.  821 
Jamison  ▼.  King,  50  Cal.  132..  1008 
Jamison  r.  Miller,  27  N.  J.  Eq. 

586 140 

Jamison  v.   Weaver,    87    Iowa, 

72 438 

Janney    v.    Bumes,     11    Leigh 

(Va.),  100 506 

Janney  v.  Howard,   150  Pa.  St. 

339 67,       69 

Jansen  ▼.  Lewis.  52  Neb.  556.. 

897,    910 
Janiien  v.  McQueen,    112   Mich. 

254 937 

Jansen  t.   McQueen,    105   Mich. 

199 621    1002,  1003 

Janvrln  v.  Curtis,  63  N.  H.  312. 

665,     765 
Janvrin  ▼.    Maxwell,    23    Wis, 

61 623 

Jaques  v.   Greenwood,    12   Abb. 

Pr.    (N.  Y.)    232 241 

Jaquith  v.  Alden,  189  U.  S.  78.  1157 
Jaquith  v.  Massachusetts  Bap- 


172 
439. 

Jaquith  t.  Biogen,    179 

102 917,  997,  1002 

Jarboe  t.  Jarboe,  106  Mol  Ada. 

459 7:..     156 

Jamlawaki  t.  Sibmii,  3  Brewsi. 

(P*.)  37 314,489, 

JarreU   t.   Bmbaker,    115    Ind. 

260. 

Jairis  T.  Baata,  83  Ind.  528.. 

986.  1008 
Jarris  t.  DtaTis,  53  Ky.  629... 

626»  531 
Jarris  ▼.  Prentice,  19  Onm.  272 

96,     138 
Jaseph     T.     Kronenberger,     120 

Ind.  495 745 

Jaseph   ▼.   Peofrfes^   Sav.   Bank, 

132  Ind.  39 745 

Javcox  ▼.  Caldwell,    51    X.    Y. 

395 142,  149,     361 

Jayne  v.  Hymer,  66  Neb.  785.. 

141,   146.  348,     402 
J.  B.  Brown  Co.  v.  Henderson, 

123  Ala.  623. 876 

Jefferson  Counly  Sar.  Bank  v. 

Ebom,  84  Aia.  529 309,     457 

Jefferson  County  Bank  ▼.  Hum- 

mell,  11  Colo.  App.  337 

227,  318,  419,     440 
Jeffery  y.   J.   W.   Butler  Paper 

Co.,  37  IlL  App.  96 625,  1047 

Jencks  ▼.  Alexander,   11   Paige, 

619 683 

Jenison    ▼.    Graves,    2    Bladcf. 

(Ind.)   440 110,     680 

Jenkins  v.  Bank,  106  U.  S.  571.  1235 
Jenkins    v.    Einstein,    13    Fed. 

Gas.  No.  7,265 . . , . .  .225,  234,     260 

355,  578 
Jenkins  v.  Lockard,  66  Ala. 

377 205,  206 

Jenkins  ▼.  Peace,  46  N.  C.  413. 

385,  408 
Jenks  V.  McOowan,  9  Okla.  306.  966 
Jenkyn    v.    Vaughan,    3    Drew, 

419 120,  194,     423 

Jenney  v.  Alden,  12  Mass.  375. 

110,  379 
Jennings  v.  Jennings,   104  Gal. 

160 484 

Jennings    ▼.    Frazier,    80    Pac. 

1011 581 

Jennings   v.   Howard,    80    Ind. 

214 275 

Jennings  v.  Smith,  22  Pa.   Co. 
Ct.  554 583,     719 


Tabus  of  Casbb. 


dv 


PAOS 

Jerkowski   t.   Muroo,  57    8.   C. 

SO? W2 

Jerome  t.  McGarter,  94  U.   8. 

734 1113 

Jessup  T.  Hulse,  29  Barb.    (N*. 

Y.)  B39 851,  857 

Jessup  ▼.  Johnstone,  48  N.  0. 

335 385 

Jetter  Brewing  Go.  ▼.  Soollan, 

16  Am.  B.  R.  300 1189 

Jewell  ▼.  Knight,  123  U.  8.  426. 

2,  8,  457,  512,     527 
Jewell  V.  Porter,  31  N.  H.  34. . 

634,  695 

Jewett  V.  Cook,  81  HI.  260 

232,  354,  679,  587,  703 

707,  714 
Jewett  ▼.  Downs.  6  S.  D.  319. .  462 
Jewett  V.  Guyer,  38  Vt.  209 .. . 

163,  161 
Jewett  ▼.  Noteware,  30  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  192 456,  512,     601 

Jewett  V.  Sundback,  5  8.  D.  Ill  253 
Jewett  ▼.  Tucker,  139  Mass.  566  712 
Jewett    ▼.    Warren,    12    Mass. 

300 303,  541,     542 

Jewett   Bros.    ▼.    Huffman    (N. 

D.  Sup.     Ct.),  13  Am.  B.  R. 

738 114* 

Jezeph  ▼.   Ingram,  1  Moore  C. 

P.  189 518 

J.  Grossman's  8ons  ▼.  Sanders, 

114  la.  968 818 

Jimmerson  v.  Duncanw  48  N.  C. 

537 736,     753 

John  Deere  Plow  Co.  ▼.  Sulli- 
van,  158  Mo.  440 266,     616 

Johns  y.  Jordan,  69  Kan.  771. 

60,      64 

Johnson  ▼.  Alden,  16  La.  Ann. 

505 737 

Johnson  ▼.  Alexander,  126  Ind. 

575 121,     122 

Johnson   v.   Bishop,    Fed.    Cas. 

No.  7,373 1230 

Johnson  v.  Bonfield,   19  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  300 796 

Johnson      v.      Brandis,      Smith 

(Ind.),  263 y     ^87 

Johnson    v.    Bumside,    8    Ohio 

8.  &  C.  PI.  Dec.  412 

135,  167,  340,     672 
Johnson    v.    Christie,    79    Mo. 

App.  46 113«     115 

Johnson  v.  Oohn,  30  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    189 1183 

Johnson  v.   Gushing,   16   N.  H. 

298 1^*»     ^*^ 


PAOV 

Johnson  v.  Cunningham,  1  Ala. 

249. 428 

Johnson  t.  Elkins,  90  Ky.  163. 

155,  800 
Johnson  v.  Emery    (Utah),  86 

Pac.  869 525 

Johnson  ▼.  Gibson,  116  111.  294 

814,  882 
Johnson  ▼.  Goldston  (Tenn.  Ch. 

App.),  52  S.  W.  474.... 493,  506 
Johnson  v.  Hays,  6  Ohio  St.  101  35 
Johnson  ▼.  Harrison,  6  Ky.  L. 

Eep.  591 182,  205,     396 

Johnson  v.  Harvey,  2  Pen.  &  W. 

(Pa.)   82 384,  414,     426 

Johnson  v.  Holloway,  82  111.  334  526 
Johnson  v.  Huber,  134  111.  511 

820,  821 
Johnson  ▼.  Jones,  16  Colo.  138  625 
Johnson  v.  Jones,  79  Ind.  141 . . 

60,  102,  335,  789 
Johnson  v.  Jones^  6  Kan.  App. 

756  .   .   .   : 1051 

Johnson     t.     Ingram,     9     So. 

(Miss.)  822 678,  734 

Johnson  v.  Johnson,  101  Iowa, 

405 459,  693 

Johnson  ▼.  Johnson,  36  Neb.  700  970 
Johnson  y.  Kingsland,  etc.,  Mfg. 

Co.,  38  UBL,  Ann.  248 736 

Johnson  v.  Kline,  16  Ont.   129.     144 
Johnson  v.   Lucas,   103   Va.   36 

462,  464, 

475,  493,  509,  511,  895,  962,  980 
Johnson  ▼.  Levy,  109  La.  1036. 

467,  598 
Johnson   v.    McGrew,    11    Iowa, 

151 29, 

459,  487,  492,  504,  506,  698,  618 
Johnson  v.  May,  16  Nat.  Bankr. 

Reg.  425 820 

Johnson  v.  Mayor,  30  La.  Ann. 

1203 177 

Johnson  v.  Murchison,  60  N.  C. 

286 72,  184,  294,  441,     444 

Johnson  v.  Murphy,  180  Mo.  597 

193,   279,   284,     342 
Johnson   v.    Phillips,    2    N.    Y. 

Supp.  432 71,  331,     333 

Johnson  v.  Powers,  139  U.  S.  156    781 

Johnson  v.  Riley,  41  W.  Va,  140 

95,    486 

Johnson   v.    Robinson,   68    Tex. 

399 472 

Johnson  v.  Sage  (Ida.),  44  Pac. 

641 422,  445 


clvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Johnson  ▼.  Sharp,  31  Ohio  St. 

611 653 

Johnson  v.  Skaggs,  8  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  601 179,  188,  1061 

Johnson  v.  Silsbee,  49  N.  H.  643     110 
Johnson    ▼.    Stebbins-Thompson 

Realty  Co.,  177  Mo.  681 971 

Johnson  ▼.  Sullivan,  23  Mo.  474    688 
Johnson  v.  Trust  Co.  of  Amer- 
ica, 104  Fed.  174   713,    756 

Johnson    v.    Thweatt,    18    Ala. 

741  .  .  191,  418,  717,  985,  987,  988 
Johnson  v.  Wagner,  76  Va.  687  243 
Johnson  v,  Wald,  2  Am.  B.  R. 

84 1084,  1089,  1131 

Johnson  v.  West,  43  Ala.  689.     278 
Johnson  v.  Whitwell,  24  Mass. 

71 601 

Johnson  v.  Worthington,  30  111. 

App.  617 818,     822 

Johnson  v.   Waters,   111   U.   S. 

640 62,       64 

Johnson's  Petition,  20  R.  I.  108     304 
Johnston  v.  Dick,  27  Miss.  277 . 

521,     564 
Johnston  v.  Dillard,  1  Bay  (8. 

C).  232 322 

Johnston  v.  Ferris,  12  St.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)  666  391 

Johnston  v.  Field,  62  Ind.  377     679 
Johnston  v.  Forsyth  Mercantile 

Co.,  11  Am.  B.  R.  669..  1133,  1140 
Johnston   v.    Gill,      27      Gratt 

(Va.)  68/ 359 

Johnston  v.  Hirschberg,  85  111. 

App.  47 579,     892 

Johnston  ▼.  Huff  (C.  C.  A.),  13 

Am.  B.  R.  287 1153 

Johnston  v.   Luling    Mfg.    Co. 

(Tex.  Civ.  App.),  24  S.  W. 

996 623 

Johnston  v.  Piper,  4  Minn.  192 

178,  279,  876 
Johnston  ▼.  Standard  Shoe  Co., 

6  Tex.  Civ.  App.  398.  .  882 
Johnston  v.  Straus,  26  Fed.  57.  1035 
Johnston  v.  Zane,  11  Gratt. 

(Va.)  652 188,  349 

Johnston  Harvester  Co.  v.  Cib- 

ula,  62  Iowa,  697 377,     410 

John  V.  Farwell  Co.  v.  Wright, 

38   Neb.  445    461,  490,     995 

Joiner  v.  Franklin,  80  Tenn.  420 

142,  148,     361 
Jollv  V.  Diehl  (Tex.  Civ.  App.), 

S.  W.  965 161,     163 

Jolly  V.  Kyle,  27  Or.  96 


PAGB. 

306,  384,  386,  509,  511  D7i 
Jones  V.  Basham,  16  S.  W. 

(Ky.)  88 358 

Jones  V.  Bivin,  36  Neb.  821 973 

Jones  V.  Brandt^  59  Iowa,  332 

164,  366,  613 
Jones  V.  Bryant,   13  N.  H.   53 

132,  646,  674 
Jones  V.  Campbell,  84  Iowa,  557  974 
Jones    T.     CJannon,    8     Bioust. 

(Del.)  1 366 

Jones  V.  Clifton,  101  U.  S.  226  426 
Jones  V.  Comer,  6  Leigh  (Va.), 

350 667 

Jones  V.   Crawford,   1    McMull. 

(S.  C.)  373 67,627,     738 

Jones  V.  Croucher,  1  Sim.  &  St. 

316 la 

Jones  V.  CuUen,  100  Tenn.  1 . . 

443,  466,  581,  607,  608 
Jones  V.  Davenport,  44  N.  J. 

Eq.  33 366,  686,     803 

Jones  V.  Dipert,  123  Ind.  594. .  154 
Jones  V.  Dougherty,  10  Ga.  273  631 
Jones  V.  Dulaney  &  Mitchell,  27 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  702   311 

Jones  V.  Dunbar,  52  Neb.  151 . . 

291,  330,  625 
Jones  V.  Emery,  40  N.  H.  348 

893,  955 
Jones  V.   Farris,  70  Iowa,   739 

642,  650 
Jones  V.  Geery,  153  Mo.  476..  384 
Jones   V.   Gott,    10   Ind.    240.. 

309,  459 
Jones  V.  Green,  68  U.  8.  330. . 

186,  770,  771,  773,  798 
Jones  V.  Hall,  58  N.  C.  26.  .532,  533 
Jones  V.  Henry,  13  Ky.  427 .. .  686 
Jones  V.  Hetherington,  45  Iowa, 

681 580,  690,  609,     616 

Jones  V.  Hill,  72  Ky.  692  . .  .69,  177 
Jones  V.    Huggeford,   44   Mass. 

515 621,     664 

Jones  V.  Jenkins,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

408 221,  646,  666 

Jones  V.  Johnson,  7  Kan.  App. 

616 986 

Jones  V.  Jones,   108  N.  W.   (8. 

D.)  23 640 

Jones  V.  Jones,  79  Miss.  261 . . 

202,     778 

Jones  V.  Lake,  2  Wis.  210 956 

Jones   V.   JLieeds,   7   Ohio   N.   P. 

480. .  .233,  266,  330,  353,  572,     903 
Jones  V.  Levering,  118  Mo.  App. 

377 252,     562 


Table  of  Cases. 


civil 


PAGK 

Jones  v.  Li^t,  86  Me.  437 

232,  355,  413,     434 
Jones  ▼.  Loree,  37  Neb.  816. . . . 

236,  316,  461,  490,  491,  594 
Jones    V.    LoBsiter,    29    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  614   952 

Jones  V.  Mackenzie  Bros.  Wall 

Paper,  etc.,  Co.,  19  Colo.  App. 

121 544 

Jones  V.  McLeod,  61  Ga.  602.. 

688,  712 
Jones  v.  Massey,  79  Ala.  370.. 

199,  846 
Jones  ▼.  Meyer,  7  8.  D.  152. . .  473 
Jones  V.  Meyer  Bros.  Drug  Co., 

25  Tex.  Civ.  App.  234. .  .915,     920 
Jones  V.  Naughright.   10  N.  J. 

Eq.  298.. 45,  46,  47,  461,  473,     510 
Jones    V.    O'Brien,    36    N.    Y. 

Super.  Ct  68 530,     911 

Jones  V.  Patton,  10  W.  Va.  653     209 
Jones  V.   Pattv,  73  Miss.    179. 

123.  124,     127 
Jones  ▼.  Rahillv.  16  Minn.  320 

638,  639,  650,  665,  764,  774 
Jones  V.  Bead,  33  Ky.  540.  .651,  711 
Jones  y.  Read,  20  Tenn.  335 .. .  676 
Jones  V.  Reeder,  22  Ind.  111..  . 

645,  680 
Jones  ▼.  Ruffin,  14  N.  C.  404. .  290 
Jones  V.  Shaw,  8  Pa.  Super.  Ct. 

487 637,     650 

Jones  V.  Slauson,  33  Fed.  632.     870 
Jones  V.  Sleeper,   13  Fed.   Cas. 

No.  7,496 29,  259,  1072,  1098 

Jones  y.   Slubey,   5   Har.   k  J. 

(Md.)    372    434,    822 

Jones  ▼.  Smith,  92  Ala.  455 . . 

203,  815,  843,     845 
Jones  ▼.  Snyder,  117  Ind.  229. . 

39,  366,  509,     920 

Jones  ▼.  Spear,  21  Vt.  426 299 

Jones  y.  Steyens,  5  Am.  B.  R. 

571 1142,  1147 

Jones  y.  Wilson,  69  Ala.  400. . .     826 
Jones  y.  Wbitbread,    11    C.   B. 

406 260 

Jones  y.  Young,  18  N.  C.  352. . 

178,  279 
Jorda  y.  Lewis,  1  La.  Ann.  59 . .  521 
Jordan  y.  Buschmeyer,  97  Mo. 

94 376,  880,  1008 

Jordan  y.  Collins,  107  Ala.  572 

436,  612,  907,     909 
Jordan   v.    Crickett,    123    Iowa, 

576 741,     958 

Jordan  v.  Fenno,  13  Ark.  593 . . 


PAGK 

30,  177,  634 
Jordan  y.  Frink,  3  Pa.  St.  442 

535,  998 
Jordan  y.  Liggan,  95  Va.  616.. 

868,  869 
Jordan  y.  Stephenson,  17  Iowa, 

514 808 

Jordan  y.  White,  38  Mich.  253 

460,    513 
Jose  y.  Hewitt,  50  Me.  248... 

274,  296,  311,     340 
Joseph  y.  McGill,  52  Iowa,  127 

773,  1044 
Joseph  y.  Makley,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

18 1224 

Joseph  M.  Smith  Co.  y.  O'Brien, 

57  N.  J.  Eq.  365 251,     444 

Joseph   y.    Raff,    82   App.   Diy. 

(N.  Y.)   47    1131,  1204 

Joseph  Wild  &  Co.  y.  Provident 

L.  &  T.Co.,  18  Am.  B.  R.  506.  1169 
Joalin  V.  Goebel.  90  Mich.  71..     691 

Joy  y.  Sears,  26  Mass.  4 539 

Joyce  v.  Perry,  111  Iowa,  567. 

711,     792 
Joyner  v.  Van  Alstyne,  22  Neb. 

172 272 

J.  S.  Brittain  Dry  Goods  Co.  v. 

Plowman,  113  Iowa,  624.  .259,    612 
J.   T.   Robinson  Notion   Co.   v. 

Foot,  42  Neb.  156    490 

Judge  v.  Houston.  34  N.  C.  108     259 
Judge  V.  Vogel,  38  Mich.  569. . 

657,  710,  951 
Judice  v.  Neda,  8  La.  Ann.  484.  371 
Judson  v.  Connolly,  5  La.  Ann. 

400 891 

Judson  y.  Courier  Co.,  15  Fed. 

641    28,  41,  78,  257,    258 

Judson  v.  Kelty,  14  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  7,567    268 

Judson  y.  Lyford,  84  Cal.  505 

66,  732,    738 
Judson  v.  Walker,  155  Mo.  166 

120,  121,  124,  126,  818 
Justh  y.  Wilson,  19  D.  C.  629. .  520 
J.  V.  Farwell  Co.  y.  Zenor,  100 

Iowa,  640   883 

J.    W.    Butler    Paper    Co.    v. 

Goembel,  16  Am.  B.  R.  26. . .   1168 

K 
Kahn  v.  Export,  etc.,  Co.,  8  Am. 

B.   R.    157    1173 

Kahn    v.    Fischbein,    55    Minn. 

509 470 

Kahn  v.  Kohn,  35  111.  App.  437     473 
Kahn    v.    Weinlander,    39    Fla. 


clviii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

210. 897 

Kahn     ▼.     WilkinS;,     36     Fla. 

428 637,     661 

Kain  ▼.  Lukin,  141  N.  Y.  144 

287,  843,  864,     856 
Kain  v.  Larkln,  131  N.  Y.  300. 

110,  277,  280,  290,    299 
345,  380,  902,  967,    976 
Kain   ▼.    Larkin,   4   App.    Div. 

(N.  Y.)    209   200,     384 

Kaine  t.   Weiglej,   22   Pa.   St 

179 225,     964 

Kalish  ▼.  Higgins,  70  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    192    902 

KaliBh   ▼.    Higgins,    176   N.   Y. 

496 966,     978 

Kamp  V.   Kamp,   46   How.   Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    143    972 

Kalk  V.  Fielding,  60  Wis.  339. 

228,  319,  908,  919,  923,     943 
Kanawha   Valley   Bank   v.   At- 
kinson, 32  W.  Va.  203.. 320,    373 
Kanawha  Valley  Bank  v.  Wil- 
son, 26  W.  Va.  242 

30,  72,  284,     696 
Kane  v.  Desmond,  63  Cal.  464.     347 

Kane  v.  Drake,  27  Ind.  29 

29,  220,  246,  620,  647,  910,  999 
Kane  v.  Roberts,  40  Md.  590..  195 
Kane  v.  Stem,  13  Mo.  App.  581 

530,     562 
Kane  Co.  v.  Kinney,  174  N.  Y. 

69 1121 

Kankakee   Woolen   Mill    Co.   v. 
Kampe,  39  Mo.  App.  229... 

775,776,  797 
Kansas    City    Packing    Co.    v. 

Hoover,  1  App.  Cas.  268 12 

Kansas  Moline  Plow  Co.  v.  Sher- 
man, 3   Okla.  204.. 581,  590,     613 
Kapernlck  v.  Louk,  90  Wis.  232     168 
Karll  V.  Kuhn,  38  Neb.  639.. 

245,     937 

Karst  V.  Gane,  136  N.  Y.  316. 

464,  772,  778 
Kastl  V.  Arthur,  135  Mich.  278  967 
Kassing  v.  Durand,  41  111.  App. 

93 650,     658 

Kauf er  v.  Walsh,  88  Wis.  63 . . 

954,  987,  1004 
Kaufman  v.  Burchinell,  15  Colo. 

App.  520    «03,     914 

Kaufman    v.    Cobum,    30    Neb. 

672 307 

Kaufman   v.  Tredway,   12  Am. 

B.  R.  682    1166,  1173 

Kaufman  v.  Whitney,  60  Miss. 


PAGE 

103 398 

Kaupe    v.    Bridge,    25    N.    Y. 

Super.  Ct  469 670 

Kayanaugh    ▼.    Oberfelder,    37 

Neb.  647    461,     469 

Kayser    ▼.    Haitnett,    67    Wis. 

250 911 

Kea  ▼.  Epstein,  87  Ga.  115.960,    971 
Keady  v.  White,  168  HI.  76.. 

327,     376 
Keagy  v.  Trout,  85  Va.  390.. 

228,  329,  358,  941,    967 
Keam  v.  Conkwright,  78  Mich. 

58 975 

Keane    ▼.    Goldsmith,     14    La. 

Ann.  349    69,     177 

Kearby  v.  Hopkins,  14  Tex.  Civ. 

App.    166    204 

Kearney  County  Bank  v.  Dul- 

lenty,  4  Neb.  753   963 

Kearney  County  Bank  ▼.   Dul- 

lenty,  96  N.  W.  169 966 

Keating  Implement,  etc.,  Co.  v. 

Terre    Haute    Carriage,    etc., 

Co.,  11  Tex.  Civ.  App.  216. . .     304 
Keeder    v.    Murphy,    43    Iowa, 

413 330,  442,     443 

Keegan  v.  King,  3  Am.  B.  R.  79 

1178,  1221,  1226 
Keehn  v.  Keehn,  115  Iowa,  467  187 
Keel  V.  Larkin,  83  Ala.   142.. 

144,  182,  358,     578 
Keen   v.   Kleckner,    42   Pa.   St. 

529    320,  462,  474,     992 

Keen  v.  Preston,  24  Ind.  395 . .        74 
Keeney  v.  Good,  21  Pa.  St.  349 

113,  400,     898 
Keep  V.  Keep,  7   Abb.  N.  Cas. 

(N.  Y.)   240   324,     426 

Keet-Rountree  Shoe  Co.,  v.  Lis- 

man,  149  Mo.  85   602,     610 

Keetou    v.    Bandy,    25    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  233   649 

Kehler  ▼.  G.  W.  Jack  Mfg.  Co., 

65  Ga.   639    1048 

Kehr  v.   Sichler,  48  Mo.  96...     439 
Kehr  v.  Smith,  87  U.   S.  31.. 

266,  1138 

Kehr  ▼.  Smith,  20  Wall.  31 343 

Keichline  v.   Keichline,   54   Pa. 

St.  75 613 

Keith  V.  Albrecht,  89  Minn.  247       95 
Keith  ▼.  Gettysburg  Nat.  Bank, 

10  Am.  B.  R.  762 1167 

Keith  V.   Heffelfinger,    12  Neb. 

497 306 

Keith  V.  Kreidel,  4  Wash.  544 


Table  of  Casxb. 


dis 


PAOB 

960,  961,  966,  967 
Keith  ▼.  Proctor,  67  Tenn.  189  714 
Keith   T.   Woombell,   25   Mau. 

211 326 

Keel  T.  Isaacs,  68  Hnn  (N.  Y.)f 

610 970 

Kellar  t.  Tkylor,  90  Ala.  289. .  907 
Keller    ▼.    Blanchard,    19    La. 

Ann.  63 233,  363,    620 

Keller  ▼.  Paine,  107  N.  Y.  83. . 

86,      87 
Keller   v.    Payne,   48  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  620   1046 

Kelley    v.    Gonnell,     110    Ala. 

543   168,  399,     897 

Kelley  v.  Flory,  84  Iowa,  671..  612 
Kelliher    v.   Sutton,    115    Iowa, 

632 694,924,     926 

Kellogg    ▼.    Aherin,    48    Iowa, 

mW   ...•••    ..........  .  OBU,       01 22 

Kellogg  v.  Clyne,  64  Fed.  696. . 

229,  237,  317,  924 
Kellogg     ▼.     Douglass     County 

Bank,  68  Kan.  43.  .57,  58,  59,     183 
Kellogg  V.  Hamilton,  43  Mich. 

269 874 

Kellogg  Newspaper  Co.  v.  Pater- 
son,  162  111.   158 541,     542 

Kellogg  y.  Richardson,  19  Fed. 

70 413,  428,     467 

Kellogg    T.    Wilkie,    23    How.   * 

Pr.   (N.  Y.)    233.... 619,  551,     552 
Kells  ▼.  McClure,  69  Minn.  60 

936,  965,  1007 
Kelly-Goodfellow    Shoe    Co.    v. 

Vail,  84  Mo.  App.  94 681 

Kelly  V.  Atkins,  14  Colo.  App. 

208 969,     966 

Kelly   ▼.    Fleming,    113    N.    C. 

133 408 

Kelly  V.  Herb,  157  Pa.  St.  41 . . 

804,  1046 
Kelly  ▼.  Karsner,  72  Ala.  106. .  658 
Kelly  T.  Lenihan,  66  Ind.  448. .  750 
Kelly  ▼.  Mesier,   18  App.   Diy. 

(N.  Y.)    329    637 

Kelly  y.  Simmons,  73  6a.  716. . 

397  711  913 
Kelly  y.  Smith,  102  Ala.  336. .'  624 
Kelly  y.  Smith,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

7,676 1210 

Kelly  V.  Sparks,  54  Fed.  70. . .  169 
Kelly's  Appeal,  77  Pa.  St.  232.  343 
Kelly  y.  Strange,  Flsd.  Cas.  No. 

7,676 1188 

Kelsey  y.  Kelley,  63  Vt.  41. .300,  384 
Kelso    y.    Blackburn,    3    Leigh 


PAOB 

(Va.),  299 1041 

Kemmer  y.  Tool,  78  Pa.  147. . .  616 
Kemp  y.  Folsom,  14  Wash.  16 . . 

141,     146 
Kemp  y.  National  Bank  of  Re- 
public, 109  Fed.  48 457 

Kemp  y.  Small,  32  Neb.  318. . .  443 
Kemp  y.  Walker,  16  Ohio,  118.  473 
Kemper,  etc..  Dry  Goods  Co.  y. 

Renshaw,  68  Neb.  513    866 

Kempner  y.  Churchill,  76  U.  S. 

362 28,     959 

Kempner  y.  Churchill,  8  Wall. 

(U.  S.)  362 7,  9,  233,  353,     953 

Kendall  y.  Baltis,  26  Mo.  App. 

411 583 

Kendall  Boot,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Bain, 

46  Mo.  App.  581   652 

Kendall  v.  Fitts,  22  N.  H.  1 . . 

522,  644,  627 
Kendall  y.  Hughes,  46  Ky.  368 

520,  894,  950 
Kendall  y.  O'Neal,  16  Mont.  303  1010 
Kendall  y.  Samson,   12  Vt.  515 

529,  530,  553 
Keneweg  Co.  v.   Schilansky,  47 

W.   Va.  287... 428,  613,  867,     886 
Kennaird  y.  Adams,  50  Ky.  102 

459,  473,  490,  499 
Kennard  v.  Gray,  58  N.  H.  51.  227 
Kenningham  y.  McLaughlin,  42 

Ky.   30    533 

Kennedy  y.  Barandon,  67  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  209  1017 

Kennedy  v.  Conroy  (Cal.),  44 

Pac.  795  531 

Kennedy  v.  Dedge,  19  Ohio  Cir. 

Ct.  425  343 

Kennedy    v.    First   Nat.    Bank, 

107  Ala.  170    162 

Kennedy  v.  Kennedy,  2  Ala.  671  858 
Kennedy  v.  Lowe,  9  Iowa,  580.  49 
Kennedy  v.  Merriam^  70  III.  228  1012 
Kennedy  y.  Powell,  34  Kan.  22 

319,  320,  396,  397,  513,     515 
Kennedy  y.  Ross,  2  Mill  Const. 

(S.  C.)    125   518 

Kennedy  v.  Thorpe,  51  N.  Y. 

174 204 

Kenney  v.  Burkhart,  5  Pa.   St. 

478 297 

Kenney  y.  Dow,  10  Mart.  (La.) 

577 85,  580,     892 

Kennewig  Co.  v.  Moore,  49  W. 

Va.  323    186,     775 

Kenosha  Stoye  Co.  y.  Shedd,  82 

Iowa,  640   745 


clx 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAQE 

Kent  V.  Curtis,  4  Mo.  App.  121 .     774 
Kent  ▼.  Liverpool,  etc.,  Ins.  Co., 

26  Ind.  294   176 

Kenton  v.  Ratcliff,  105  Ky.  376 

541,     643 
Kerber  ▼.  Ruff,  4  Ohio  S.  &  C. 

P.  Dec.  406    267 

Kemer  t.  Boardman,  133  N.  Y. 

539 646 

Kern's  EsUte,  4  Pa.  Diet.  73 . .     344 
Kerr  v.  Bain,  11  Grant  Ch.  (XJ. 

C.)    423  763 

Kerr  ▼.  Hutchins,  36  Tex.  452. .     848 
Kerr  ▼.  Hutchins,  46  Tex.  384. 

86,  523,  900,  993,  996,  1014,  1025 
Kerr  v.  Kennedy,  119  Iowa,  239 

593,  693,     977 
Kervick   v.   Mitchell,   68    Iowa, 

273 644 

Kerwin  v.  Hibernia  Ins.  Co.,  36 

L.  Ann.  33    639,     641 

Kessler  v.  Levy,   11  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    275    68 

Ketchum  v.  Allen,  46  Conn.  414 

151,     157 
Ketcham  v.  Hallock,  65  111.  App. 

632 281,     340 

Ketchum  v.  McNamara,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  160   1071 

Ketner  v.  Donten,  15  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  604 180,    378 

Kettleschlager  v.  Ferrick,  12  S. 

D.  455    163,     164 

Keuren   v.   McLaughlin,    19   N. 

J.  Eq.  187  697 

Kevan  v.  Crawford,  46  L.  J. 

Ch.  729  228 

Keyes  v.  Rines,  37  Vt.  260 164 

Keys  V.  Grannis,  3  Nev.  648. . .     760 
Keyser  v.  Angle,  40  N.  J.  Eq. 

481 619 

Keyser  v.  Wessel,  12  Am.  B.  R. 

126 1122 

Kickbush  v.  Corwith,  108  Wis. 

634 75,  253,  463, 

474,  561,  570,  680,  699,  692,     758 
Kichline  v.  Labach,  125  Pa.  St. 

295 948 

Kid  V.  Mitchell,   1   Nott  &  M. 

(S.  C.)  334  .  ..68,70,85,  177, 

189,  211,  220,  351,  563,  633,     665 
Kidd  V.  Rawlinson,  2  B.  &   P. 

59 19,     518 

Kidder  v.  Beavers,  33  Wash.  635     856 
Kidney  v.  Coussmaker,  12  Ves. 

Jr.  136 188 

KidVdl  V.  Kirkpatrick,  70  Mo. 


PAOB 

214 107 

Kiehn  v.  Bestor,  30  111.  App.  468  597 
Kiel  V.  Harris,  4  Pa.  Cas.  201 . .  544 
Kiely  v.  Hickcox,  70  Mo.  App. 

617 124.     162 

Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Co. 

V.  McPheely,  37  Neb.  8b0..461,    473 
Kihlken    v.   Kihlken,    59    Ohio 

St.  106 650 

Kilboume  v.  Fay,  29  Ohio  St. 

264 203,     548 

Kilbride  v.  Oamer<m,   17  U.  C. 

C.  C.  P.  373   132 

Kibly  V.  Haggin,  26  Ky.  208. . .  667 
Kilgorev.  Stoner  (Ala.),  12  So. 

60 466,     613 

Killam  v.  Pierce,  153  Mass.  502 

29,  30,  257,     258 
Killian  v.  Clark,  3  MacArthur 

(D.  C),  379 192 

Killian  v.  Cox,  132  Ala.  664..  876 
Killough  V.  Steele,  1  Stew.  A.  P. 

(Ala.)  262 

13,  15,  33,  251,  290,     441 
Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  (Soods  C)o, 

V.  Bremera,  44  Neb.  863.  .235,     316 
Kilpatrick-Koch  Ddy  Goods  Co. 

V.  McPheeley,  37  Neb.  800 .. . 

235,  317,  995 
Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Co. 

V.  Straus,  45  Neb.  793 

236,  236,  316 
Kimbal  v.  Fenner,  12  N.  H.  248  904 
Kimball  v.  Grieg,  47  Ala.  230 . .  826 
Kimball  v.  Rosenham  Co.,  7  Am. 

B.  R.  718   1172 

Kimball  v.  Thompson,  4  Cush. 

(Mass.)  441 263,     675 

Kimble  v.  Kimble,   1   Mart.  N. 

S.  633 67,    737 

Kimmel  v.  McRight,  2  Pa.  St. 

38 37,      67 

Kimble  v.  Smith,  95  Pa.  St.  69. 

193.     350 
Kimble  v.  Wotring,  48  W.  Va. 

412 692,  693,     969 

Kimbro  v.  Clark,  17  Neb.  403.  966 
Kimmel  v.  McRight,  2  Pa.  St. 

38 732 

Kinmouth  v.  Braeutigan   (N.  J. 

Esq.),  10  Am.  B.  R.  83.1112,  1144 
Kimmouth   v.    White,     47     Atl. 

(N     T  )    1  255 

Kinball  v.  Fenner,  12  N.  H.  248  97 1 
Kinberling  v.  Hartley,     1     Fed. 

571 796,  1035  . 

Kinder  v.  Macy,  7  Cal.  206 855 


Table  of  Cases. 


clxi 


PA6K 

Kinealy  v.  Macklin.  2  Mo.  App. 

241 67,  361.  737,  769 

King  y.  Arnold,  52  Iowa,  712. .  966 
King  y.  Atkins,    33    La.    Ann. 

1067 894,  954 

King  V.  Baboock,  40  Iowa,  690  964 
King  V.   Baer,    31    Misc.    Rep. 

(N.  Y.)  308 780 

King  T.  Bailey,  6  ^io.  375 526 

King  ▼.  Bailey,  6  Mo.  575 36 

King  y.  Beason.  5  Pa.  Caa.  69.  992 
King  y.  Oantrel,  26  N.  C.  251. 

77.  82,  441 
King  y.  Cnun,  185  Mass.  103 . . 

128,  669 
King  y.  Clarke,  2  Hill  Eq.    (S. 

C.)   611.... 86.  178,  188,  349,  781 

King  V.  Clay,  34  Ark.  291.. 69,  177 
King  y.  Duncan,  29  Grant  Ch. 

(U.  C.)    113  51 

King  y.  Dupine.  2  Atk.  603.  .99,  102 
King  y.  Grannis.  29  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  367.  ...   916 

King  y.  Barter,  70  Tex.  679 . . . 

153,  161 
King  y.    Holland   Trust   Co.,   8 

App.  Diy.   (N.  Y.)    112 614 

King  y.  Hubbell.  42  Mich.  695 .  333 

King  y.  Hubbell,  42  Mich.  497.  227 
King  y.  Hubbell,  42  Mich.  597 . 

236,  317 
King  y.  Keating,  12  Grant  CIl 

29 670 

King  y.  King,  61  Ala.  470.. 631,  658 
King  y.  Leyy    (Va.),  22   8.   E. 

492 623 

King  y.  Moody,  79  Ky.  63 476 

King  y.  Moore,  42  Mo.  651 663 

King  y.  Muncer,  28  N.  Y.  Supp. 

587 699 

King  y.  Poole,  61  Ga.  373 920 

King  y.  Richardson,  94  Mo.  App. 

670 907 

King  y.  Russell,  40  Tex.  124. . .  906 

King  y.  Skellie,  79-Ga.  147. . . .  Ill 
King    y.    Simmons,    66    N.    Y. 

Supp.  1096 310,  329,  962 

King  y.  Tharp,  26  Iowa,  283 .. .  636 
King  y.  Thompson,    34    U.    S. 

204 376 

King  y.  Trice,  38  N.  C.  568. . . .  721 

King  y.  Ward,  74  Me.  349 1003 

King  y.  Wells,  106  lowa^  649 . . 

107,  114,  348 

King  y.  Wilcox,   11   Paige    (N. 

Y),  689 191,  360,     701 

Kinghom  v.  Wright,  45  N.  Y. 

Super.  Ct.  616    74,       78 

k 


Kingman     v.      ComellTebbetts 

Mach.,  etc.,  Co.,  160  Mo.  282. 
Kingman  &  Co.  y.  Mowtt,  182 

III.  266 

Kingsbury  y.  Haswell,  6  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  691 

Kingsley  y.   First    Nat.    Bank, 

31  Hun  (N.  Y.),  329 

Kingsley  y.  White,  67  Vt.  665. 

642, 
Kinkle  y.  Gale,  11  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

126 :. 

Kinmouth   y.   Walling     (N.    J. 

Ch.),  36  Atl.  891 

Kinmouth  y.  White.  47  Atl.  (N. 

J.)   1 581,  688,  620, 

Kinnemon  v.  Miller,  2  Md.  Ch. 

407 

Kinner  y.  Woodson.  94  Va.  711. 

963, 
-Kinney  y.  Craig,  103  Va.  158.. 

833,  871, 
Kinsey  y.    Feller,   60   Atl.    (N. 

J.)   680 

Kinsey  v.  Feller,  64  N.  J.  Eq. 

367 187,  337,  348, 

Kinter  y.  Pickard,  67  Mich.  125. 

172, 
Kipp  V.  Hanna,  2  Bland  (Md.), 

26 129,  179,  280,  339,  343, 

Kipp   y.    Lamoreaux,    81    Mich. 

299 521, 

Kipper   y.   GUuicey,     2    Blackf. 

(Ind.)    366 36,   136,  787, 

Kirby  y.  Bruns,  45  Mo.  234 . . . 
Kirby       y.       IngersoU,       Harr. 

(Mich.)   172 

Kirby  y.  Raynes,  138  Ala.  194.. 
Kirchman   y.    Kratky,    51    Neb. 

191 

Kirdadi     y.     Basha,    36    Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)    715 

Kirk  y.  Clark,  Prec.  Ch.   (Eng.) 

275 

Kirkby  y.  Raynes,  138  Ala.  194 
Kirker  y.   Johnson,     13    Wkly. 

Notes  Cas.   (Pa.)    386 

Kirkley  y.  Blakeney,  2  Not.  A. 

M.    (S.  C.)   544   

Kirkley     v.     Larcy,     7     Houst. 

(Del.)  213 

Kirkpatrick   y.    Clark,    132   111. 

342 639,  642, 

Kirkpatrick  y.  Finney,  30  La. 

Ann.  223 

Kirksey   y.    Snedecor,    60    Ala. 

192 190,  347, 

Kirksville  Say.  Bank  y.  Spang- 


PAOE 
460 

666 

42 

543 

1050 

839 

691 

634 

967 

872 

969 

910 

173 

688 

904 

789 
130 

72 
631 

897 

812 

324 
639 

42C 

276 

114 

668 

399 

103L 


dxii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

ler,  59  Mo.  App.   172 166 

Kirmey     v.     Consolidated     Va. 

Min.    Co.,    14    Fed.    Cas.    No. 

7,827 658 

Kirtland  v.  Snow,  20  Conn.  23.  458 
Kiser  v.  Dozier,  102  Ga.  429 .. . 

985,     997 
Kiser  v.  Gamble,  76  Ala,  386 . . 

579,     593 
Kissam  ▼.  Edmonston,  36  N.  C. 

180 327 

Kisterson  v.  Tate,  94  Iowa,  665  1035 
Kitchen  V.  Bratton,  2  111.  300.  520 
Kitchell  y.  Jackson,  71  Ala.  556  688 
Kitchen  v.   Lowery,    127   N.   Y. 

59 778 

Kitchen  v.  McCloskey,   150   Pt. 

St.  376 393,  461,  509,     510 

Kitchen   v.    St.    Louis,   etc.,    R. 

Co.,   69  Mo.  224 594 

Kittel  V.  Augusta,  etc.,  R.  Co., 

85   Fed.  859   856 

Kittel  V.  Jones,  11  St.  Rep.   (N. 

Y.)   641 1038 

Kittredgo  v.  Slack,  67  111.  App. 

128 429 

Kittredge  y.   Sumner,  23  Mass. 

60 550.     580 

Kittredge  ▼.  Warren,   14  N.  H. 

609 782 

Kitts  V.  Willson,  140  Ind.  604. 

84,     172 
Kitts  V.  Wilson,  130  Ind.  492. 

641,  644,  650,  664,     677 
Kizsee    v.    Winston,    Fed.    Cas. 

7,835 1186 

Klauber  v.  Schloes,  198  Mo.  602. 

331,     335 

Klauber   v.    Schloes    (Mo.),   96 

S.  W.  930 273 

Klay   V.    McKellar,     122    Iowa, 

163 185,  775,     895 

Klemm  ▼.  Bishop,  56  111.  App. 

613 79,  233,     353 

Klein  v.  Horine,  47  111.  430 .. . 

865,     892 
Klein  ▼.    Richardson,   64  Miss. 

41 262 

Kleine     ▼.     Katzenberger,      20 

Ohio  St.   110 ,    664 

Klein  v.  Hoffheimer,  132  U.  S. 

367 685,  687,    908 

Kleinschmidt      v.     McAndrews, 

117  U.  S.  282 651 

Kline  v.  First  Nat.  Bank  (Pa.), 

15  Atl.  433 948 

Kline  v.  Kline,  103  Va.  263 .. . 

898,     968 


PAGE 

Kline    v.    McDonnell,     62     Hun 

(N.  Y.),   177    

36,  38,  682,     6^3 
Kline  v.    McGuckin,    24   N.   J. 

Eq.  411 670 

Klous  V.  Hennessey,  13  R.  I. 

332 756 

Klosterman    v.    Mason    County 

Cent.  R.  Co.,  8  Wash.  281 .. . 

762,  764,     775 
Klosterman    v.    Harrington,    11 

WaAh.  138 275,     376 

Klosterman  v.   Vader,  6  Wash. 

99 95,     293 

Kluender  v.  Ljmch,  2  Abb.  Dec. 

(N.  Y.)   588    900 

Kluender  v.  Lynch,  2  Abb.  Dec. 

(N.  Y.)    538 113,  963,     967 

Knapp  V.  Bailey,  79  Me.  195. . .     616 
Knapp  V.   Crane,    14  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    120 1025 

Knapp  V.  Day,  4  Colo.  App.  21.     572 
Knapp  V.  Fisher,  68  Neb.  651 . . 

674,     893 
Knapp  T.  Forrest,  6  U.  C.  Q.  B. 

O.   S.  577    45 

Knapp    V.    Knapp,     96    S.    W. 

(Mo.)   295 635 

Knapp  V.  McGowan,  96  N.  Y.  76 

420,     429 
E^natvold      v.      Wilkinson,      83 

Minn.  266 341,     686 

Kneeland    v.    Cowles,    3    Pinn. 

(Wis.)   316 428 

Knevan  v.  Specker,  74  Ky.  1 . . .       92 
Knickerbocker  Trust  Co.  v.  Car- 
hart,  64  Atl.    (X.  J.)    756...     366 
Knight   V.    Capito,    23    W.    Va. 

639 247,  314,  386,     905 

Knight     V.     Dalton,     83     Pac. 

(Kan.)   83 654 

Knight  V.  Darby,  65  Neb.  16. . . 

234,     355 
King  V.  Duncan,  29  Grant  Ch. 

(U.  C.)    113 •  43 

Knight   V.    Forward,    63    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    311    635,     637 

Knight    V.    Glascock,    51    Ark. 

390 637,     865 

Knight  V.  Jordan,  25  Tenn.  101     676 
Knight  V.  Kidder   (Me.),  1  AtL 

142 892 

Knight  V.  Nease,  63  W.  Va.  50. 

904,  952,  954,     967 
Knittel  v.  McGowan,  14  Am.  B. 

R.  209 1074 

Knoch    V.    Bemheim,    14    App. 

Div.    (N.   Y.)    410 937,     938 


Table  of  Cases. 


cbdii 


Knoop  y.  Kelsey,  121  Mo.  642.. 
Knoop  V.  Nelaon  Distilling  Co., 

26  Mo.   App.   333 

Knoop  y.  Nelson  Distilling  Co., 

26  Mo.  App.  303 626, 

Knorr  y.  Lohr,  108  Iowa,  181 . . 
Knott  y.  Putnam,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

80 

Knower  y.  Cadden  Clothing  Co., 

67  Conn.  202.. 679,  615,  907, 
Knower  y.   Central  Nat.  Bank, 

124  N.  y.  552 98, 

Knower  y.  Haines,  31  Fed.  513. 
Knowles  y.  Street,  87  Ala.  357. 
Knowlton  y.  Mish,  8  Sawy.  (U. 

S.)  627 

Knowlton  y.  Mosely,  105  Mass. 

136 

Knox  y.  Bank,  12  Wall.  379. . . 
Knox  y.   Clark.   15   Colo.   App. 

356 

Knox  y.  Hunt,  18  Mo.  174 

Knox  y.  Moses,  104  Cal.  502.. 

346, 
Knox  y.  Trayers,  23  Grant  Ch. 

(U.  C.)   41    

Koch    y.    Bruce,    20    Tex.    Ciy. 

App.  634 

Koch  y.  Peters,  97  Wis.  492 .. . 
Kock   y.   Bostwick,     113    Mich. 

302 73, 

Kohl   y.    Sulliyan,    140   Ba.   St. 

36 42,  172,  671, 

Kohn  y.  Clement,  58  Iowa,  589. 
Kohn  y.  Fishback,  36  Wash.  69. 
Kohn  y.  Johnston,  97  Iowa,  99. 
Kohn  y.  Meyer,  19  S.  C.  190 .. . 
Kohout  y.   Chaloupka,   11    Am. 

B.  R.  265   

Kohner    y.    Ashenaur,    17    Cal. 

578 

Kolb  y.  Raiflor,    17    Ind.    App. 

651 

Kolander  y.  Dunn  (Minn.),  104 

N    W.  371 

Kolander  y.  Dunn,  95  Minn.  422 
Koaminflky     y.     Walter     (Tex. 

Ciy.  App,),  44  S.  W.  540 

Koster  v.    HiUer,    4    111.    App. 

21 185,  274, 

Koster  y.  Merritt,  32  Onn.  246. 

86,  470, 
Koster  y.  Miller,  4  111.  App.  21. 
Kramer   y.  McCaughy,    11    Mo. 

App.  426 

Kramer  y.  Wilson,  22  Mo.  App. 

173 923, 

Kratz  y.  Buck,  111  111.  40 


PAGB 

232 

990 

629 
669 

1232 

994 

593 

311 
309 

8 

938 
1233 

614 
721 

993 

43 

582 
695 

76 

696 
583 
174 
995 
623 


1133 

.215 

152 


176 
269 

893 

278 

660 
339 

294 

924 
818 


PAOB 

Kraus  v.  Haas^  6  Tex.  Ciy.  App. 

666 74,  684,  595,  608 

Kreider's  Estate,  135  Pa.  St. 

584 154 

Krider  y.   Koons,    5   Ohio   Cir. 

Ct  221 299 

Krippendorf-Dittman      Co.      y. 

Trenworth,  84  .Pac.   806 971 

Krippendorf-Ditman       Co.       y. 

Trenoweth,  16  Colo.  App.  178. 

311,     510 
Krippendorf  y.    Hyde,   28    Fed. 

788 480,     502 

Kroesen    y.     Seevers,    5    Leigh 

(Va.),  434 544 

Kroger  v.   Roger  Wheel   Co.,    1 

Ky.   L.  Rep.  419 796 

Krolik  y.  Bulkley,  58  Mich.  407  814 
Krolik  y.  Graham,  64  Mich.  226. 

924      947 
Krolik  y.  Root,  63  Mich.  562 . .' 

77,     804 
Kronskop  y.  Kronskop,  95  Wis. 

296 640,     644 

Krueger  y.   Vorhauer,    164   Mo. 

156 78,  187,     348 

Kruger  y.  Walker,  111  Ga.  383. 

761,  779,  817,     871 
Kruschell  y.  Anders,  26   S.  W. 

(Tex.)  249 987 

Kruse  y.  Prindle,  8  Or.  158. . .  461 
Kubic  V.  Zemke,  105  Iowa,  269.  896 
Kuder  v.  Chadwick,  207  Pa.  St. 

182 188 

Kueyan   v.    Specker,     11     Bush. 

(Ky.)   1 162,     163 

Kuevan  v.  Specker,  74  Ky.  1 . .  707 
Kuhn   y.   Gustafson^    73     Iowa, 

633 618 

Kuhn  y.  Mack,  4  W.  Va.  186..  415 
Kuhn  y.  Stansfield,  28  Md.  210. 

368,     370 
Kuhl  y.  Martin,   26  N.  J.  Eq. 

60 337 

Kuhlenbeck  y.  Hot2,  53  111.  App. 

676 693,     999 

Kulage  y.  Schueler,  7  Mo.  App. 

250 153 

Kundson     y.     Parker^     3     Neb. 

(Unoff.)    481 394 

Kunzler  y.  Kohaus,  5  Hill   (N. 

Y.),  317 1068 

Kurtz  y.  Lewis  Voight  &  Sons 

Co.,    175    Mo.   506 591,     594 

Kurtz. y.    Troll,    86    Mo.    App, 

649 588,  589,     998 

Kuykendall  y.  McDonald.  15  Mo. 

416 234,  241,  309,   460,     471 


cbriv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 
600,  501,  502,     599 
Kvello  V.  Taylor,  6  N.  D.  76. . . 

61,     163 
Kyger  v.  F.  Hull  Skirt  Co.,  34 

Ind.  249 369,  513,    679 

Kyle  V.  (VNeil,  88  Ky.  127 ... . 

773,    796 
Kyser  ▼.   Angle,  40  N.  J.   Eq. 
481 610 

I. 
Labauve  y.   Boudreau«    9    Rob. 

(La.)  28 1026 

La  Belle  Wagon  Works  v.  Tid- 

ball,  69  Tex.   161 309 

Labish  v.  Hard,  23  Pac.    (Cal.) 

123 177 

Lackland  v.  Smith,  5  Mo.  App. 

163 804 

Lachman  v.  Martin,  139  111.  450. 

113,  114 
Lachman  v.  Wood,  26  Cal.  147.  110 
Lackner     v.     Sawyer,     5     Neb. 

(Unoff.)  257 867 

I^   Clef   V.   Campbell,    3    Kan. 

App.  756 583,     922 

LaCrosse,  etc.,  R.  Co.  v.  Seeger, 

4  Wis.  268   633,  634,     665 

LaCrosse  Nat.  Bank  v.  Wilison, 

74  Wis.  391 ... .  100,  101,  391,  748 
Ladd  V.  Johnson,  32  Or.  195. . .  461 
Ijadd  V.  Newell,  34  Minn.   107. 

114,  950,  961,  966 
l.add  V.  Smith,  107  Ala.  506 .. .  758 
Ladd  V.  Wiggins,  35  N.  H.  421. 

441,  705 
J^dnier    v.    Ladnier,    64    Miss. 

368 680,     993 

Lafayette    Bank    v.    Brady,    96 

Ind.  498 143,     663 

LaFitte  v.  Rups,  13  Colo.  207. 

961,  965 
JiS     Fleur    v.    Hardy,    11    Rob. 

(La.)    633 669 

J^fleur  V.  Hardy,  11  Rob.  (La.) 

493 85,  178,  276,     900 

Laflin  v.  Central  Pub.  House,  52 

111.  432 50,     742 

Lahr*8  Appeal,  90  Pa.  St.  507.     614 
Ijaib  V.   Brandenburg,  34  Minn. 

367.  ...»  050 

l^idlaw    V.    Gilmore,    47    How. 

Pr.  67  (N.  Y.)  .  .231,  315,  456,  578 
Laidley  v.  Reynolds    (W.  Va.), 

62  S.  E.  406 861 

Lain  v.  Morton,  23  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

438 613 

Laird  v.  Davidson,  124  Ind.  412 


PAGE 
38,  40,  363,  514,  950,    951 
Laird  y.  Scott,  5  Heisk.  (Tenn.) 

314 216,220,     221 

Lake    Shore    Banking    Co.    v. 

Fuller,  110  Pa.  St.  156 

462,  474,     491 
Lake  ▼.  Morris,  30  Conn.  201 . . 

526,  533,  560,     990 
Lally     y.     Holland,     1     Swan 

(Tenn.),  399    87 

Lallman  v.  Hovey,  92  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  419    827 

Lamb  y.   Lamb,    18   App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)    260    326 

Lamb   y.    Mclntire,    183    Mass. 

367 696,698,  1016 

Lamb  y.  Smith,  132  Mass.  674.  42 
Lamb  y.  Stone,  28  Mass.  527 . . 

756,  757 
Lambert  y.  Saloy,  37  La.  Ann.  3  1036 
Lambeth  v.  McCiinton,  66  Tex. 

1U8 72 

Lanibrecht  v.  Patten,   15  Mont. 

200 397,     614 

Lamkin  v.  Clary,  103  Ga.  631 . .  lUU.i 
Lammert  v.  Stockings,  27  Ind. 

App.  019   862 

Lammons  v.  Allen,  88  Ala.  417.  399 
Lamont  y.  Regan,  96  111.  App. 

359 79,  348,     909 

Lampert  v.  Haydel,  96  Mo.  439 

422,  423,     657 
Lampkin  y.  Peoples  Nat.  Bank, 

y«   Mo.  App.   239 696 

Lamplugh    v.    Lamplugh,    1    P. 

VVms.    HI     36 

Lamprey    v.    Donacour,    68    N. 

H.  370    961 

Lampson    v.    Arnold,    19    Iowa, 

479 469 

Lanahan    y.    CsiTrey,    47    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    124 776,     889 

Lanahan  y.  Latrobe,  7  Md.  268  708 
Landaucr  y.  Mock,  43  Neb.  430  599 
Landauer  y.  Mack,  39  Neb.  8 . .  893 
Landauer  y.  Victor,  69  Wis.  434  463 
Landecker    y.    Houghtaling,     7 

Cal.   391    9^2 

Lander  y.  Beers,  48  Cal.  646 . .  411 
Lander  y.  Pollard,  61  Kan.  688  762 
Lander  y.  Zieher,   150  Mo.  403 

339,     406 
Landis    y.    McDonald,    88    Mo. 

App.   335    1127 

Landman  y.   Gloyer    (Tex.   Ciy. 

App.),  25  S.  W.  994 623 

Landreth  Co.  y.  Schevenel,  102 


Table  of  Cases. 


dxv 


PAGB 

Tenn.  486  197 

Landry  t.  First  Nat.  Bank,  11 

Am.  B.  R.  223 ,.   1166 

Landrjr  v.  Andrews,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

281 1163,  1166 

Landwirth  y.  Shaphran,  47  La. 

Ann.  336  663 

Lane  v.  Johnson,  43  Vt.  48 766 

Lane  v.  Kingsbury,  11  Mo.  402 

340,  920,  935,  948,  986 
Lane  v.  Lutz,  23  Wend.  (N.  Y.) 

653 638 

Lane  v.  Starkey,  15  Neb.  258. . 

716,     718 

Lane  v.  Starr,  1  S.  D.  107 393 

Lane  ▼.  Sleeper,  18  N.  H.  209. .     304 
Lane  v.   Union  Nat.   Bank,   75 

111.  App.  299  645 

Laney  v.  Laney,  2  Ind.  196 ....  634 
Lanfear  v.  Sumner,  17  Mass. 

110 518,  540,  548 

Lang  V.  Lee,  3  Rand.  (V^a.) 

410 269,  415,  423 

Lang  y.  Stockwell,  55  N.  H. 

661 522,  530 

Lang  y.  Williams,  166  Mo.  1 . . 

161,    280 
Langert    y.    Dayid,    14    Wa^h. 

389 463,  479,  493,     504 

Luigford  y.  Fry,  26  Tenn.  585 

19,  202 
Langford  y.  Freeman,  60  Ind.  46  128 
Langford  y.  Thurlby,  60  Iowa, 

luo lUo,     t>7o 

Langley  y.  Perry,  14  Fed.  Oas. 

No.  8,067    1084 

Langadale  y.   Woollen,   99   Ind. 

575 82 

Jjanier  y.  Driyer,  24  Ala.  149. .     414 
Lanmon    y.    Clark,    4    McLean 

(U.  S.),   18    1039 

Lannan     y.     Smith,     7     Gray 

(Mass.),   150   104 

Lanning  y.  Carpenter,  20  N.  Y. 

447 48 

Irfuining   y.   Streeter,   57    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  33   736,  739,     743 

Lansing  Boiler  Works  y.  Ryer- 

son  &  Son,  11  Am.  B.  R.  558. 

1074,  1084 
Lant  y.  Manley,  75  Fed.  627 .. .  840 
La  Page  y.  Slade,  79  Tex.  473. .  1001 
Lapham   y.    Marshall,   51    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  36   937 

Lapman   y.    Marshall,    51    Hun 

(N.   Y.),   36    1010 

La  Point  y.  Blanchard,  101  Cal. 


PAGE 

549 164 

La  Porte  y.  Costick,  31   L.  T. 

Rep.  N.  S.  434 108,     113 

Large    y.   Bristo    Steam    Tow- 

Bioat,  etc.,  Co.,  2  Ashm.  (Pa.) 

394 ...858,     874 

Larimer  y.  Kelly,  10  Kan.  298.  107 
Larimore  y.  Tyler,  88  Mo.  661 .  177 
Larkin  y.  Mead,  77  Ala.  485 . .  196 
Larkin  y.  McAnnally,  5   Phila. 

(Pa.)    17    154,     157 

Larkin  y.  McMullin,  49  Pa.  St. 

29 188 

Larkin  v.   Wilsford    (Tex.   Ciy. 

App.),  29  S.  W.  640 84 

LaRoche  v.  Brower,  8  Ohio  Cir. 

Ct.  508    239 

Lary   y.    Pettit,    55    App.    Diy. 

631 578 

Lasher  y.  Medical  Press  Co.,  3 

Pa.  Super.  Ct.  571    59 

Lashmett     v.     Prall,     2     Neb. 

(Unoff.)    284    82S 

Lassiter  y.  Bussy,  14  La.  Ann. 

699 5i>H 

Lassiter  v.  Dayis,  64  N.  C.  498 

344,  581,     586 
Ijassiter  y.  Hoes,  11  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)   1    365 

Ijassiter  y.  Wood,  18  Tenn.  486 

634,  636 
Lata  V.  Morrison,  23  N.  C.  149.  215 
Lathrop-Hatten   Lumber   Co.  y. 

Bessemer  Say.  Bank,  96  Ala. 

350 467 

Lathrop   v.    Clayton,   45    Minn. 

124 

521,  530,  634,  541,  642,  543,  977 
Lathrop  v.  Drake,  91  U.  S.  516 

1207,  1211 
Lathrop  y.  Gilbert,  10  N.  J.  Eq. 

344 701 

Lathrop    v.    McBurney,    71    Ga. 

815 731,  758,     759 

Lathrop  y.  Pollard,  6  Colo.  424 

641,  049,     650 
Latimer   v.   Batson,  4  B.  &   C. 

662 518,     530 

Latimer  y.  Glenn,  65  Ky.  535. .  369 
Latimer   y.   Latimer,   53    S.    C. 

483 640 

Laughton  y.  Harden,  68  Me.  212  19 
Laughton  y.  Harden,  68  Me.  208 

350,  385,     819 
Laurence  y.  Lippencott,  6  N.  J. 

L.   473    377,     676 

Lavelle    v.    Clark,    18    Ky.    L. 


clxvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGS 

Rep.  759   805 

Lavender  v.  Bowen,  101  N.  W. 

760   (Iowa)    1126 

Lavender    v.    Thomas,    18    Qs.. 

668    458,  465,  473,     478 

Law  V.  Law,  76  Va.  527 633 

Lawrence  Bros.  v.  Heylman,  98 

N.  Y.  Supp.  121 226,    263 

Lawrence  Bros.  v.  Heylman,  111 

App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)   848 

889,  905,  908,     939 
Lawrence  v.  Bank  of  Republic, 

36  N.  Y.  320   171,     819 

Lawrence    v.    Barker,    82    Mo. 

App.  125   \,.       82 

Lawrence   v.    Bowman,    6    Rob. 

(La.)    21    819,     855 

Lawrence  v.   Bumham,  4  Nev. 

361 526 

Lawrence  v.  Lippencott,  6  N.  J. 

Eq.  473   207 

Lawrence  v.  Lowrie,  13  Am.  B. 

R.  297 1133,  1170,  1211,  1216 

Lawrence  v.  Young,  1  La.  Ann. 

297 53,       54 

Lawrenceville    Cement    Co.    v. 

Parker,  60  Hun   (N.  Y.),  586     377 
Lawson  v.  Alabama  Warehouse 

Co.,    80   Ala.   341 301 

Lawson  v.  Alabama  Warehouse 

Co.,  73  Ala.  289   

830,  831,  832,  900,     956 
Lawson  v.  Dunn,  66  N.  J.  Eq. 

90 678,  688,     689 

Lawson  v.  Funk^  108  111.  502.. 

384,  572 
Lawson  v.  Warren,  89  Ala,  584.  1039 
Lawton    v.    Levy,    2    Edw.    Ch. 

(N.   Y.)    197    796 

Lawyer   v.   Barker,   46   W.   Va. 

468 302 

Lawyer  v.  Turpin,  91  U.  S.  114.  1153 

Lay  v.  Seago,  47  Ga.  82 428 

Layman  v.  Denton    (Tenn.  Ch. 

App.),  42  S.  W.  153 163,     166 

Layson  v.  Rowan,  7  Rob.  (La.) 

1 408 

Layton  v.  Bank  of  Calhoun,  22 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  872 345,    382 

Lazarus   Jewelry   Co.   v.   Stein- 

hardt,   112  Fed.  614 794 

Lazarus  v.  Rosenberg,  70  App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    105 694,1016 

Lea  V.  West  Co.,  1  Am.  B.  R. 

261 1106,  1139,  1225,  1226 

Leach  v.  Ansbacher,  55  Pa.  St. 
«6 717 


PAGK 

Leach   v.   Devereuz,    32   S.   W. 

(Tex.)    837    640 

Leach  v.  Fowler,  22  Ark.  143. 

893,  906 
Leach  v.  Francis,  41  Vt.  670..  582 
Leach   v.    Flack,    31    Hun    (N. 

Y.),  605    610 

Leach  v.  Selby,  68  Miss.  681 .. .  820 
Leach  v.  Shelly,  58  Miss.  681 . .  942 
Leach  v.  Tilton,  40  N.  H.  473. 

663,  664 
Leadman   v.   Harris,    14   N.    0. 

144 294,     986 

Leaf  V.  Marriott^  4  Ohio  S.  k 

C.   PI.    Dec.   402 814 

Leake  v.  Anderson,  43  S.  C.  448. 

226,  320 
Leasure  v.  Cobum,  57  Ind.  274.  994 
Leasure  v.  Forquer,  27  Or.  334. 

856,  857 
Leathwhite   v.   Bennet,    11    Atl. 

(N.  J.)    29   373 

Leavell  v.  Leavell,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

489 :..... .*.     346 

Leavitt  v.  Blatehford,  17  N.  Y. 

^  621 456 

Leavitt  v.  Jones,  54  Vt.  423 155 

Leavitt  v.  La  Force,  71  Mo.  353  389 
Leavitt  v.   Leavitt,    47    N.    H. 

329 279,     284 

LeBlanc  v.  Dubroca,  6  La.  Ann. 

360 178 

Le  Due  V.  Brandt,  110  N.  C.  289     ' 

818,  823,     826 
Ledyard  v.  Butler,  9  Paige   (N. 

Y.),  132 723,     724 

Lee   v.   Abbe,   2   Root    (Conn.), 

359 721 

Lee  V.  Brown,  7  Ga.  275... 200,  215 
Lee  V.  Cole,  44  K.  J.  Eq.  323..  27 
Lee  V.  Cole,  44  N.  J.  Eq.  318. . 

373,     688 

Lee  V.  Figg,  37  Cal.  328 686 

Lee  V.  Flanagan,  29  N.  C.  471.     312 

Lee  V.  Hollister,  5  Fed.  762 

148,  360,  366,  761,  1038 
I^ee  V.  Huntoon,  1  Hoff.  Oh.  (N. 

Y.)    447 643 

Lee  V.  Lamprey,  43  N.  H.  13..     947 

Lee  V.  Lee,  77  Ind.  251.. 

801,  806,     807 

Lee  V.  Orr,  70  Cal.  398 843 

Lee  V.  Savannah  Guano  (>>.,  99 

Ga.  672 362 

Lee  V.  Wathen,  42  Ky.  297 .. . 

237,     319 
Lee  V.   Whitehead,   8   La.   Ann. 

81 53 


Table  of  Cases. 


clxvii 


PAGE 

Lee    V.    WilkiiUy  79  Mo.  App. 

159 , 724 

Lee  V.  Willis,  101  Va.  188 898 

Leech  v.  ShanU,  2  Phila.  (Fa.) 

310 990 

Leen  Kee  y.  Smith,  35  La.  Ann. 

518 580 

Leeper  y.  Bates^  85  Mo.  224... 

247      983 
LePevre  v.  Phillips,  81  Hun  (n! 

Y.),  232 803 

Leffel  y.   Schemerhom,  13  Neb. 

342 250,     276 

Lefmann  y.  Brill,  124  Fed.  44. 

634,  637,     773 
Legg  y.  Olney,  1  Den.   (N.  Y.) 

202 940 

liCgg  y.  Willard,  34  Mass.  140.  547 
Leggat  y.  Leggat,  79  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    141    800,     801 

Leggett  y.  Humphreys,  62  U.  S. 

66 482 

LeGierse    y.    Kellum,    66    Tex. 

242 679,     756 

LeGierse  y.  Whitehurst,  66  Tex. 

244 621 

Legro  y.  Lord,  10  Me.  161 

152,  160,    418 
Le  Herisse  y.  Hess,  67  Atl.   (N. 

J.)  808 335,     410 

Lehman   y.   Bently^    60    N.    Y. 

Super.   Ct.  473    297 

Lehman  y.  Bryan,  67  Ala.  558.  159 
Lehman  y.  Coulon,  106  La.  431.  968 
Lehman  y.  Crosby,  99  Fed.  542.  865 
Lehman  y.   Greenhut,    88    Ala. 

478 394,  483,     904 

Lehman  y.  Gunn,  124  Ala.  217. 

123,   126,     129 
Lehman  y.  Kelly,  68  Ala.  192. . 

313,  570,  574,  576,  612,     626 
Lehnuin  y.   Leyy^   30   La.   Ann. 

745 263,     371 

Lehman  y.  Meyer,  67  Ala.  396.  869 
Lehman  y.  Van  Winkle,  92  Ala. 

443 846 

Lehmberg  y.  Biberstein,  51  Tex. 

457 195,     814 

Ijehmer  v.  Herr,   1   Duy.    (Ky.) 

360 955 

Lehr  y.  Brodbeck^   192   Pa.   St. 

535 527 

Leibes  y.  Steffy,  4  Ariz.  11 519 

Leioester  y.  Rose,  4  East,  371. .     656 

Leieh  y.  Dee,  86  Iowa,  709 625 

L^idigh  Oarriage  Ck>.  y.  Stengel, 

2  Am.   B.  R.  383 1069 


PAQE 

Leighton  y.  Morrill,   159  Mass. 

271 258 

Leinbach    y.    Templin,   105  Pa. 

St.  522 108 

Leinkauff    y.    Prenkle,   80   Ala. 

136 503,     599 

Leitch  y.  Hollister.  4  N.  Y.  211. 

420,  421,     428 
Lemay  y.  Bibeau,  2  Minn.  291. 

69,  84,  213,     632 
Lemert  y.  McKibben,  91   Iowa, 

345 660,     561 

Lemp  Brewing  CJo.    y.    LaRose, 

20  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  575 756 

Lempriere    y.    Pasley,  2  T.  R. 

485 540 

Lenard  y.  Barnett,  70  Ind.  367.  370 
Lenhardt  y.  Ponder,  64  S.  C.  364  588 
Lennon  y.  Parker,  21  R.  I.  43. 

103,  416,  435,  437 
Lenox  v.  Notrebe,  15  Fed.  Oa«. 

No.  8,246 66,  69,  634 

Lent  y.  Shear,  160  N.  Y.  462. . .  922 
Leonard  y.  Baker,  1  M.  &  S. 

251 255,  518 

Leonard  y.  Barnett,  70  Ind.  367  140 
Leonard    v.    Bolton,    153   Mass. 

428 201 

Leonard  y.  Bryant,  56  Mass.  32 

645,     672 
Leonard  y.  Clinton,  26  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  288 119,     685 

Leonard  y.  Dayis,   1  Black    (U. 

S.)   476 542,     547 

Leonard  y.  Green,  30  Minn.  496 

'  682,     683 

Leonard  y.  Green,  34  Minn.  137.  820 
Leonard  v.  New  England  Mortg. 

Security  Co.,  102  Ga.  536 .. .     856 
Leonard   v.   Winslow,   2   Grant. 

Cas.   (Pa.)    139 313 

Leonhard  y.  Flood,  68  Ark.  162.  905 
Leoschigk  y.   Hatfield,    5    Rob. 

(N.  Y.)    26    , 309 

LePage  v.  Slade,  79  Tex.  473 . . 

297,     581 

Lepin  y.  Coon,  54  Neb.  664 554 

Leppig  y.  Bretzel,  48  Mich.  321. 

509,    513 
Leque  v.  Stroppel,  64  Minn.  152. 

382,  692,  696,  698 
Leqve  y.  Smith,  63  Minn.  24. . .  907 
Leroux    y.    Hudson,    109    U.    S. 

468 1208 

Lerow    y.    Wilmarth^    9    Allen 

(Mass.),  382 119 

Lerow    y.    Wilmarth.    91    Mass. 


dxviii 


Tablb  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

382 339,  377,  632 

Leroy  v.  Dickinson,  11  N.  C. 

223 46 

Le  Roy  y.  Rogers,  3  Paige   (N. 

Y.),  234 1039 

Le  Saulnier  v.  Krueger,  85  Wis. 

214 358,  368,    898 

Lesem  v.  Herriford,  44  Mo.  323. 

529,  711 
Leslie  v.  Joyner,  39  Tenn.  514. 

91,  104,  110,  112,  116,  153 
Lesseh  v.  Brown,  75  Conn.  491.  942 
Lesseps  v.  Wickis,   12  La.  Ann. 

739 907 

Leeser  v.  Boekhoff,  33  Mo.  App. 

223 990;     991 

Lesser  v.   Bradford  Realty  Co., 

15  Am.  B.  R.   123 1205 

Lesser  v.  Brown,  75  Conn.  491. 

937,   944,     955 
Lesser  v.  Driesen,  2  Lack.  Leg. 

N.    (Pa.)    343    960,     964 

L'Estrange  v.  Robinson,  1  Hog. 

.(Eng.)  202. 327 

Lett  y.  Commercial  Bank,  24  U. 

C.  Q.  B.  552    113 

Letz  V.  Smith,  94  Iowa,  301 .. .     974 
Leukener  v.  Freeman^  2  Freem. 

(Eng.)  236 201 

Leiipod  V.  Krause,  95  111.  440. .      162 
Level  Land  Co.  No.  3  v.  Sivyer, 

112  Wis.  442   

763,  794,  799,  844,     857 
Levering  v.  Bimel,  146  Ind.  545. 

458,  490 
Levering   v.    Norvell,    68    Tenn. 

178 269 

Levering    v.    Norvell,    9    Baxt. 

(Tenn.)    176 340,  1031 

Levi  v.  Hamilton,  68  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)   277 494 

Levi  V.  Morgan,  33  La.  Ann.  532 
Levi  V.  Picard,  17  Am.  B.  R. 

430 1195,  1196 

85,  184,     371 
Levi  V.  Rothschild,  69  Md.  348. 

897,  972 
Levi  V.  Welsh,  45  N.  J.  Kq.  867.  879 
Levine  v.  Clatiin,  31  U.  C.  C.  P. 

600 113 

Levine     v.     Rouss     (Tex.    Civ. 

App.),  49  S.  W.   1051 450 

Levis    Zukoski,    Mercantile   Co. 

V.   Bowers,    105  Tenn.   138...     178 
Levor  v.  Seiter,  8  Am.  B.  R.  459. 

1142,  1143,  1164,  1185 
Levy   V.    Crittenden^     120     Ind. 

37 1021 


PAGR 

Levy  V.  Hamilton,  68  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    277    331,  603,     697 

Levy  V.  Kentucky  Distilling  Co., 

9  Ky.  L.  Rep.  103 87 

Levy  V.  Levy,  57  Atl.    (N.  J.) 

ion.  ....   958 

Levy  V.   Marx    (Miss.),   18   So. 

575 873,  103el 

Levy  V.  Scott,  116  Cal.  39 536 

Levy  V.  Welsh,  2  Edw.  Ch.    (N. 

Y.)  438 519 

Levy  V.  Williams,  79  Ala.  171. 

457,  495,  599,  603.  604 
Levy  V.  Woodcock,  63  N.  H.  413  62 
Levyson  v.   Ward,  24  I^a.  Ann. 

158 882 

Lewin  v.  Hopping,  67  Cal.  541.  416 
Lewis  V.  Alexander,  31  S.  W. 

(Tex.)  414 583 

Lewis  V.  Baker,  38  Tenn.  385..    1022 
Lewis  V.   Bishop,  47   App.   Div. 

(N.  M.)    554    1204 

Lewis    V.    Boardman,    78    App. 

Div.    (N.   Y.)    394 902,     970 

Iwcwis  V.  Bush,  30  Minn.  244 ...       87 
Lewis   V.   Cline    (Miss.),   5    So. 

112 799 

Jjcwis    V.    Carpenter,    8    Gratt. 

(Va.)    148 329,  333,  358,     41S 

422,  561,  1034 
Jjewis    V.    Castleman,    27    Tex. 

407 218,   221,   633,     955- 

Lewis  V.  Connolly,  29  Neb.  222.    1000 
Lewis  V.  Dudley,  70  N.  H.  694. 

722,  724,  1001) 
Lewis  V.   Gibson,    1    Tenn.    Cas. 

163 23J> 

Lewis   V.    Herrera     (Ariz.),     85 

Pac.  245 274 

Lewis  V.  Holdrege,  56  Neb.  379. 

178,  632 
Lewis  V.  Holdrege,  55  Neb.  173.  959 
Lewis  V.  Hughes,  49  Kan.  23 . .  45t> 
I^wis  V.  Kash,  25  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1241 963 

Lewis  V.  Ivamphere,  79  111.  187. 

560,  763,     801 
IjewiB  V.  Lindlev,  19  Mont.  422. 

897,  905 
Lewis  V.  Rees,  3  Jur.  N.  S.  12. 

215,     218 

Lewis  V.  Rice,  61  Mich.  97 

04,  258,     917 
Lewis  V.  Simon,  72  Tex.  470. . . 

190,  350 
Lev/is  V.   St.    Albans    Iron.  etc.. 

Works,  50  Vt.   477 869 

Lewis  V.  Swift,  54  HI.  436 526 


Table  of  Cases. 


clxix 


PAGE 

Lewis  y.  Whiiten,  112  Mo.  318.    816 

Lewis  V.  Wilcox,  6  Nev.  216 636 

Lewy  y.  Flschl,  66  Tex.  311 .. . 

462,  490,  491,  493,  693,     596 
Ley  y.  Madill,   1   U.  C.  Q.   B. 

546 756 

Ley  y.  Reitz,  26  Dl.  App.  616 . .  699 
Libby  y.  Crossley,  31  Fed,  647.  973 
Lichtenberg  v.  Herdtfelder,   103 

N.  Y.  302 766,     803 

Liddle  v.  Allen,  90  Iowa,  738 . .  688 
Lide  V.  Parker,  60  Ala.  165. .. .  778 
Liebenthal    v.    Price,    8    Wash. 

206 1062 

Lieber  v.  Laeber^   17  Mont.   Co. 

Rep.    (Pa.)    34   349 

Lienkauf  y.  Morris,  66  Ala.  406. 

256,  271 
Light  V.  Kennard,  11  Neb.  129.  340 
TJgon    V.    Tillman     (Tex.    Civ. 

App.),  43  8.  W.   1069... 296,     611 
Lillard  y.  Johnson,  148  Mo.  23. 

610,     917 
Lillard  v.  McGee,  7  Ky.  165... 

14,  187,  201,  225,  240,  761,     771 
LilHanthal  y.   Lesser,   102  App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    600 692 

Lillibridge   v.   Walsh,   97   Mich. 

459 158 

Lillienthal     v.      Dnicklieb,     92 

Fed.  763 m,     766 

Lillie    V.    McMillan,    52    Iowa, 

463 892,  948,  1005 

Liming  v.  Kyle,  31  Neb.  649...  1000 
Lincoln  v.  Claflin,  74  U.  S.  132.  924 
Linooln  v.   McLaughlin,   74   111. 

11 187,  194,     348 

Lincoln  v.  Wilbur,     125    Mass. 

249 946 

Lindell  Real  Estate  Co.  v.  Lin- 
dell,  133  Mo.  386. .  .  .206,  814,  1026 
Lindle   y.   Neville,    13    Serg.    & 

R.  (Pa.)   227    473 

Lindlev  v.  Cross,  31  Ind.  106.. 

^  36,     779 

Lindsey  v.  Lambert  Bldg.,  etc., 

Assoc,  4  Fed.  48.. 624 

Lindsley  v.  Van  Cortlandt,   142 

N.  Y.  682 608,  509,     511 

line  V.  State,  131  Ind.  468....  1006 
Liner  v.  Thielke,  115  Wis.  389.  238 
Lininser  v.  Herron,  18  Neb.  450 

392,     678 

Link  V.  Harrington,  41  Mo.  App. 

636 526 

linkman   v.   Wilcox,    Fed.   Cas. 

No.  8,374 1093 

Linneman   v.   Bieber^     85     Hun 


PAGE 

(N.  Y.),  477    764 

Linsey  v.  McGannon,  9  W.  Va. 

164 633 

Linton  v.  Buts,  7  Pa.  St.  89...     644 
Linz  y.  Atchison,   14  Tex.  Civ. 

App.  647 333,  973,  1062 

Lionberger  v.  Baker,  88  Mo.  447 

233,  284,  293,  322,  340,  363,  769 
Lionberger  v.  Baker,  14  Mo. 

App.  353 388,  410 

Lipperd   v.    Edwards,     39     Ind. 

165 867 

Lippert   v.   Qilmartin,   37    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    411 311 

Lippincott     v.    Shaw    Carriage 

Co.,  25  Fed.  577 1033 

Lippitt   V.    Gilmartin,   37    App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    411 480 

Lippman     v.     Boals,     16     Lea. 

(Tenn.)  283 180 

Lipscomb  v.  Lyon,  19  Neb.  511. 

369,  392,  398,     968 
Lipscomb  v.  McClellan,  72  Ala. 

151 895 

Litchfield    v.    Pelton,    6    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    187   244,  257,     879 

Little  V.   Holly    Brooks    Hard- 
ware Co.,  13  Am.  N.  R.  422. 

1130,  1155 
Little  V.  Lichkoff,  98  Ala.  321.  947 
Little  V.  Ragan,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

391 183,     348 

Little  V.  Sterne,  125  Ala.  609.. 

849,  850,  855,  859,  861,     862 
Livermore  v.  Boutelle,  77  Mass. 

217 192,  700,     752 

Livesay  v.  Beard,  22  W.  Va.  585 

72,  74,  76,  77,  232,  355,  523,     530 
589,  591,  692,  696,  954,     978 
Livesley  v.  Heise  (Or.),  85  Pac. 

509 291,  581,     909 

Livey  v.  Winton,  30  W.  Va.  554 

398,  894,  898,     899 
Livingston  v.   Bruce,   Fed.  Cas. 

8,410 1093 

Livingston  v.  Littell,    15    Wis. 

218 523,     547 

Livingston   v.   Wright,    88    Ga. 

33 612 

Livre  v.  Thielke,  116  Wis.  389. 

230,     311 

Lloyd  v.  Foley,  11  Fed.  410 638 

Lloyd  v.  Fulton,  91  U.  S.  479.. 

6,  9,  17,  266,  280,     338 
Lloyd  V.   Williams,   21   Pa.   St. 

327 , 610,     511 

Lobsenz  v.  Burton,  68  N.  J.  L. 

566 732 


J 


clxx 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Lobstein  v.  Lehn,  120  111.  549. . 

691,  693,     695 
Locheixn  v.  Eversole,  24  Ky.  L. 

Rep,  1031 797,     798 

Locke   y.   Duncan,   47   111.   App. 

110 458 

Locke  V.  Hedrick,  24  Kan.  763.     520 
Lockard  v.  Nash,  64  Ala.  385 . . 

186,  337,  347,  676,  678,     864 
Lockhard  v.  Becklev,  10  W.  Va. 

87 9,  24,   136,   193,  225,     268 

344,  349,  414,  671,  674,     582 
686,  627,  703,  706,     976 
Lockren  v.  Rustan^  9  N.  D.  43. 

295,  461,  466,  590,  592,     595 
698,  646,  658,   668,     669 
Lockwood    V.    Doane,     107    111. 

235 923 

Lockwood  V.    Harding,    79   Ind. 

129 437,     860 

Lockwood  V.  Nelson,  16  Ala.  294 

326,  1005 
Lockyer  v.  DeHart,  6  N.  J.  L. 

450 377 

Lodor  V.  Creighton,  9  U.  C.  C. 

P.  295 91,       99 

Loeb  V.    Leon,    2    Tex.    Unrep. 

Cas.  445 462 

Loeb  V.  Manasses,  78  Ala.  555. 

737,     751 
Loehr  v.  Murphy,  46  Mo.  App. 

519 343,     863 

Loeschi^  y.  Addison,   19  Abb. 
Pr.    (N.   y.)    169...  183,   191,    24B 
270,  343,  347,  599,  903,    909 
Loeschigk  v.  Baldwin,    1    Rob. 

(N.  Y.)  377 310 

Loeschi^  y.  Bridge,  42  N.  Y. 

421 256,  271,  273,     618 

Loeschigk  y.  Hatfield,  61  N.  Y. 

660 278 

Loesohigk  y.  Hatfield,  28  N.  Y. 

Super.  Ot.  26   265 

Loeser  y.  Sayings  Depoeit  Bank 
&,  Trust  Co.    (C.  C.  A.),   17 

Am.  B.  R.  628   1166 

Logan  y.  Brick,  2  Del.  Ch.  206.     672 
Logan  y.  Logan,  22  Fla.  661 .. . 

672,  769,  771,     798 
Lohmann  y.  Stocke,  94  Mo.  672. 

969,     965 
Lokerson  y.  Stillwell,   13  N.  J. 

Eq.  357 634 

Lombaert  y.  Morris,  2  Del.  Co. 

R.    (Pa.)    467    334 

Lombard  y.  Dows,  66  Iowa,  243. 

226,  237,  317,  321,  486,  909 


PAGK 

London  y.  Martin,  149  N.  Y. 

686 456,  474,  486 

Long  V.  Deposit  Bank,  28   Ky. 

L.  Rep.  913    810,     399 

Long  V.  Efurd,  80  Ala.  267 371 

Long  V.   Evening  News    Assoc., 

113   Mich.   261    917,     940 

Long  V.    Farmers*   State   Bank, 

17  Am.  B.  R.  103.1154,  1165,  1191 
Long  y.  Hancock,   12  Can.  Sup. 

Ct.  532 468 

Long  V.  Klein,  35  La.  Ann.  384.  665 
Long  V.  Wright,  48  N.  C.  290. .  220 
Long   V.    Yancey ville    Bank,    81 

N.  C.  42    ...'. •   864 

Long    Branch    Banking    Co.    y. 

Dennis,  56  N.  J.  Eq.  549 

182,  300,  337,     348 
I>ongeway  y.  Mitchell,  17  Grant 

*Ch.    (U.   C.)    190 777,     789 

Longfellow  v.  Barbard,  68  Neb. 

612 714 

I^ngley  v.  Daly,  1  S.  D.  257. . .  525 
Loomis    y.    Stewart,     75    Iowa, 

389 459 

Loomis  V.  People,   19  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  601 1064,  1066 

Loomis  V.   Tifft,    16   Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   641 789,  874,  1044 

Looney    y.    Bartlett,     106    Mo. 

App.  619 615,  638,     661 

Loos  y.  Wilkinson,    113    N.    Y. 

485 693,  698,  699,  1053 

LooB  y.   Wilkinson,    110   N.   Y. 

196 18,  129,  133,     688 

690,  941,     949 

Lopez  y.  Beroel,  12  La.  197 

179,  831,    956 
Lopez  y.  Merchanta',  etc.,  Nat. 

Bank,   18  App.  Diy.    (N.  Y.) 

427 784,     814 

Lord  V.  Bishop,  101  Ind.  334..  140 
Lord  y.  Deyendorf,  64  Wis.  491.  242 
Lord  y.  Harte,  118  Mass.  271.  118 
Lord  y.  Locke,  62  N.  H.  666. . .     381 

Lord  y.  Poor,  23  Me.  669 .. .     110 

Lord  y.  Seymour,  85  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  617   1183 

Lore  V.  Dierkes,  51  N.  Y.  Super. 

Ct.  144 692,  694,  699,  1031 

Lore  y.  Getsinger,  7  N.  J.  Eq. 

191 812,  816.     872 

Loring  y.  Dimning,  16  Fla.  119. 

231,  330,     331 
Lormore  y.  Qampbell,  60  Barb. 

62 347 

Loth   y.    Faoonesowich,   22   Mo. 

App.  68 45 


Table  of  Cases. 


clxxi 


PAGE 

Lott  T.  Gray,  6  Rob.   (La,)   152. 

85,     179 

Lott  V.  Kaiser,  61  Tex.  673 202 

Loucheim   v.    First   Nat.   Bank, 

98  Ala.  521    334,  428,     855 

Loucheim   v.    Seyfarth,    49    111. 

App.  661 538 

I^oudon  V.  Blandford,  56  Ga.  150  1233 
Louden    v.    Vinton,    108    Mich. 

313 228,  238,     317 

I^udheim    y.    White,    67    How. 

Pr.    (N.    Y.)    467 117 

Lou^hridge      v.      Bowland.  •   52 

Miss.  546 182,  206,     560 

Louis   V.   Belgard,  63  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  630 815,     863 

Louisiana    Sugar    Refining    Co. 

V.  Harrison,  9  Tex.  Civ.  App. 

141 600,     613 

Louisville    City    Nat.    Bank    v. 

Woolridge,   116  Ky.  641... 96,     149 
Louisville  Trust  Co.   v.   Comin- 

gor,  184  U.  S.  18 

1214,  1215,  1229 
Love  V.  Hudson,  24  Tex.  Civ. 

App.  377 896 

Ijove  V.  Export  Storage  Co.   (C. 

C.  A.),  16  Am.  B.  R.  171....   1124 

I»ve  V.  Mikals,  11  Ind.  227 789 

Love  V.  Tinsley,  32  W.  Va.  25.     633 
Love  V.  Tomlinson,  1  Colo.  App. 

516.  .  '; 927 

Lover  v.  Mann,  2  Am.  L.  ^J.  N. 

&   (Pa.)   95   567 

Love  joy  v.  Irelan,  17  Md.  626. 

819,     823 
Lovell  V.  Kewton^  4  C.  P.  D.  7 . 

113,     114 
Lovell   V.   Payne,   30   La.   Ann. 

511 905 

Loving    V.    M^ler,    20    Ey.    L. 

Rep.  1664. 876 

Loving  V.  Pairo,  10  Iowa,  282. 

771,    796 
Lonng  V.  Sweeney,  20  Ky.   L. 

Rep.  1654 387 

Low  y.  Garter,  21  N.  H.  433. . . 

414,  423,  434,     439 
Low  ▼.  Ivy,   10  Pa.  Super.  Ot. 

32 414 

Low  V.  Marco,  63  Me.  46 763 

Low  V.  Wertman,  44  N.  J.  Eq. 

193 382,     461 

Lowe  V.  Watson,  140  Ul.  108.. 

554,  666,     557 
Lowenstein    v.    Abramsohn,    76 

Miss.  890 970 

Lowensteixk  v.  Fudickar,  43  La. 


PAGFs 

Ann.  886 580 

Lowenstein    v.    McShane     Mfg. 

Co..  12  Am.  B.  R.  602 

1073,  1081.  1101 
Lowentrout    v.    Campbell,     130 

111.  603 404 

Lowery  v.   Coulter,    9    Pa.    St 

349 47 

Lowery  v.  Howard.  35  Ind.  170. 

233,  241,  242,  290,  353,     574 

Lowiy  V.  Fisher,  65  Ky.  70 

183,  266,  274,  280,  341,     346 
Lowry  v.  Pinson,  2  Bailey    (S. 

C),  324.  .  ^ 67,     201 

Lowry  v.  Tew,  3  Barb.  Ch.    (N. 

Y.)  407 877 

Lowther  v.  Rader,    102    N.    Y. 

Supp.  929 266,     456 

Lowther  Oil   Co.   v.   Miller-Sib- 
ley Oil  Co.,  63  W.  Va.  501 . . .     656 
Loy  V.  Rorick,    100    Mo.    App. 

105 ^^,     348 

Lucas  V.  Birdsey,  41  Conn.  357. 

74,  77,     173 
Lucas  V.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269. . . 

463,  485,  489,  490,     491 
500,  501,     570 
Lucas  V.  Lucas,  103  111.  121... 

348,     375 
Luce  V.  Barnum,   19  Mo.  App. 

359 167 

Ludes  V.  Hood,  29  Kan.  49 764 

Ludlow    V.     Dutton,     1     Phila. 

(Pa.)   226 761 

Ludlow  V.  Hurd,  19  Johns.   (N. 

y.)  218 311,    600 

Ludwig  V.  Fuller,  17  Me.  162. 

621,  639,  541,     669 
Luers  v.  Bumjes,  34  N.  J.  Eq. 

19 368 

Lufkin  V.  Collins,  2  Ida*.  160. . .     644 
Luhrs  V.   Hancock    (Ariz.),   67 

Pac.  605 169 

Lukins  v.  Aird,  6  WaU.  (U.  S.) 

79 23,  430,  436,    437 

Lumsden  v.  Scott,  4  Ont.  323..     204 
Lund  V.   Equitable  Life  Assur. 

Soc.,  N.  J.  Eq.  355 624 

Lush  V.  Wilkinson,  6  Ves.  Jr. 

384 96,  328,    341 

Lusk  V.  Riggs  (Neb.),  97  N.  W. 

1033 895 

Lutkenhoff     v.     Lutkenhoff,    13 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  584 1051 

Lutton  V.  Hesson,  18  Pa.  St. 

109 993 

Lux  V.   Davidson^  66  Hun    (N. 

y.),  346 784 


clxxii 


Table  of  Cases. 


Lycoming  Rubber  Co.  v.  King, 

90    Iowa,   343    

236,  318,  506,  607, 
Lydecker  v.  Smith,  44  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  454 

Lydia  Pinkham  Medicine  Co.  v. 

Gibba,  108  Ga.  138 861, 

Lyman    r.    Oessford,    15    Iowa, 

229 191,  193,  285,  906, 

Lyman  v.  Place,  26  N.  J.  Eq.  30. 
Lyman  v.  Tarbell,  30  Vt.  463.. 
Lynch  v.  Burt.  132  Fed.  417. . . 
695,  697.  713,  737, 
Lynch    v.    Englehardi^Winning- 

Davidson    Mercantile    Co.,    1 

Neb.    (Unoff.)    528    

Lynch  v.  Johnson,  48  N.  Y.  27. 
Lynch  v.  Raleigh,  3  Ind.  273.. 
Lynch  v.  Sanders,  39  Ky.  59 . . 
Lynch  v.  Welah,  3  Pa.  St.  294. 
Lynde  v.  McGregor,    95    Mass. 

172,  182.. 71,  75,  79,  82,  130, 

227, 
Lyne  v.   C(»nmonwealth    Bank, 

28  Ky.  645   148,  361, 

Lyne  v.  Wann,  72  Ala.  43 

Lynn  v.  Le  Gierse,  48  Tex.  138. 

67,  734, 

Lynn  ▼.  Lyerle,  113  111.  128. . . 

656, 

Lyon    V.    Ballentine,    63    Mich. 

97 

Lyon  V.  Boiling,  14  Ala.  753 . . . 

Lyon  V.  Boiling,  9  Ala.  403 

Lyon  V.  Clark,  129  Mich.  381 . . 

^  1160, 

Lyon  V.  Clark,  2  N.  B.  N.  R. 

792 

Lyon  v!  BLaddodc,  69  Iowa,  682 
Lyon  V.  Hampton,    20    Pa.    St. 

46 

Lyon  V.  Miarshall,  11  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)  241 

Lyon  ▼.  Robbins,  46  111.  276. . . 

Lyon  V.  Rood,  12  Vt.  233 

462,  471, 
Lyons   y.  Hamilton,    72    Iowa, 

759 

Lyons  v.  Hamilton,  69  Iowa,  47. 

691, 
Lyons  v.  Lancaster,   14   S.  W. 

405 

Lyons  v.  Leahy,  15  Or.  8 

688,  615,  716, 

Lyons  y.  Murray,  95  Mo.  23 

290,  789, 
Lyons  v.  Urgalones,  189  Mass. 

424 784,  737, 


PA08 

605 

791 

871 

910 

1014 

894 

738 

399 
764 
192 
645 
688 

203 

924 

626 
366 

760 

662 

238 
110 
206 

1183 

1220 
330 

987 

481 
1036 

504 

585 

612 

696 

718 

802 

741 


PAGB 

Lytle  V.  Black,  107  Ga.  386 339 

Lytle  V.  Scott,  2  111.  App.  646. 

160,  274,  278,  340 


Maas  y.  Miller,  58  Ohio  St.  483.  833 
Maasch  y.  Grauer,  58  App.  Div. 

560 239,  353 

Maasch  v.  Parkin,  58  App.  Div. 

(N.   Y.)    560    243 

Maass  v.  Falk,  146  N.  Y.  34 . . . 

74,  456 
Maass  v.  Falk,  146  N.  Y.  34. . . 

77,  600 
Mabbett  v.  White,  12  X.  Y.  442.  464 
Mace  V.  Roberts,  97  Wis.  199.. 

247,     744 
Macdona  v.  Swiney,  8  Ir.  C.  L. 

73 ; 518 

MacDonald    v.    MacDonald,    57 

Hun    (N.  Y.),  594 960 

MacDonald  v.  Moore,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  8,763 1098 

Miack  V.  Block,  S.  S.  W.   (Tex.) 

495 226,     306 

Mackason's  Appeal,  42  Pa.   St. 

330 133,     137 

Maekay  v.   Douglass,   L.   R.    13 

Eq.   (Eng.)    106   190 

MacKaye    y.    Soule,    25    N.    Y. 

Supp.  798 1044 

Mackel  v.  Rochester,  14  Am.  B. 

R.  429.  • 1226 

Mackenzie   y   Thomas,    118   Ga. 

728 1041 

Mackellax  y.  Pillsbury,  48  Minn. 

396 460,     621 

Mackey  y.  Douglass,  L.  R.    14 

Eq.  106 903 

Mackey    y.    Pettijohn,    6    Kan. 

App.  57 86 

Mackie  y.   Cairns,  6  Cow.    (N. 

Y.)  647 71,    415 

Maoomber  y.  Peck,  39  Iowa,  351.    436 
Macomber  y.  Parker,  31   Mass. 

497 521 

Macomber  y.  Parker,   30  Mass. 

175 641,  547,     550 

Macon  Grocery  Co.  v.  Beach,  19 

Am.  B.  R.  558 1091 

Madden  y.  Day,    1    Bailey   (S. 

C),  587 55» 

Maddox  y.  Epler,  48  111.  App. 

265 406 

Maddox  x.  Reynolds,    69    Ark. 

541 604,    91^ 

Maddox  y.   Summerlin,  92  Tex. 

483 90a 


Table  of  Cases. 


clxxiii 


PAGE 

Madera  ▼.  Whallon,  65  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  622 1017 

Mftdisonville    Bank     ▼.     M0CO7 

(Tenn.   Ch.  App.),  42  «.  W. 

814 973 

Maffi    T.    Stephens,    93    S.    W. 

(Tex.)   158 998 

Magee   ▼.    Raigiiel,    64   Pa.    St. 

110 683 

Magniae  y.  Thompson,   16   Fed. 

O18.  No.  8,956    338,     678 

Magniac  v.   Thompson,    7    Pet. 

(U.  &)  348 467,     612 

MaiTniac  v.  Thomson,   32  U.  S. 

348 322,  326,  684,     590 

Magovem  v.  Richard,  27   S.  E. 

*272 462 

Afagruder  v.   Clayton,  29  S.  C. 

407 62,     969 

Magnum  v.   Finucane,  38  Miss. 

354 613 

Mahaney  v.  Lezier,  16  Md.  69. . 

846,     861 
Mahaaka     County    v.     Whitsel, 

110  N.  W.   (Iowa)   614 369 

Maher  t.  Swift,  14  Neb.  324. . .  668 
Mahle  v.   Kurtz,  9  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 

280 196,     670 

Mahler  v.   Schloss,   7   Daly    (N. 

Y.),  291 431,  447,  994 

Mahoney  v.  Hunter,  30  Ind. 

246 299 

Mahoney  ▼.  James^  94  Va.  176. 

126,     161 
Mahoney  y.  McWalters,  3  App. 

Diy.  248 713,  714,     786 

Main  y.  Glen,  16  Fed.  Caa.  No. 

8,973 268,  1210 

Main  y.  Lynch,  64  Md.  668... 

677,  916,    926 
Mairs  y.  Remaen,  3  Code  Rep. 

X38 813 

Maish  y.  Crangle,  80  Iowa,  660. 

691,    966 
Majorowicz  y.  Payson^  163  111. 

484 209 

Malady    y.    McEnary,    30    Ind. 
273 39 

Malcolm  v.'  Hai^ '  1  Md.  Ch.  i72  460 
Maloom  Brewing  Co.  y.  Wagner 

(N.  J.  Ch.).  45  Atl.  260 905 

MsLlcom  Brewing  Co.  y.  Wagner, 

45  Atl.    (N.  J.)    260 971 

Maley  y.  Barrett,  34  Tenn.  601 .  760 
Mallard    y.    First    Nat.    Bank 

(Neb.),  59  N.  W.  767 165 

Malloch    y.    Plunkett,   9  Qrant 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   566 769 


PAGK 

Malloney    y.    Horan,   49    N.    Y. 

Ill 1034 

Mallory  v.  Gallagher,  75  Conn. 

666 685,     858 

Mallory   v.   Kirkpatrick,   64   N. 

J.  Eq.   60    100 

Mallow   V.   Walker,    115    Iowa, 

238 185,  660,  789,  1038 

Maloiie     y.     Hamilton,     Minor 

(Ala.),  286 428 

Malone   v.   Brown     (Tenn.    Ch. 

App.),  46  S.  W.   1004 560 

Maloney   v.    Bewley,    10    Heisk. 

(Tenn.)    642 61 

Maloy  y.  Berkin,  11  Mont.  138. 

233,     353 
Mamlock  y.  White,  20  Cal.  598. 

476,     751 

Manby  v.  Scott,  1  Mod.  132 24 

Manchester  y.  McKee,  9  Hi.  511  866 
Manchester  y.   Tibbitts,   121    N. 

Y.  219 319,     320 

Manchester   y.    Tibbetts,    4    N. 

Y.  Supp.  23 472,  512,     515 

Manchester      y.      Tibbetts,      49 

Hun    (N.  Y.),  612 1061 

Mancil  y.  Mancil,  2  Del.  Co.  R. 

351 369 

Mandeyille  y.  Ayery,  124  N.  Y. 

376 171,  172,  454,  672,     696 

Mandeyille  y.  Campbell,  46  App. 

Diy.    (N.  Y.)   612 771 

Mandloye  y.  Burton,  1  Ind.  39.  164 
Mandigo  y.  Healey,  69  N.  H.  94  454 
Mandy  y.  Mason,  4  Bush  (Ky.), 

339 138 

Maney   y.   Eallough,     15    Tenn. 

440 911,     623 

Mfg.  Co.  y.  Norden,  67  N.  J.  L. 

493 1183 

Mangum  y.  Finucane,  38  Miss. 

354 699 

Mianhard      Hardware      Co.      y. 

Rothschild,  121  Mich.  667...   1050 
Manhattan   Co.   y.  Eyerteon,     6 

Paige   (N.  Y.),  457 293,     877 

Mjanhattan  Co.  y.   Eyertson,    6 

Paige    (N.  Y.),  457    726 

Manhattan    Co.    y.    Osgood,    16 

Johns.    (N.  Y.)    162.... •.273,    936 
Manheim  y.  Claflin,  81  Qa.  129. 

760,  770,  813 
Manley  y.  Larkin,  69  Kan.  660.  440 
Manley  y.  Rassiga,  13  ]^un  (N. 

Y.),  288 204 

Mann  y.  Appel,  31  Fed.  378...     761 
Mann  y.  Broolcs,    7    How.    Pr. 
(N.   Y.)    449    49 


clxxiv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOE 

Mann  v.  Ruby,  102  III.  348 815 

Mannen    ▼.    Stebbins^     1     Kan. 

App.  261 622 

Manney  v.  Hamilton,  132  K.  C. 

295 970 

Manning  v.  Beck,  129  N.  Y.  1. 

486,  493,     600 
Manning  y.  Carruthers,  83  Md. 

1 911 

Manning  v.  Drake,  1  Mich.  34.     849 
Manning  v.  Riley,  52  N.  J.  Eq. 

39 326,  327 

Manor  ▼.  Sheehan,  30  Minn. 

419 228 

Manseau    ▼.    Mueller,    45    Wis. 

430 382 

Mansir  v.  Crosby,  72  Mass.  334.     924 
Manson  v.  Phoenix  Ins.  Co.,  64 

Wis.  26 776 

Mansfield   v.    Dyer,     131    Mass. 

200 708,     723 

Mansfield  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  ^6 

Wash.  665 319 

Mansur,  etc.,  Implement  Ck).  v. 

Jones,  143  Mo.  253 331 

Mansur-Tebbetts  Implement  Ck). 

V.  Ritchie,  143  Mo.  587 1005 

Mansur-Tebbetts  Implement  Co. 

V.  Ritchie,  159  Mo.  213.. 580,  594 
Manton  v.  Moore,  7  T.  R.  67 . . .  541 
Manufacturers*   Bank  ▼.  Rugee, 

59  Wis.  221 529,     534 

Manwaring  v.  O'Brien,  75  Minn. 

642.  .  .  .    613,  924,     979 

Mapes  V.   Bums,   72   Mo.  App. 

41l! 594 

Mapes  T.  Snyder,  59  N.  Y.  450. 

*^  90,     145 

Maple  V.  Bumside,  22  Ind.  139.    520 
Maples  ▼.  Maples,  Rice  Eq.   (S. 

C.)  300 462,    491 

Maple  Valley  Twp.  v.  Foley,  113 

Mich.  622 406 

Marborough  ▼.  Lewis  Cook  Mfg. 

Co.,  32  Kan.  636 333 

Marbury   v.   Brooks,    7    Wheat. 

(U.  S.)  556 ....457,    466 

March     y.     Heaton,     Fed.    Cas. 

9,061 1178 

Marcoffflkr*  v.    Franks,    19   Ky. 

L.  Rep.  1377    1051 

Marcotte  v.  Hartman    (Minn.), 

48  N.  W.  767 840 

Marcum  t.  Powers,   10   Ky.  L. 

Rep.  380—265,  346,  813,  848,  857 
Marcus  v.  Leake,  4  Neb.  354. . .  599 
Marcus      v.      Leake,      4      Neb. 

(Unoff.)   354 393 


PAGK 

Marden  v.  Baboock,  43  Mass.  99. 

521,     986 
Marden     y.     Baboock,    2    Mete. 

(Mass.)   99 291 

Marden  y.  Phillips,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

566 1181,  1182 

Mareton  y.  Dresen,  76  Wis.  418     851 
Marion   Deposit   Ci).   y.   McWil- 

liams,  2  Ohio  Dec.  142 1041 

Marion   Distilling   Co.   y.   Ellis, 

63  Mo.  App.  17 65 

Markey    y.     Umstattd,    53    Mo. 

App.  20 .' 553 

Markham    y.    Whitehurst,    109 

N.  C.  307    364 

Marks  y.  Bradley,  69  Miss.  1 . .     572 

Marks  y.  Crow,  14  Or.  382 

335,  342,  396,     563 
Marks  y.  Hill,  15  GnUt.   (Va.) 

400 1019 

Marks  y.  Miller,  21  Or.  317. . . .     522 
Marks  y.  Reynolds,  12  Abb.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)  403. .  .  .71,  72,  73,  78.     302 
Markson   y.   Heaney,    Fed.   Cas. 

No.  9,098 1178 

Marlatt  y.   Warwick,   19  N.   J. 

Eq.  439 666,     660 

Marlow  y.  Orgill,  8  Jur.  N.  S. 

829 962 

Marmon    y.    Harwood,    26    111. 

App.  341 586 

Marmon  y.   Harwood,    124    111. 

104 125,  340,  572,     57» 

Marmon  y.  White,  151  Ind.  445. 

95,  150,  152,  294     322 
326,  579,     691 
Marquam  y.  Sengfelder,  24  Or. 

2 ....191,  461,  492,     597 

Marquess  y.  Felsenthal,  58  Ark. 

293 473,  502,     603 

Miaxr  y.  Rucker,  20  Tenn.  348 . . 

649,     676 
Marriman  y.  Knight^    7    Okla. 

419 920 

Marriott  y.  Giyens,  8  Ala.  694.     317 
Marsalis  y.  Brown,  1  Tex.  App. 

Ciy.  Cas.  Dec.  453 601 

Marsh  y.  Bennett,  16  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  9,110 575 

Marsh  y.   Burroughs,    16    Fed. 

Cas.  No.  9,112   101 

Marsh  y.  Dayis,  24  Vt.  363 

242  462  480 
Marsh  y.  Puller,  18  N.  H.  360. .'  340 
Marsh  y.  Hammond,    93    Mass. 

483 937 

Marsh   y.   Woodbury,   42   Mass. 

436 548 


Table  of  Cases. 


clxxv 


PAGE 

Marshall  v.  Blasa,  82  Mich.  618.  214 
Marshall  v.  Croon,  52  Ala.  554. 

224,  231,  247,  302,  393,  583,     878 
Marshall  y.  Groom,  60  Ala.  121. 

129,  688,  933,     956 
Marshall  v.  Hutchison,   44  Ky. 

298 368,  469,     604 

Marshall  t.  Knox,  83  U.  S.  551. 

1121,  1213,  1219 
Marshall  v.   Marshall,   2   Bush. 

(Kv.)   415 35,     146 

Marshall   v.    Roll,    139  Pa.  St. 

399 196 

Marshall  v.  Sears,  79  Va.  49..  162 
Marshall  v.  Strange,  10  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  410 384 

Marshall   v.    Whitney,    43    Fed. 

343 366 

Marston  v.  Brackett,    9    N.    H. 

336 215,  220,     760 

Marston  v.  Dresen,  85  Wis.  630. 

141,  857,  861 
Marston  v.  Marston,  64  Me.  476  360 
Marston  v.  Vultec,    21    N.    Y. 

Super.   Ct    129    618 

Martel  v.  Somers^  26  Tex.  551. 

161,  904,  931 
Martha  v.  Curlev,  90  N.  Y.  372.  768 
^fartin  v.  Atchison,  2  Ida.  624.  761 
Martin  v.  Berry,  116  Ala.  233.  967 
Martin  t.  Bigelow,  7  Am.  B.  R. 

218 1170 

Martin  v.  C6wles,  18  N.  C.  29..  721 
Martin  v.  Adams,  104  Mass.  262  660 
Martin  v.  Crosby,  79  Tenn.  198.  766 
Martin     ▼.     Crosby,      11      Lea 

(Tenn.),  198 167 

Martin  v.  Drumm,  12  La.  Ann. 

494 907 

Martin  v.  Duncan,  156  111.  274.  628 
Martin  v.  Duncan,  47  111.  App. 

84 ....961,     977 

Martin  v.  Duncan,  181  111.  120. 

918,  933,  960 
Martin  ▼.  Dungan,  166  III.  274.  394 
Martin  v.  Elden,    32    Ohio    St. 

282 1021 

Martin  y.  Estes,  132  Mo.  402..  699 
Martin  y.  Fox,  40  Mo.  App.  664. 

249,  396,  860,  901,  907,     920 
Martin  y.   Hausman,     14    Fed. 

160 472,    488 

Martin  y.  Hulen  &  Co.    (C.  C. 

A.),  17  Am.  B.  R.  610 1090 

Martin  y.  Johnson,  23  Mo.  App. 

96 214 

Martin  y,  Kennedy,  83  Ky.  335.  396 
Martin  v.  Livingston,  68  N.  H. 


PAGE 

662 »94 

Martin    y.    Marshall,    64    Kan. 

147 612 

Martin  v.  Martin,  1  Vt.  91 633 

Martin  v.  Mathiot,   14  Serg.   & 

R.    (Pa.)   214 34 

Martin  v.  Matthews,    10  Wash. 

176 809 

Martin    v.    McAlpine,     8     Ont. 

App.  676 46 

Martin  v.  Michael,  23  Mo.  60.. 

774,  783 
Martin  v.  Ogden,  41  Ark.  186..  620^ 
Martz  V.  Pfeifer,  80  Ky.  600.. 

774,   782,     783 
Martin  v.  Rexroad,   15  W.  Va. 

612 960,     961 

Martin  v.  Rice,  24  Mo.  681 82 

Martin  y.  Root^  17  Mass.  222.. 

60,     102 
Martin  y.    Shears,    110   N.    W. 

1010 632 

Martin  v.  Tillman,  70  Miss.  614     639 
Martin  y.  Walker,   12  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  46 195,  201,     205 

Martin  v.   Warner,   34  W.   Va. 

182 37,  40,  983.     966 

Martin     y.      White,     2      Stew. 

(Ala.)    162 519 

Martin  y.  White,  115  Ga.  868.. 

293,  329 
Martin-Brown  Co.  y.  City  Nat. 

Bank,   41   S.   W.  624 998 

Martin  Brown  Co.  y.  Cooper,  82 

Tex.  242 907,     909 

Martin  Brown  Co.  y.  Perrill,  77 

Tex.  199 188 

Martin-Brown    Co.    v.   Siebe,  6 

Tex.  Ciy.   App.   232 

462,  467,  472.  474,     484  * 
Martindale  y.  Booth,  3  B.  &  Ad. 

498 518 

Maryin  v.   Anderson,    111    Wis. 

387 276,  279,  1152 

Maryin  y.   Chambers,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  9,179 1122 

Maryin  y.  Smith,  22  Alb.  L.  J. 

116 619 

Marx  y.  Meyer,    50    La.    Ann. 

1229 46,     816 

Marx  y.   Tailer,    12  N.  Y.  Ciy. 

Proc.  R.  226    811 

Masch  y.  Grauer,  68  App.  Diy. 

560   (N.  Y.)    230 

Maskelyni  y.  Smith,    2    K.    B. 

158 463 

Mason  y.  Baker,  8  Ky.  208 

628,     637 


clxxvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Mason  v.   Echela,    8    Wkly.    L. 

Bui.   (Ohio)   7    36 

Mason   v.   Eichels,   8   Ohio  Dec. 

436 753,  758,     767 

^laaon   v.    Franklin,    58    Iowa, 

506 228,     260 

MiaAon  V.  Perkins,  180  Mo.  702. 

240,     410 
Mason  v.  Pierron,  69  Wis.  585. 

678,  679,  806,     970 
Mason   v.    Scott,  20   Grant   Ch. 

84 582 

Mason  v.   Somers    (N.  J.   Ch.), 

45   Atl.   602    206 

Mason  v.  Somers,  59  N.  J.  Eq. 

451 181,     410 

Mason   v.    Trustees   of    Schools, 

11  111.  App.  454 722 

Mason  v.  Vestal,  88  Cal.  396.. 

66,  732,     749 
Massey.  v.     Gorton,     12    Minn. 

145 774 

Massey  v.  McCoy,  79  Mo.  169 . .     299 
Massie  v.  Enyart,  32  Ark.  251. 

608,  703,  705,     706 
Massie    v.    McKee     (Tex.    Civ. 

App.),  56  S.  W.  119 514 

Mast  V.  Henry,  65  Iowa,  193. . .     727 
Master   v.    Campbell,    41    Mich. 

613 632 

Masters  ▼.  Teller,  7  Okkk  668. 

541,  1004 
Masten  v.   Webb,   19   Hun    (N. 

Y.),  172 658 

Masuret    v.    Stewart,    22    Ont. 

290 172,    681 

Metador  Land,  etc.,  Co.  ▼.  Coo- 
per   (Tex.   Civ.  App.),   87   S. 

W.  235 141 

Metador  Land  k  Cattle  Co.  v. 

Cooper,  87  S.  W.   (Tex.)   236.    682 
Mather  v.  Coe,  I  Am.  B.  R.  504. 

1101,  1230 
Mateer  v.  Hiasim,  3  Penr,  &  W. 

(Pa.)   160 190,  249,  265,     340 

Mathes  v.  Dobschuetz,    72    111. 

438 679 

Mathews  v.   Arbrittom,   83   Ky. 

22 136 

Mathews  v.  Feaver,  1  Cox  Ch. 

(Eng.)  278 294 

Mathews  v.  Feaver,   1  Cox  Ch. 

278 91 

Mathews  v.  Green,  19  Fed.  649.     118 
Matthews  v.  Hiardt,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

373 1164 

Mathews  v.  Jordan,  98  111.  602.     339 
Mathews  v.  Mack,  95  Ind.  431.      43 


PAGE 

Mathews  v.  Mobile  Ins.  Co.,  76 

Ala.  85 1035 

Mathews  v.  Rentz,  5  Ohio  Dec. 

72 220 

Mathews  v.  Rinehardt^  149  III. 

635 354,  618,  716,  982,  1003 

Mathews     v.     Thompson,      186 

Mass.   14 339,     358 

Mathews  v.   Torinus,   22  Minn. 

132 364 

Mathiez   v.   Day,   36  N.   J.   Eq. 

88 681 

Matlock  V.   Bledsoe    (Ark.),   90 

S.  W.  848    99,     209 

Matson   v.    Melchor,    42    Mich. 

477 343,     686 

Matter  of  Adler,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

414 1229 

Matter  of  Alden,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

362 1124,  1167 

Matter  of  Alex,   15  Am.   B.  R. 

450 1202 

Matter  of  Andre,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

132 1214 

Matter  of  Barthelme,  1 1  Am.  B. 

R.  67 1164 

Matter  of  Bay   City   Irrigation 

Co.,  14  Am.  B.  R.  370 1221 

Matter  of  Berry  it  Co.,  16  Am. 

B.  R.   564    1107,    1181,  1190 

Matter   of    Bradway,    1    Ashm. 

(Pa.)  212. 614 

Matter  of  Burrell  &  Carr,  9  Am. 

B.  R.  626    1085 

Matter  of   Cavagnaro,    16   Am. 

B.  R.  820 1193 

Miatter  of  Cotton  Export,  etc., 
Co.,  10  Am.  B.  R.  14 1161 

Matter  of  Department  of  Parks, 
73  N.  Y.  660   23 

Matter  of  Downing,  16  Am.  B. 
R.  423 1144,  1146 

Miatter  of  Duplex  Radiator  Oo., 

15  Am.  B.  R.  324 1104 

Matter  of  Farrell  Co.,  9  Am.  B. 

R.  341 1132 

Matter  of  Fletcher,  16  Am.  B. 

R.  491 1179 

Matter  of  Fuller,  36  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  162 60 

Matter  of  Gesas  (C.  C.  A.),  16 

Am.   B.   R.   872 1124,  1160 

Matter  of  Girard    Glazed    Kid 

Co.  (2),  14  Am.  B.  R.  486. . .  1213 
Matter  of  Gray,  3  Am.   B.   R. 

647 1072 

Matter  of  Grissler,  13  Am.  B. 


Table  of  Cases. 


clxxvii 


PAGE 

R,  508 1121 

liatter  of  Hawkins,  9  Am.  B. 

R.  698 1188 

Matter  of  Hess,   14  Am.  B.  R. 

635 1192 

Matter  of  Hooks  Smelting  Co., 

15  Am.  B.  R.  83 1179 

Matter  of  Hornstein,  10  Am.  B. 

R.  308 1221 

Matter  of  Hunt,  14  Am.  B.  R. 

416 1156 

Matter  of  Hurlburt,  13  Am.  B. 

R.  60 1190 

Matter  of  Hutchinson,   14  Am. 

B.  R.  518 _1134 

Matter  of  Kauter  &  Cohen,   9  ^^ 

Am.  B.  R.  372    1226 

Matter  of  Keller,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

727 1190 

Matter  of  Levi,   16  Am.  B.  R. 

756 1196 

Bfatter  of  Maher,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

786,  16  Am.  B.  R.  340..  1077,  1107 
Matter  of  Mandel,   10   Am.   B. 

R.  774 1154 

Matter  of  Marks  Bros.,  15  Am. 

B.  R.  457    1097 

Matter  of  McBride,  12  Am.  B. 

R.  81 1189 

Matter   of   Metropolitan    Store, 

etc.,  Co.,  15  Am.  B.  R.  119..   1116 
Matter  of  Milbury  Co.,  11  Am. 

B.  R.  623 1103 

Matter  of  Murphy,    etc.,    Shoe 

Co.,  11  Am.  B.  R.  428 1195 

Matter  of  Fiaine,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

361 1236 

Matter  d  Patterson,  10  Am.  B. 

R.  748 1196 

Matter  of  Phelps,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

170 1191 

Matter  of  PoUman,   16  Am.  B. 

R.  144 1143,  1226 

Matter  of   Rasmussen,   13   Am. 

B.  R.  462    1194 

Matter  of  Riggs  Restaurant  Co., 

11  Am.  B.  R.  508 ^1077,  1093 

Matter  of  Robertshaw  Mfg.  Co., 

13  Am.  B.  R.  409 1132 

Matter  of  Rodgers,   16  Am.  B. 

R.  401 1192 

Matter  of  Roeber,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

303,  778 1120,  1121 

31atter  of   Rosenblatt,    16   Am. 

B.   R.   306   1106 

Miatter  of  Rung  Furniture  Co., 

14  Am.  B.  R.  12 1075,  1096 

3iatter  of  Russell,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

1 


PAOW 

24 1188 

Matter    of    Sherman   Mfg.    Co., 

15  Am.  B.  R.  740 1179 

Matter    of    Sunseri     (Pa.),    18 

Am.  B.  R.  231    1215 

Matter  of  Talbot,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

159 1104 

Matter  of  Thompson,  10  Am.  B. 

R.  242.  . 1116,  1216 

Matter  of  United    States   Food 

Co.,  15  Am.  B.  R.  329 1122 

Matter  of  Van  Dermoor,  42  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  326    123 

Matter  of  Weinger,   11   Am.  B. 

R.  424. 1143 

Matter  of  Werder,  10  Fed.  275.     117 
Matter  of  Wright,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

778 1189 

Miatteucci   v.   Whelan,    123  Cal. 

312 557 

Matthai  v.  Heather,  57  Md.  483. 

187,  190,  195,  350 
Matthews   v.   Albritton,   83  Ky. 

32 36 

Matthews  t.  Buck,  43  Me.  265. 

76,  77,  82,  83,  143 
Matthews  v.  Lloyd,  89  Ky.  625.  819 
Matthews  v.  Matthews.   154  N. 

Y.  288 878 

Matthews  v.  Mobile  Ins.  Co.,  75 

Ala.  86 796 

Matthews  ▼.  Reinhardt,  149  111. 

635 231 

Matthews  v.  Rioe,  31  N.  Y.  457. 

256,  257,     992 
Matthews     y.     Thompson,     186 

Mass.  14 274 

Matthewson     v.     Caldwell,     59 

Kan.  126 473 

Mattingly  v.  Nye,  8  Wall.    (U. 

S.)  370 186,  189,     190 

Mattocks   V.   Rogers,    Fed.   Cas. 

No.  9,300 1087 

Mattingly  v.  Obley,  1  III.  App. 

626 ^..     113 

Mattoon  v.  McGrew,  112  U.  8. 

7i3 358 

Mauran  y.  Crown  Carpet  Lining 

Co.,  6  Am.  B.  R.  734 1143 

May  V.  Hoover,  48  Neb.  199 

402,  409 
May  V.  Huntington,  66  Ga.  208.  335 
May  V.  Jenkins,  15  111.  101 .. .  402 
Mays    V.    Rose,    1    Freem.    Ch. 

(Miss.)    703 206 

May  v.  State  Nat.  Baink,  59  Ark. 

614 191,  360,     620 

May  V.  Taylor,  62  Miss.  500. . .     996 


clxxviii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

May  V.  Walter,  66  N.  Y.  8 619 

Maybin  v.  Raymond,  Fed.  Oas. 

9,338 1235 

Mayer  v.  Clark,  40  Ala,  259...  619 
Mayer  v.  Feig,  114  Ind.  677...  885 
Mayer  y.  Fraech,  7  Wash.  604. 

193,   194,    270 
Miayer  v.  Hellman,  91  U.  S.  600. 

463,  1071,  1108 
Mayer  v.  Hermann,    Fed.    Cas. 

No.  9,344 1169 

Mayer  v.  Templeton    (Tex.  Civ. 

App.),  63  S.  W.  68 481,     484 

Mayer  v.  Walker,  82  Tex.  222. .  1006 
Mayer  v.  Webster,  18  Wis.  393. 

623,     961 
Mayer  v.  Wilkins,  37  Fla.  244. 

171,  612,     711 

Mayer  v.  Wood,  66  Ga.  427 

1041,  1044 
Mayers  v.  Kaiser,  86  Wis.  382.     114 
Afayfleld  Woolen  Mills  v.  Wil- 
son, 87  Mo.  App.  146 694 

Maynard  v.  Hoskins,    9    Mich. 

486 70,  736,     763 

Maynard    v.    Way,    11    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  166 867 

Maynes  v.  Atwater,  88  Pa.  St. 

496 667 

Mayor  v.  Hodge,  etc.,  Co.,  78  111. 

App.  656 744 

Mayr  v.  Hodge,  etc.,  Co.,  78  111. 

App.  666 693 

Maze  y.   Griffin,    66    Mo.    App. 

377 661 

Matz  y.  Erick,  76  Conn.  388... 

301,     332 
Matula  V.  Lane,  66  S.  W.  (Tex.) 

112 996 

Maul  V.  Rider,  60  Pa.  St.  167 . .  616 
Maurin  v.  Rouquer,  19  La.  694. 

378,  392,  408,     409 
Maxwell    v.    Conklin,    41    App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)    211 969 

Maxwell    v.    Hanshaw^     24    W. 

Va.,  406 368,     399 

Maxwell  v.  Mallard,  5  La.  Ann. 

702 67 

Mary     Lee     Coal,     etc.,    Co.    v. 

Knox,  110  Ala.  632   978 

Maryville      Bank     v.      Thorton 

(tenn.   Ch.  App.),  35   S.  W. 

665 609 

Meacham  Amus  Go.  v.   Swartz, 

2  Wash.  Terr.  412 783,     873 

Meacham,  y.  Hahn,  46  111.  App. 

144 941 

31ead   v.   Combs,   19   N.   J.   Eq. 


112 336,     688 

Mead   v.    Conroe,    113    Pa.    St. 

220 446 

Mead  v.  Dayton,  28  Conn.  33..       88 
Mead  y.  Gardiner,  13  R.  I.  267. 

522,  538 
Mead  y.  Gregg,    12    Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   653 191 

Mead  y.  Noyes,  44  Conn.  487 . . .     990 
Meade  v.  Smith,  16  Conn.  346. 

620,  574,     635 

Meade  y.  Stairs,  88  Ky.  66 405 

Meakin  y.  Samson,  28  U.  C.  C. 

P.  356 113 

Means  y.  Dowd,  128  U.  S.  281.       23 
Means  v.  Feaster,  4  S.  C.  249. . 

581,  980 
Means  y.  Hicks,  65  Ala.  241 .. . 

631,  635,     956 
Means  y.  Montgomery,  23  Fed. 

421 583,  985,     988 

Mears  y.  Gage    (Mo.   App.),  80 

S.  W.  172   272 

Mears  y.  Gage,  80  S.  W.   (Mo.) 

712 996,     99^ 

Mears     y.     Waples,     4    HousC. 

(Del.)   62 35 

Mears     v.     Waples^     3     Houst. 

(Del.)   581 722 

Mebane  v.  Layton,  86  N.  C.  572. 

777,  812,     816 
Mechanics'   Bank   y.   Taylor,    16 

Fed.  Cas.  No.  9,386 327 

Mechanics'  Bldg.,  etc.,  Assoc,  y. 

Fowler,  57  S.  C.  1 10 50'» 

Mechanics',  etc.,  Bank  v.  Dakin, 

61  N.  Y.  519.. 740,  742,  793,     798 
Mechanics',  etc.,  Transp.  Co.  y. 

Borland,  53  N.  J.  Eq.  282. . .      781 
Mechanics'  Nat.  Bank  y.  H.  C. 

Burnet  Mfg.  Co.,  33  N.  J.  Eq. 

486 42 

Mechanics'   Nat.    Bank   y.   Lan- 

dauer,  68  Wis.  44 822 

Meche  y.  Lalamie,  30  La.  Ann. 

1136 85,  178,     179 

Medalis  v.  Weimer,  22  Pa.  Co. 

Ct.  91 527 

Meech  y.  Stoner,  19  N.  Y.  26..    1198 
Meehan   y.    Williams,    36    How. 

Pr.    (N.  Y.)    73    764,     78& 

Meeker  y.  Harris,  19  Colo.  278. 

474,  883 
Meeker  v.  Hays,  18  La.  19.. 67,  741 
Meeker  y.  Warren,  66  N.  J.  Eq. 

146 184 

Meeker  y.  Wilson,  16  Fed.  Cas. 

No,  9,392 13 

Meeker   v.   Wilson,    1    Gall.    (U. 


Table  of  Cases. 


dxxix 


PAGB 

S.)  419 639 

Megehe  ▼.  Draper,  21  Mo.  510. 

152,  153 
Meggison  v.  Forster,  7  Jur.  646.  350 
Mehan  v.  Mehan,  203  111.  180..  634 
Hehlhop  y.   Pettibone,   54   Wis. 

652 582,  625,  634,     980 

Meibergen  t.   Smith,    45    Kan. 

405 715 

Meigs  V.  Dibble,  73  Mich.  101. 

168,  366 
Meigs  V.  Weller,  90  Mich.  629.  444 
Meinhard  v.  Youngblood,  37  8. 

C.  231 777,     857 

Meixsell  y.  Williamson,  35  111. 

529 579 

Melbye    y.    Melbje,    15    Wash. 

648 644 

Mellen  y.  Ames,  39  Iowa,  283. 

60,     631 
Mellen  y.  Banning,  72  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  176 319,     334 

Mellick  y.  Mellick,  47  N.  J.  Eq. 

86 707 

Mellier  y.  Bartlett,  106  Mo.  381  393 
Mencke  y.  Rosenberg,  9  Am.  B. 

R.  323 1141,  1143 

Mendelhall    y.    Elwert^    36    Or. 

375 967 

Mendenhall     y.    Treadwaj,     44 

Ind.  131 363 

Mendes  y.  Kyle,  16  Ney.  369. . .  1002 
Menken  y.  Baker,  166  N.  Y. 

628 519,  990 

Menroe  y.   Smith,    79    Pa.    St. 

459 352 

Mente  y.  Townsend,  68  Ark.  391  980 
Menton  y.  Adams,  49  Cal.  020.  445 
Mensesheimer    y.    Kennedy,    75 

Wis.  411 235,  316,     317 

Mercantile  Ezch.  Bonk  y.  Tay- 
lor, 41  So.    (Fla.)    22 

236,  236,    311 
Merced  Bank  y.  lyett,   127  Gal. 

134 458 

Mercer  y.  Andrews,  2  La.  538 . . 

187,  323 
Mercer  y.  Mercer,    24    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  2469 1131 

Meroer  y.  Hooker,  2  Fla.  277..  40 
Merchant   &   Co.   y.   Whitescar- 

yer,  47  W.  Va.  361 478 

Merchants'  Bank  y.  Belt,  30  S. 

E.  467 582,     970 

Merchants  Bank  y.   Brooker,  9 

Ont.   Pr.   133    813 

Merchants'  Bank    y.    Clark,   18 

Grant.  Oh.  694   589,     953 


PAOB 

Merchants'  Bank  y.  Thalheimer, 

50  Hun   (N.  Y.),  600.... 938,     973 
Merchants'  Bldg.,  etc.,  Assoc,  y. 

Barber,  30  Atl.  (N.  J.)  865. . 

605,  694 
Merchants',  etc..  Bank  y.  Loye- 

joy,  84  Wis.  601 131,     132 

Merchants,  etc.,   Say.    Bank    y. 

Loyejoy,    84   Wis.   601... 414,     426 
Merchants',  etc.,  Transp.  CJo.  y. 

Borland,  53  N.  J.  Eq.  282... 

123,  124,  125,  337,     789 
Merchants'  Nat.   Bank  y.    Cha- 

pin,  61  Hun  (N.  Y.),  620. ...     967 
Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  y.  Cook, 

95  U.  S.  342 276 

Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  y.   Cole, 

18  Am.  B.  R.  44 1084 

Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  y.  Green- 
hood,  16  Mont.  395    799 

Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  y.  Hogle, 

25  111.  App.  543 763 

Merchants'   Nat.   Bank  y.   Kop- 

plin,  1  Kan.  App.  599 162 

Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  y.  Lyon, 

185  m.  343    ..A.... 225,  879,     953 
Merchants  Nat.  Bank  y.  McGee, 

108  Ala.  304 196 

Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  y.  New- 
ton Cotton  Mills,   115  N.  C. 

507 47,    417 

Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  y.  North- 

nip,  22  N.  J.  Eq.  58 618 

Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  y.  Paine, 

13  R.   L   592 788 

Meredith    y.    Sanders,    2    Bibb. 

(Ky.)   101 534 

Meredith  y.  Schaap   (Iowa),  85 

N.   W.   628    459,     513 

Meredith  y.  Citizens'  Nat.  Bank, 

92  Ind.  343....  142,  148,  367,     585 
Meritt  y.  Meritt,  11  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

493 1051 

Merrell  v.  Johnson,  96  111.  224.     278 
Merrifield  v.  Williams,   17  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  8    r.     979 

Merrill  v.  Allen,  38  Mich.  487.     858 
Merrill  y.  Hussey,  101  Me.  439. 

110,  1187 
Merrill  y.  Hussey,  101  Me.  439.  91 
Merrill  y.  Johnson,  96  111.  224. 

339,  839,  848,  851 
Merrill  y.  Locke,  41  N.  H.  486.  563 
Merrill  y.   McLaughlin,   75   Me. 

64 817 

Merrill     y.     Meachum,    5    Day 

(Conn.),  341.  ." 921 

Merrill  v.  Merrill,  105  111.  App. 


clxxx 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

5 989,  997,  1003 

Merrills  v.  Swift,  18  Conn.  257.  227 
Merriman  v.  Laoefield,  4  Heisk. 

(Tenn.)   209 234,    365 

Merritt  v.   Lyon,   3    Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   110 404,     988 

Merritt   v.  Merritt,    11   Ky.   L. 

Rep.  493 378 

Merritt  v.  Miller,  13  Vt.  416..  529 
Merritt  v.  Nilea,  28  Grant  Ch. 

346 604 

Merry  v.  Bostwick,  13  111.  398.  699 
Merry  v.  Fremon,  44  Mo.  618. . 

774,  780,  796,  805,     820 

821,     844 
Merahon  y.  Hulse,  26  111.  App. 

292 484 

Mertens  v.   Welsing,    86    Iowa, 

698 231,     620 

Meserve  v.  Dyer,  4  Me.  62 202 

Mesmer  v.  Jenkins,  61  Gal.  161. 

770,  773,     790 
Messersmith    v.    Devendorf,    64 

Wis.  498 242 

Messick  v.  Fries,  128  N.  0.  450.  997 
Metcalf  V.  Arnold,  110  Ala.  180.  57 
Metcalf    V.    Arnold    (Ala.),    32 

So.  763 171 

Metcalf  V.   Barker,    187    U.    S. 

165 1142,  1143,  1145 

1225,  1226 
Metcalf  V.  Del  Valle,    64    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  245 817,  1036,  1036 

Metcalf  V.  Moses,  161  N.  Y.  587. 

696,  699,  1063 
Metcalf  V.  Moses,  35  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    596    682,     661 

Metcalf    V.    Munson,    92    Mass. 

491 945 

Metropolis       Nat.       Bank       v. 

Sprague,  21  N.  J.  Eq.  530...     600 
Metropolis       Nat.       Bank       v. 

Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13 

37,   188,  461,  471,     472 
Metropolitan  Bank    v.    Aarons- 

Mendelsohn  Co.,  50  La.  Ann. 

1047 ..611,    695 

Metropolitan    Bank    v.    Blaise, 

109  La.  92   904 

(Metropolitan     Bank    v.  Durant, 

22  N.  J.  Eq.  35 27,       46 

Metropolitan  Wat.  Bank  v.  Rog- 
ers, 47   Fed.  148....  186,  283,     347 
Metsker   v.   Bonebrake,    108   U. 

S.  66    366 

Metz  V.  Blackburn,  9  Wyo.  481. 

7,  64,  326,  723,    969 
Metzger     v.     Burnett,    5    Kan. 


PAGE 

App.  374 794,  820 

Meux  V.  Anthony,  11  Ark.  411.  773 
Meux  V.  Anthony,  11  Ark.  411.  645 
Meux  V.  Anthony,  11  Ark.  411 . .   185 

Meux  V.  Howell  4  East^  1 

47,  463,  475,  1057 
Mevberg  v.  Jacobs,  40  Mo.  App. 

128 603,  915,  934 

Meyer  Boot,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Shenk- 

berg  Co.  11  S.  D.  620 

180,  564,     768 
Meyer  Bros.  Drug  Co.  v.  Dur- 
ham, 36  Tex.  Civ.  App.  71.. 

611,  1002 
Meyer   Bros.   Drug  Co.   v.   Pip- 
kin Drug  Co.   (C.  C.  A.),   14 

Am.  B.  R.  477    1166 

Meyer  Bros.  Drug  Co.  v.  Rather, 

30  S.  W.    (Tex.)    812 320 

Meyer  Bros.  Drug  Co.  v.  White, 

165    Mo.    136    962.  1050 

Meyer  v.  Baird,  120  Iowa,  597.  914 
Meyer  v.  Houck,  85  Iowa,  319.  366 
Meyer-Marx  Co.  v.  Masters,  119 

Ala.  186 882,     885 

Meyer  t.  Mohr,  24  N.  Y.  Super. 

Ct.  333 955 

Meyer  v.  Moss,  110  La.  132 812 

Meyer  v.  Specker,  10  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  116 580,  979 

Meyer  v.  Stone,  21  Neb.  717... 

588,  686,  687 
Meyer  v.  Sulzbacher,  76  Ala. 

120 693 

Meyer  v.  Union  Bag,  etc.,  Co., 

41  Neb.  67  461 

Meyers  v.  Josephson,  10  Am.  B. 

R.  687 1191 

Meyers  v.  King,  42  Md.  65 341 

Meyers  v.  Kinzie,  26  111.  36...  579 
Meyers  v.  Meyers,  24  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  603 312,  462,  490,     951 

Meyers  v.  Wedel  (N.  J.  Ch.),  57 

Atl.  1008 1041,  1043 

Meyrovitz   v.   Glaser,    132    .£ila. 

103 56,      64 

Miami    County    Nat.    Bank    v. 

Barkalow,  63  Kan.  68 

71,  333,  884 
Michael  v.  Gay,  1  F.  &  F.  409.  1040 
Michigan  Trust  Co.  v.  Bennett, 

106   Mich.   381    235,     315 

Michigan  Trust  Co.  v.   Chapin, 

106  Mich.  384    67,  741,     742 

Michigan     Trust     Co.    v.    Corn- 
stock,   130   Mich.   572....  160.     4G0 
Mickel    V.    Walraven,    92    Iowa, 

423 173,  838,     839 


Table  of  Oases. 


clxxxi 


Micon  V.  First  Nat.  Bank,  104 

U.   S.   630    610,    977 

Micou  V.  Moses,  72  Ala.  439. . . 

1047,  1049 
Middlecome   v.   Marlow,   2   Atl. 

(Eng.)   619. 328 

Middleton  v.  Hoof,  16  Mo.  416.     986 
Middleton  v.  Pollock,  2  Ch.  Div. 

104 463,  484,     490 

Middleton  v.  Pollock,  45  L.  J. 

Ch.  293 138 

Middleton  v.   SinclaJr«    17   Fed. 

Cas.   No.   9,534    206 

Miers  v.  Zanesville,  etc..  Turn- 
pike Co.,  11  Ohio,  273 101,  1039 

Milbum   V.   Phillips,     136    Ind. 

680 231,     364 

Milburn  v.  Waugh,  11  Mo.  369.     622 
Miles  V.  Lewis,  116  Pa.  St.  680. 

810,     907 

Miles  T.  Miles,  6  Or.  266 308 

Miles  y.  Richards,  Falk.  (Miss.) 

477 863 

MilhoUand   v.   Tiffany,   64   Md.      . 

456 221,  366,  717,     970 

Milhous  V.  Sally,  43  S.  C.  318.     664 
Mill  River  Loan  Fund  Assoc,  v. 

Claflin,  91  Mass.  101   760 

Millar    v.    McTaggart,    20    Ont. 

617 767,     768 

Millard   t.    Babcock,    29    Mich. 

526 632 

Millard  ▼.  Hall,  24  Ala.  209. . .     619 
Millard  ▼.  Parsell,  67  Neb.  178. 

90  959 
Miller  v.  Babcock,  29  Mich.  626  779 
Miller  Co.  v.  Bracken,  104  Iowa, 

643 333 

Miller  v.  Bryan,  3  Iowa,  68 ... . 

560,  580,  1003 
Miller  y.  Clarke,  37  Iowa,  326. 

49,  60,     334 
Miller  v.  Cobb,  64  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

637 983 

Miller  v.  Davidson,  8  111.  /518.. 

807,     843 
IMiller  v.  Dayton,  47  Iowa,  312. 

797,     807 
Miller  v.  Drane,  122  Wis.  315.. 

186,     775 
Miller  v.  Desha,  66  Ky.  212. . . 

343,     346 
Miller   v.    Furse,    1   Bailey   Eq. 

(S.  C.)    187    437 

MiUer  v.  Fraley,  21  Ark.  22... 

36,  52,  450,  678,  711,     884 
Miller   v.    Garman,   69    Pa.   St. 
134 ..529,  530,     534 


768 
305 


PAGE 

Miller  v.  Gillespie,  54  W.  Va. 

450 408,  868,     898 

Miller  v.  Hall,  70  N.  Y.  250. . .  819 
Miller  v.  Hilton,  88  Me.  429 .. .  970 
Miller  v.  Hughes,  33  S.  C.  630. 

778,  797,  844,  861,     866 
Miller  v.  Jamison,  26  N.  J.  Eq. 

404 716,     965 

Miller  v.  Jamison,  24  N.  J.  Eq. 

41 818,    870 

Miller  v.  Jannett,  63  Tex.  82 . . 

673,  91$ 
Miller  v.  Johnson,  27  Md.  6. . 

348,  37& 
Miller  v.  Keys,  17  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

^ 1084 

Miller  v.  Kirby,  74  111.  242 .. . 

263,  57» 
Miller  v.  Koertge,  70  Tex.  162.  676 
Miller  v.  Krueger,  36  Kan.  344  513 
Miller  v.  Lacey,  7  Houst.  (Del.) 

8 525      552 

Miller  v.  Lake,  24  W.  Va.  545 ! 
Miller  v.  Lebanon  Lodge  No.  48, 

I.  O.  O.  F.',  88  Ind.  286 

Miller   v.   Lockwood,   32   N.   Y. 

2?3 519,     554 

Miller  V.  Leeper,  120  Mo.  466. 

^x.„  1^^»     364 

Miller  V.  Lehman,  87  Ala.  517.     856 
Miller   v.   Mackenzie,   29  N.  J. 

Eq.  291    206 

Miller  v.  McAlister,  178  Pa.  St. 

140 94g 

Miller  v.   McGill,   24   U.   C.   Q. 

B.  597   r:     216 

Miller  v.  Marckle,  21  111.  152..     656 
Miller   v.   Miller   Knitting   Co., 
23  Misc.  Rep.   (N.  Y.)   404.. 
Miller  v.  Miller,  10  Shep.  (Me.) 

22 

Miller  v.  Miller,  23  Me.  22... 

184,  830,  831,  883, 

Miller  v.  Morgan,  11  Neb.  121. 

622,     910 
Miller  v.  O'Brien,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

0,686 117» 

Miller  v.  Payne,  4  111.  App.  112. 

373,     879 
Miller  v.  Plass,  11  Wash.  237. 

744,     746 
Miller  v.  Rowan,  108  Ala.  698. 

290,  291,  662,  563,  904,     990 
MiUer   v.    Sauerbier,   30   N.   J. 

Eq.    71    381 

Miller  v.   Sherry,   2   Wall.    (U. 
S.)   237   860 


303 
830 
956 


cljuudi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

Miller  t.  Speeht,  11  Pa.  St.  449  61 
Miller  t.  Stetson,  32  Ala.  161 . 

428,  472 
Ifiller  T.  Stewart,  24  Cal.  502.  985 
Miller    v.    Thompflon,    3    Port. 

(Ala.)    198    278,    409 

Miller  v.  ThompBon,  3  Port.  196  337 
Miller    ▼.    Tollison,    Harp.    Eq. 

(8.  C.)    145    586,     696 

Miller  v.  Vemoy,  2  Tex.  Civ. 

App.   675    718 

Miller    y.   Wilkerson,    10    Kan. 

App.  576    343,    827 

Miller  ▼.  Waller,  Dall.    (Tex.) 

416 234 

Miller    v.    Winton    (Tenn.    Ch. 

App.),  66  8.  W.   1049 509 

Miller  v.  Wilson,  15  Ohio,  108. 

37,  279,     340 
Millhiser  ▼.  McKinley,   98  Va. 

207 856,     882 

Millican  v.  Headon,  8  Ont.  503 .  667 
Milliman    v.    Eddie,    115    Iowa, 

630 41,      50 

Millington  v.  Hill,  47  Ark.  301 

d4,  213,  631,  695 
Millis  V.  Lombard,  32  Minn.  259  206 
Mills    V.    Argell,    6    Paige    (N. 

Y.),  677    638 

Mills   V.    Block,    30   Barb.    (N. 

Y.)    549    772,  1045 

Mills  V.  Carnley,   1   Bosw.    (N. 

Y.)    169    334 

Mills  V.  Eden,  10  Mod.  487 358 

Mills   V.   Howeth,    19   Tex.   257 

582,  627,     934 
Mills  V.  Hunt,  12  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

866 249,     396 

Mills  V.  Miller,  109  Iowa,  688.  583 
Mills  V.  Mills,  40  Tenn.  705 .. .  299 
Mills   V.   Morris,   1   Hoflfm.  Ch. 

(N.    Y.)    419    195,     270 

Mills  V.  Scott,  43  Fed.  462...  139 
Mills  V.  Tliompson,  72  Mo.  367  626 
Mills     V.     Waller,     Dall.     Dig. 

(Tex.)    416    354,     682 

Mills  V.  Walton,  19  Tex.  271.. 

523,  667,     911 
Mills  V.  Warner,  19  Vt.  609.. 

630,     535 

Mills  V.  Webb,  89  Ga.  734 1048 

Milne  v.  Henry,  40  Pa.  St.  352 

527,  990 
Milner  v.  Davis,  65  Iowa,  265 . .  395 
Milwaukee,  eto.,  R.  Co.  v.  Sout- 

ter,   13  Wall.  517 695,     700 

Milwaukee     Harvester     Co.     v. 


PASS 

Culver,  89  Hun  (N.  Y.),  598    996 

Miner  v.  Lane,  87  Wis.  348 1036 

Miner  v.  Phillips,  42  HI.  123..     916 
Miner     v.     Warner,     2     Grant 

(Pa,),  448   

85,  178,  180,  201,  384,  426,     576 
Miners'     Trust    Co.     Ban^    v. 

Roeeberry,  81  Pa.  St.  309...       43 
Minge  v.  Biarbra,  51  La.  Ann. 

1286 467 

Mingua  v.  Condit,  23  N.  J.  Eq. 

313 711,     718 

Minneapolis    Stock-Yards,    etc., 

Co.,  V.  Halonen,  56  Minn.  469     972 
Minnesota  Threshing  Mach.  Co. 

V.  Schaack,  10  S.  D.  511 832 

Minnich  v.  Shaffer,  136  Ind.  634    405 
Minor    v.    Sharp,    17    Ky.    L. 

Rep.    992    152 

Minor  v.  Wilson,  58  Fed.  616. .     162 
Minzesheimer  v.  Doolittle,  56  N. 

J.  Eq.  206 190,  348,  882,     974 

Mishler  v.  Finch,  104  Md.  183.       96 
Misotiere's  Syndics  v.  Coignard, 

3  Mart.  O.  S.    (La.)   361 490 

Missinskie    v.     McMurdo,     107 

Wis.  5r8..249,  392,  408,  529,     534 

611,   998,   1P03,  1007 
Missouri,     etc..    Trust    Co.    v. 

Richardson,  67  Neb.  617 774 

Missouri  Lead  Min.,  etc.,  (Ik>.  v. 

Reinhard,   114  Mo.  218.. 262,    263 
Mitchell    V.   Adams,    52   S.    W. 

(Tenn.)    316    341 

Mitchell  V.  Berry,  58  Ky.  602. 

343,     346 
Mitchell  V.   Bettman,   25  Barb. 

(N.    Y.)     408 1042,  1043 

Mitchell  V.  Bryns,  67  111.  622. .     858 
Mitchell  V.  Cleveland,  57  S.  E. 

(S.  C.)    33    633 

Mitchell  v.  Eure,  126  N.  C.  77 

346,  408,  611,     583 
Mitchell    V.    Gendell,    7    Phila. 

(Pa.)    107    53 

Mitchell  V.  Great  Works  Mill- 
ing,   etc.,    Co.,   2    Story    (U. 

S.),  648    1069 

Mitchell  V.  Henley,  110  Mo.  698     651 
Mitchell  V.  McClure,  178  U.  S. 

539 1211 

Mitchell   V.  McKibbin,   17   Fed. 

Cas.  No.  9,666   314 

Mitchell    V.    Mitchell,    17    Am. 

B.  R.  382    1169.  1204 

Mitchell  V.  Mitchell,  212  Pa.  St. 

02... 211,  23o,  aiO,  310,  90G,  1052 


Table  of  Cases. 


elxzxiii 


PAGX 

Mitchell  ▼.  Sawyer,  116  HI.  660 

238,  436,  1012 
Mittaiiglit  7.   Smith,    17   N.   J. 

Eq.  259   1041 

Mitchell    T.   Simpson,   62   Ejui. 

343 382 

Mitchell    T.    Steelman,    8    Cal. 

363 669 

MitcheU  ▼.  Stetson,  64  Oa.  442 

6,  413,     664 
MitcheU   y.    Stiles,    13   Pa.    St. 

306 429 

Mitchell    Y.    Tinsley,    83    Mo. 

App.  386 648 

MitcheU  y.  West,  66  N.  Y.  107 

619,     911 
Mitchell  y.  Willock,  2  Watts  & 

S.   (Pa.)   263   663 

Mittelburgh     y.     Harrison,     90 

Mo.   444    95 

Mittelburg  y.  Harrison,  11  Mo. 

App.    136    348 

Mix  y.  Ege,  67  Minn.  116.  .727,  943 
Mixell  y.  Lutz,  34  111.  382 . .  187,  348 
Mixon  y.  Symonds,  2  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.    629    600 

Mize  y.  Turner,  16  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

67 1021 

Mobile  Say.  Bank  y.  McDonnell, 

80  Ala.  434    315 

Mobile  Say.  Bank  y.  McDonnell, 

87  Ala.  736. . .  .213,  309,  467,    960 
Moffat  y.  Ingham,  37  Ky.  496 

770,  1036 
Moffett  y.  Parker,  71  Minn.  139 

657,    720 
Mohawk    Bank    y.    Atwater,    2 

Paige   (N.  Y.),  64 

586,  626,  793,     803 
Mohr  y.  Mattoz,  12  Am.  B.  R. 

330 1141,  1144 

Mohr  y.  Senior,  86  Ala.  114. . .  198 
Molaska  Mfg.  Co.  y.  Steele,  36 

Mo.  App.  496 441,  442,     446 

MoUne  Plow  Co.  y.  Braden,  71 

Iowa,    141    34 

Moline  Wagon  Co.  y.  Rummell, 

12  Fed.  658 626 

Moline  Wagon  Co.  y.  Rummel, 

14  Fed.  166 678 

Molitor  y.  Robinson,  40  Mich. 

200 621,     995 

Monaghan   Bay   Co.   y.  Dickin- 
son, 39  S.  C.  146 695 

Monarch  Rubber   Co.  y.   Bunn, 

78   Mo.    App.   56 

6,  414,  461,  688,  594,     625 


PAOK 

Moncure  y.  Hanson,  16  Pa.  St. 
385 203 

Monday    y.    Vance,    Ciy.    App. 
(Tex.)    61   S.  W.  346 180 

Monday  y.  Vance,  11  Tex.  Ciy. 
App.    374    91;     160 

Monell  y.  Scherrick,  64  111.  269 

232,  354,     526 
Monessen  Nat.  Bank  y.  Lichten- 

stein,  207  Pa.  St.  187... 619,     620 
Monroe      Mercantile      (Do.      y. 

Arnold,   108  Ga.  449 497,  1006 

Monroe  y.  Hussey,  1  Or.  188..  622 
Monroe  y.  May,  9  Kan.  466 . . 

168,     369 
Monroe  y.  Reid,  46  Neb.  316.. 

764,     871 
Monroe  y.  Smith,  79  Pa.  St.  459 

188,  193,     195 
Montana    Lumber,    etc.,    Co.    y. 

Gerhold,   17  Mont.  668 286 

Monteith  y.  Bax,  4  Neb.  166. . .  988 
Montesano       Nat.       Bank       y. 

Graham,   40   Wash.   490 960 

Montgomery  y.  Baylies,  96  Ala. 

342 603 

Montgomery  y.  Boyd,  78  App. 

Diy.   (N.  Y.)   64 766 

Montgomery   y.  Brown,    1   Tex. 

App.  Ciy.  Cas.   1305 164 

Montgomery  County  y.  Riley,  75 

N.   C.    144    163 

Montgomery's  Ex'rs  y.  Kirksey, 

26   Ala.    172    , 290 

Montgomery  y.  Clark,  46  S.  W. 

(Tenn.)    466    972 

Montgomery  y.  Hunt,  5  Cal.  366  631 
Montgomery     y.     Kifksey,     26 

Ala.    172    392,     557 

Montgomery     y.     McGuire,     59 

Miss.   193    218 

Montgomery  y.  McNicholas,  138 

Fed.  956    1126 

Montgomery  y.  Phillips,  53  N. 

J.  Eq.  203    254 

Montgomery  y.  Turner,  85  Ky. 

55 796 

Montgomery  y.  Turney,  85  Ky. 

55 806 

Montgomery       Web       Co.       y, 

Dienelt,  133  Pa.  St.  585.. 57,     998 
Montgomery  y.   Wilson,  31   La. 

Ann.    196 233,   353.     680 

Moody  y.  Burton,  27  Me.  427 . .  756 
Moody  y.  Gay,  81  Mass.  467. . .  813 
bloody  V.  Townseiid,  3  Abb.  Pr. 


clxxxiy 


Tabi^e  of  Cases. 


PAQB 

(N.  Y.)    376    49 

Moog  ▼.  BenediekB,  49  Ala.  612 

247,  519,  914 
Moog  ▼.  Fraley,  79  Ala.  246.. 

248,  295,  309,  457,  506,    510 
511,  904,  907,  909,    926 
Moog  Y.  Taloott,  72  Ala.  210..     867 
Moore  ▼.  Baker,  34  Fed.  1 . . . 

796,    798 
Moore  v.  Baker,  2  Pa.  Diet.  142     154 

Moore  v.  Besse,  43  Cal.  511 96 

Moore    y.    Blondheim,    19    Md. 

172 82,     196 

Moore  y.  Butler,  90  Va.  683. . .  1052 
Moore  v.  Carr,  65  Mo.  App.  64  276 
Moore  ▼.   Crawford,   130  U.  S. 

122 139 

Moore  v.  Floyd,  4  Or.  101 522 

Moore  v.  Flynn,  135  III.  74...  159 
Moore    y.    Hinnant,    89    N.    C. 

466 13,  569,     575 

Moorse  y.  Horslej,  156  111.  36. . 

631,  635,  636,     645 
Moore  y.  Jeffries,  18  So.  (MIbs.) 

272 387 

Moore  y.  Jordan,  65  Miss.  229.  639 
Moore  y.  Kidder,  55  N.  H.  488.  1041 
Moore  y.  Lampton,  80  Ind.  301 

130,     579 
Moore    y.    Land,    etc.,    82    Md. 

288 87 

Moore   y.   Livingston,    14   How. 

Pr.    (N.  Y.)    1..69,  631,  651,     653 
Moore  y.  Lowery,  27   Tex.  641 

231,  233,  353,     354 
Moore  y.  Meek,  20  Ind.  484 . . 

631,     656 
Moore  y.  Mobley,   123  Ga.  424 

68,  631,     633 
Moore    y.    Montelius,     29     III. 

App.  197  179 

Moore  y.  Moore,  165  Pa.  St. 

464 637,  967 

Moore  y.  Onuan,  56  Iowa,  39 . .  368 
Moore  y.  Penn,  95  Ala.  200...  313 
Moore  y.  Kagland,  74  N.  C.  343  302 
Moore   y.    Ringgold,    Fed.    Cas. 

No.  9,773    527 

Moore   y.   Robinson    (Tex.   Civ. 

App.),  75  S.  W,  890 462,     501 

Moore   v.   Robinson,    75    S.   W. 

(Tex.)    890    577,     987 

Moore  v.  Roe,  35  N.  J.  Eq.  90 

225,  240,  245 
Moore  y.  Rycault,  Proc.  Ch.  22  142 
Moore  v.  Spencer,  G  Ala.  506..  337 
Moore  V.  Tarlton,  3  Ala.  444 ..  .     654 


^  PAOS 

Moore  r.  Thompson,  6  Mo.  353 

643,  662 
Moore  y.  Triplet,  23  S.  £.  69. . 

233,  353 
Moore  y.  Ullman,  80  Va.  307..  973 
Moore   y.   Wilkeraon,    169    Mo. 

334 160 

Moore  y.  Williamson,  44  N.  J. 

Eq.  496    600,  613,     731 

Moore  y.  Wood,  100  111.  461 .. .     436 
Moore    y.    Wood     (Tenn.     Ch. 

App.),  61   S.  W.   1063 661 

Moore  y.  Yoimg,   17  Fed.  Cu. 

No.  9,782    268 

Moore's    Adm'r    y.    Dawney,    3 

Hen.  &  M.   (Va.)    127 322 

Moores  y.  White,  3  Gratt.  (Va.) 

139 102 

Moosbrugger      y.      Walsh,     89 

Hun   (N.  Y.),  664 182 

Moot  y.  Coughlan,  68  Mo.  App. 

229 1000 

Mora   y.   Ayery,   212   La.   Ann. 

417 67 

Moran   y.   Lilley,    10   111.   App. 

103 62 

Moran     y.     Moran,     12     Bush 

(Ky.),  301    103,  113,     116 

Moran  v.  Sturfzris,  154  U.  S.  256  1224 
Morehead's  Adm'r  y.   Mayfield, 

109  Ky.  51    120,  121,     126 

Morehouse  v.  KiBsam,  58  N.  J. 

Eq.    364    816 

Morel  y.  Haller,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

122 689 

Moreland  y.   Atchison,  34  Tex. 

351 294 

Morey  v.  Ball,  90  Ind.  450 1042 

Morey    y.    Forsyth,    Walk.    466 

(Mich.).  .  .  ." 177,     666 

Morey  Mfg.   Co.   y.   Scheffer,   7 

Am.   B.  R.  670 1173 

Morgan  y.  Ball,  81  Cal.  93 532 

Morgan  y.  Bogue,  7  Neb.  429..     796 
Morgan    v.    Bostic,    132    N.    C. 

743 904,     908 

Morgan     y.     Chamberlain,     26 

Barb.    (N.   Y.)    163 639 

Morgan  v.  Davis,  4  La.  141 ... .      187 
Morgan      v.      Elam,     4     Yerg. 

(Tenn.)    438  3 

Moran  v.   First  Nat,   Bank,   16 

Am.  B.  R.  639 

1121,  1134,  1157,  1160 
^Morgan  v.  Hecker,  16  Pac. 

(Cal.)  317  283 

Morgan  v,  Hecker,  74  Cal.  540     278 


Table  of  Cases. 


clxxxv 


PAGB 

Morgan  t.   Mastiek,   Fed.   Cas. 

No.  9,803    1073 

Morgan  v.  McLelland,  14  N.  C. 

Morgan  ▼.  Miller,  62  Cal.  492.     644 
Morgan  y.   Olvey,  63  Ind.  6.. 

806,     892 
Morgan  v.  Potter,  17  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  403   293 

Morgan   ▼.   Republic  of  Texas, 

2  Tex.  279   623 

Morgan  y.  Wood,  38  Mo.  App. 

265 694 

Morgan    v.    Worden,    145    Ind. 

600 1007 

Moritz  V.  Hoffman,  36  111.  653 

278,  339,  342,  773,  863 
Moritz  y.  Miller,  87  Ala.  331 . .  1049 
Morley    Bros.   v.   Stringer,    133 

Mich.  690   696 

Morning  Telegraph  Pub.  Co.  v. 

Hutchinson   (Mich.),  17  Am. 

B.  R.  426    ....*. 1214 

Morse    y.    Aldrich,    130    Mass. 

678 680,  709,  717,     740 

Morse  y.  Powers,  17  N.  H.  286 

644,     938 
Morse  v.  Raben,  27  Neb.  146 . . 

39  97% 
Morse  y.  Riblet,  22  Fed.  601 . .'  986 
Morse  y.  Ryland,  68  Kan.  260 

1002,  1003,  1004 
Morse  y.  Slason,  13  Vt.  296. . . 

462,     472 
Morse     y.     Steinrod,     29     Neb. 

108 304,  314,  316.     468 

Morse  y.  Velzy,  123  Mich.  532.     486 
Morton  y.   Lumber  Co.,  6   Am. 

B.  R.  860 1181 

Morton    y.    New    Orleans,    etc., 

R.  Co.,  79  Ala.  590 796 

Morton  y.  Ragan,  68  Ky.  334. 

152,     666 
Morton  y.  Ragan,  6  Bush  (Ky.), 

334 626 

Morton   y.    Weil,    11    Abb.    Pr. 

(N.  Y.)   421   811,  823,     870 

Morrell  y.  Miller,  28  Or.  354. 

28,  208,  625,     680 
Morrell    y.    Sharp,    74    N.    W. 

(Iowa)     749     332 

Morrill  y.  Kilner,  113  III.  318 

342,  348,     351 
Morrill  y.  Little  Falls  Mfg.  Co., 

63  Minn.  371   866 

Morris     Canal,     etc.,     CJo.     y. 

Steams,  23  N.  J.  Eq.  414.. 


PAGE 

239,  240,  344,     586 

Morris  y.  Allen,  32  N.  O.  203 . .     378 

Morris  y.  Cain,  39  La.  Ann.  712     833 

Morris  y.  Coombs,  109  111.  App. 

176 526,  528,     310 

Morris  y.  Fletcher,  67  Ark.  106.  970 
Morrow  y.  Bailey.  109  Ky.  359.  160 
Morrow  y.   Campbell,    118   Ala. 

330 386,  392,  394.  407,     503 

606,  912,     967 
Morrow  y.  Graves,  77  Cal.  218. 

716,  722 
Morris  y.  House,  32  Tex.  492.. 

768,  1031 
Morris  y.  Hyde,  8  Vt.  362 . .  634,  536 
Morris   v.    Morris,   7    Hun    (N. 

Y.),  45 233,  356,  407,  1020 

Morris  y.  Pearson,  79  N.  C.  263  333 
Morris  V.  Tillson,  81  111.  607 . .  458 
Morris  y.  Trumbo,  1  Kan.  App. 

160 966 

Morrison  y.   Abbott,    27    Minn. 

116. 160 

Morrison  v.  Clark,  55  Tex.  437 .  279 
Morrison    y.     Herrington,      120 

Mo.  665 63,     963 

Morrison  y.   McNeill,   53  N.   C. 

46 436 

Morrison  v.   McNeill,   51    N.   C. 

450 733,     756 

Morrison  v.  Morriswn,  49  N.  H. 

69 384 

Morrison  v.  Oinne,  3  N.  D.  76.  522 
Morrison  v.  Schuster,  1  Mackey 

(D.  C),   190    873 

Morrison  v.   Steer,  32   U.  C.  Q. 

B.  182 953 

Morriss  V.  Harveys.  75  Va.  726.  901 
Morrow  Shoe   Mfg.   Co.  v.   New 

England    Slice    Co.,    57    Fed. 

685 773,  842,     846 

Morris  y.  Lindauer,  54  Fed.  23. 

396,  608,  624 
Morris  v.  Martin,  19  Ont.  564. .  368 
Morris  v.  McLaughlin,  29  Mont. 

151 625 

Morris  v.   Morris,   62  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  256 806 

Moseley  v.  (Gainer,  10  Tex.  393,  589 
Moseley   v.    Moseley,    15    N.    Y. 

334 642 

Mosgrove  y.  Harris,  94  Cal.  162  546 
Moaley     y.     Donnell,     85     Pac. 

(Wash.)   259 958 

Moss  y.  Dearing,  45  Iowa,  430. 

583,     940 
Moss  y.  Sanger,  76  Tex.  321 .. . 

650,  1052 


clxxxvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Mo83  Nat.   Bank  v.  Arend    (0. 

C.  A.),  16  Am.  B.  R.  867...   1102 
MoBsop  y.  His  Creditors^  41  La. 

Ann.  296 187,     833 

Motley  V.  Sawyer,  38  Me.  68. . .     376 
Mott    V.     Danforth^     9     Watts 

(Pa.),  304 767 

Mott  V.   McNiel,    1    Aik.    (Vt.) 

162 , 627 

Mott  V.  Purcell,  98  Mo.  247 .. . 

110,  972 
Mott  V.  Wissler  Mining  Co.,  14 

Am.   B.  R.   321 1124 

Moulton  V.   iSturgis  Nat.  Bank, 

65  S.  W.    (Tex.)    1114... 349,     438 
Moultrie    v.    Jennings,    2    Mc- 

Miill.    (S.   C.)    508 220 

Mountain  v.  Whitman,  103  Ala. 

630 858,     874 

Mountford  v.  Taylor,  6  Vea.  Jr. 

788 794 

Mower  v.  Hanford,  6  Minn.  535. 

273,  917,  918,  1047,  1048 
Mowry  v.   Davenport^   74  Tenn. 

80  832 

Mower  v.  McCarthy,  79  Vt.  i 42  1168 
Mowry   v.    Schroder,   4    Strobh. 

(S.  C.)    69 199 

Moxley  v.  Ha.skin,  39  Kan.  653. 

622,  706 
Moyer  v.  Adams,  2  Fed.  182...  404 
Moyer  y.  Bloomingdale,  39  App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    227    620,     979 

Moyer  v.  Dewey,  103  U.  S.  301.   1207 
Mt.  Sterling  Nat.  Bank  v.  Bow- 
man, 19  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1416...     969 
Mt.  Vernon  Banking  Oo.  v.  Hen- 
derson Hominy  Mills,  15  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  333    737 

Muchmore  v.  Budd,  53  N.  J.  L. 

369 428,  434,  442,  443,     446 

Mudge  V.  Oliver,  83  Mass.  74..     710 
Mueller  v.  Nugent,  184  U.  S.  1. 

1210,  1215,  1217,  1219 
Mueller  v.  Bruss,  112  Wis.  406. 

708,  1203,  1204,  1205 
Mueller     v.     Renkes,     77     Pac. 

(Mont.)  512 233,  353,    408 

Muenks  v.  Bunch,  90  Mo.  500. 

160,  1019 
Mugge  V.  Ewing,  54  111.  236...  775 
Muggs   V.    Helgemeier,    81    Ind. 

120 1028 

Muir  V.  Miller,  103  Iowa,  127. 

75,  369,  513,     974 
Muirhead  v.  Smith,  35  N.  J.  £q. 

303 331,    681 

Mulcahey  v.  Archibald,  28  Oan. 


805 
178 
986 


1052 


FAGK 

Sup.  Ct.  623    697 

Mulford    V.    Doremus     (N.    J. 

Ch.),  46  Atl.  688 57 

Mulford  V.  Peterson,   35  N.  J. 

L.  127. . .  .13,  15,  67,  731,  732,    748 
Mulholland    y.    Williamson,    14 

Grant  Ch.   (U.  C.)   291 191 

Mull  V.  Dooley,  89  Iowa,  312..     252 

Mull  y.  Jones,  33  Kan.  112 152 

Mullanphy  Sav.   Bank  v.   Lyle, 

75  Tenn.  431    663,  1037 

Mullen  y.  Hewitt,  103  Mo.  639. 

770,  774,  796,  800, 

Mullen  y.  O'Shay,  85  111.  App. 

385 

Mullen  y.  Wilson,    44    Pa.    St. 

413 190,  340,  352, 

Mullenneaux  y.   Terwilliger,   50 

Hun  (N.  Y.),  626 

MuUer   y.   Abramson,   25   Misc. 

Rep.   (N.  Y.)   520   1053 

Muller    y.    Inderreiden,    79    HI. 

382 166 

Mulley   y.   Shoemaker,  •  180   Pa. 

St.  585 1003 

MuUins  y.  Hand,  17  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

612 

Mulloy  y.  Paul,  2  Tenn.  Ch.  156 
MuHoy  y.  Young,  29  Tenn.  298. 
Mulock  V.  Mulock,  156  Mo.  431. 
Mulock  y.  Wilson,  19  Colo.  296. 

191,     820 
Multnomah  St.  R.  Co.  y.  Har- 
ris,  13  Or.   198 794 

Multz  y.    Price,    82   App.   Diy. 

339 346 

Multz  V.    Price,    91    App.    Diy. 

(N.  Y.)    116. .  .  .273,  274,  965,     971 
Mumper  y.  Rushmore,  79  N.  Y. 

19 540,  644 

Mumsen   v.   Ellis,   3   Tex.   App. 

Ciy.   Cas.   Sec.   134 

Mundell  y.  Tinkis,  6  Ont.  625 . . 
Mundt  y.   Hagadom,    49    Neb. 

409 

Mundy  y.  Mason,  67  Ky.  339 . . 

187      321 
Munoz  y.  Wilson,  111  N.  Y.  295 
Munson  y.  Carter,  40  Neb.  417. 
Munson   y.   Ellis,    3    Tex.    App. 

Ciy.  Cas.  Sec.  134 234 

Murch   y.    Swenaen,    40    Minn. 

421 521,     634 

Murdoch  y.  Baker,  46  W.   Va. 

78 689,     604 

Murdock   y.   Welles,   9    W.   Va. 

552 1020 

Murdock  v.  Baker  (W.  Va.),  32 


329 
676 
656 
632 


233 

664 

160 


713 
160 


Table  of  Cases. 


dxxxvii 


PAGE 

8.  E.   1009   980 

Murphy  v.  Braase,  3  Ida.  644 . . 

625,  644 
Murphy  ▼.  Briggs,  89  N.  Y.  446. 

456,  713 
Murphy  y.  Crouch,  24  WU.  366.  162 
Murphy    y.    Farquhar,   39   Fla. 

360 169 

Murphy  y.  Green,  128  Ala.  486. 

904,  968 
Murphy  y.  Hubert,    16   Pa.   St 

50 636,  637,  642,  646,     647 

Murphy    y.   Jackison,    58   N.   O. 

11.  ." 819 

Murphy  y.  Moore,  23  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  95 724,  1033 

Murphy   y.<  Mulgrew,    102    Cal. 

547 524 

Murphy  y.  Murphy,  74  Conn. 

198 605,  643,  667,  867 

Murphy  y.  Nilles.  166  111.  99. .     840 

Murphy  y,  Orr,  32  111.  489 206 

Murphy  y.  Solnu^  6  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 

264 188 

Murphy  y.  Solens,  6  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 

293 361 

Murray  v.  Burtis,  9  Wend.   (N. 

Y.)   198 519 

Murray  y.  Burtis,  16  Wend.  212.  985 
Murray  y.  Cason,  15  Mo.  378 . . 

460.  488 
Murray  y.   First  Nat.   Bank,  6 

Kan.  App.  456   510 

Murray  y.  Heard,  103  Ala.  400.  974 
Murray  y.  Jones,  60  Ga.  109. . .  206 
Murray   y.    McOtllum,     8    Ont. 

App.  277 108 

Murray  y.  Riggs,  15  Johns.  (N. 

Y.)   571 425,  456,     465 

Murray  y.  Shoud,  13  Wash.  33.  883 
Murrison  y.  Seiler,  22  La.  Ann. 

327 371 

Murry  Nelson  &  Co.  y.  Leiter, 

93  HI.  App.   176    575 

Murry  Nelson  &  Co.   v.  Leiter, 

190  lU.  414 458,   996,  1002 

Murtha  y.  Curley,  90  N.  Y.  372. 

680,  867,  1023 
Murtha    y.    Curley,    47    N.    Y. 

Super.  Ct.  393    756,     768 

Murthau  y.  McKenna,  14  Grant 

Ch.  59 674 

Muse    y.    Yarborough,    11    La. 

521 734 

Muse  y.  Yarborough,  11  La.  530 

46.     734 
Musgrave  y.  Parish,  10  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  998 105 


PAGB 

Muskegon  Valley  Furniture  Co. 

y.  Phillips,   113  Ala.  314.... 

680.  681,  686,  690,     699 
Musselman    y.    Kent,    33    Ind. 

452 699 

Mutual  L.  Ins.  Co.  y.  Sandfel- 

der,   9  Mo.   285    193,     348 

Meyer,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Black,  4  N. 

M.  190 741 

Myers  y.  Conway,  90  Ala.  109. .     151 
Myers  y.  Fenn,  5  Wall.   (U.  S.) 

206 '. 827 

Myers  y.  King,  42  Md.  66 375 

Myers  y.  Little.  60  Miss.  203 . .     405 

Myers  y.  Peck,  2  Ala.  648 942 

Myers  y.  Wood,  1  Phila.    (Pa.) 

24 630 

McAdams  v.  Mitchell.  lO^y.  L. 

Rep.  856 971 

McAfee  y.  McAfee,  28  S.  C.  188. 

106,  108,  200,  362,     365 
McAlevy    y.    McElroy,    10    Pa. 

Caa.  364 990 

McAlister    v.    Honea,   71   Miss. 

266 466 

McAlpine   y.    Sweetzer,   76   Ind. 

78 64 

McAnally    y.    O'Neal,    56    Ala. 

299 343 

McAndrew   y.   McAndrew,    3   C. 

PI.    (Pa.)    174 760 

McAnnulty  y.   McAnnulty,     120 

111.  26 322 

McArtee  y.  Engart,   13  111.  242. 

231.  354.     871 
McArthur      y.      Hoysradl,      11 

Paige    (N.  Y.),  495 332 

McAulay  y.  Earnhart^  46  N.  C. 

602 924 

McAuliffe   y.   Farmer,  27   Mich. 

76 177 

McAvoy   y.    Jennings    (Wash.), 

87  Pac.  53 854 

McBee  y.  Bearden,  75  Tenn.  731     676 
McBride  y.  McClelland,  6  Watts 

&  S.   (Pa.)   94 634 

McBride  y.  McLaughlin,  5   Ky. 

L.   Rep.    174    38,     364 

McBride      y.       State      Revenue 

Agent,  70  Miss.  716   778 

McBpoom     V.     Rives,     1     Stew. 

(Ala.)   72 47 

McCabe   v.   Brayton,    38   N.   Y. 

196 914,  946,  948,     963 

McCaffrey   v.   Hickey,   66   Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    489...  110,   171,  379,     511 

669,  758,  1013 
McCaffrey    v.     Dustin,    43    111. 


clxxxviii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

App.  34 368,     376 

HcCain  v.  Wood«  4  Ala.  258. . . 

227     259 
McOall     V.     Hinkley,     4     Gill 

(Md.),  128 428 

McGalmont     v.      Lawrence,      I 

Blatchf.    (U.  S.)    232.... 794,     798 

1022,   1027,  1030 
McCandlesB  v.  Bea,  21   Ky.  L. 

Rep.  1687 613 

McGandlish  v.  Kirkland,  7  da. 

Ann.  614 620 

McOanlesB  v.  Reynolds,  74  N.  C. 

301 331 

KcCanless  v.   Flincheim,   89  N. 

C.  373 410 

McOanless  v.    Smith,   51    N.   J. 

Eq.  505 406,     696 

McCk)nnack  *  Harvesting     Mach. 

Co.  V.  Citi^ns'  BauK,  106  N. 

W.    (N.  D.)    122   988 

McCarhy  v.   Baze,  26  La.  Ann. 

382 518 

McCarthy   v.   Goold,    1    Ball.   & 

B.  387 100 

McCarthy  v.  McQuade,  1  Sweeny 

(N.  Y.)    387 1003 

McCartney      v.      Bostwick,     31 

Barb.    (N.  Y.)    390 780 

McCartney   v.    Bostwick,   32   N. 

Y.  63 36,  38,  136,  682,     752 

McCartney    v.    Earle,    115    Fed. 

462 431,  492,     962 

McCarron   v.    Cassidy,    18   Ark. 

34 442 

McCarval   v.   Wood,     68    Minn. 

104 953 

McCaskle   v.   Amarine,    12   Ala. 

17 231,  329,  354,  675,     708 

McCasland  v.   Carson,    1    Head 

(Tenn.),  117 266 

McOauley  v.  Rodes,  7   B.  Mon. 

(Ky.)   462 142,     149 

McCaun     v.     Dillabaugh,     117 

Mich.  446 507 

McCausland  v.  Ralston,  12  Nev. 

195 663 

McChord  v.  Noe,  8  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

344 364 

McClanahan  v.   Beasley,    17   B. 

Mon.    (Ky.)    111.,..  142,  146,     149 
Maclaren  v.  Stone,  18  Ohio,  Cir. 

Ct.  854 100,     147 

McClarinv.  Anderson,  109  Ala. 

671 337,     807 

McClaugherty  v.  Morgan,  36  W. 

Va.  191 349,     375 

McClellan    v.    Pyeatt,    66    Fed. 


PAGE 

843 12,       17 

McClellan   v.   Pyeatt,    50     Fed. 

686 950 

McClellan  y.   Solomon,   23    Fla. 

437 741,  742,     748 

McClelland  v.  Barnard,  36  Tex. 

Civ.  App.  118 153 

McClenahan    v.    Stevenson^    118 

Iowa,  106 631 

McClenney  v.  McClenney,  3  Tex. 

192 196 

McClenny  v.  Ford,  10  Tex.  159. 

218,  220,     637 
Mcdeskey  v.  Leadbetter,   1  6a. 

551 639 

McClintock  v.   Loisseau,  31   W. 

Va.   865 640,     668 

McCloskey   v.    Cyphert,    27    Pa. 

St.  220 110 

McCloskey  v.  Stewart,  63  How. 

Pr.    (N.  Y.)    137.... 93,   171,     768 
McClure  v.  Forney,  107  Pa.  St. 

414 532 

McClure  v.  Sheek,  68  Tex.  426. 

428,  1006 
McClure  v.  Smith,  14  Colo.  299. 

261,  318,     442 
McClurg  V.  Lecky,    3    Penr.    & 

W.   (Pa.)    83    72,     431 

McCluskey    v.    Cubbison    (Kan. 

App.),   57  Pac.   496 444 

McCluskv  V.    Cubbison,   8   Kan. 

App.  857 930,  1004 

McCole  V.  Loehr,  79  Ind.  430 . . 

275,  290,     586 
McCollum  V.  Crain   (App.  Mo.), 

74  S.  W.  650 240 

MeCollum    v.    Crain,     101    Mo. 

App.  522 200,     343 

McConaughy   v.    Famey,   89   N, 

W.    (Seb.)    812    ....' 662 

McOonihe  v.  Derby,  62  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  90 171 

McConihe  v.  Sawyer,   12  N.  H. 

396 954 

McConihay  v.  Wright,  121  U.  S. 

201 43 

McConnel    v.    Dickson,    43    111. 

99 770 

McConnel  1   v.   Borber,    86    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  360 319,  320,     334 

McC^nnell    v.    Brown,    16    Ky. 

459 993 

McConnell     v.     B  rugger  hoff,     1 

Tex.  App.  Civ.  Cas,  Sec.  1004     613 
McConnell     v.     Citizens'     State 

Bank,  130  Ind.  127 807,     970 

McConnell    v.    Martin,    62    Ind. 


Table  of  Cases. 


dxxxix 


PA6B 

434 146,     278 

McConnell  v.  Sherwood,  84  N.  Y. 

522 674 

McConville  v.   National    Valley 

Bank,  98  Va.   9 366,     976 

McCJord,  etc..  Mercantile  CJo.  v. 

Burson,  38  Kan.  278 83,     238 

McCord  V.  Gilbert.  64  111.  App. 

233 260,     638 

McCord  V.  Knowlton,  79  Minn. 

299 299,     381 

McCord  V.  Moore,  52  Tenn.  734.  432 
McOord  V.  Tennille,  81  Ala.  168  306 
McCorkle  v.  Earnhardt,  61  N.  C. 

300 722 

McCorkle     v.     Montgomery,     11 

Rich.  Eq.    (S.  C.)    114 957 

McCormick   t.    Hadden,    37   Til. 

370 34 

McCormick  v.  Hartley,  107  Ind. 

248 199,  848,  1045 

McCormick     Harvesting     Mach. 

Co.  V.  Citizen's  Bank,  106  N. 

W.  (N.  D.)   122 251 

McCormick     Harvesting     Mach. 

Co.  T.  Griffin,  116  Iowa,  397.     968 
McCormick     Harvesting     Mach. 

Co.   V.   Perkins     (Iowa),    110 

X.  W.  156 97 

McCormick     Harvesting     Mach. 

Co.  V.  Pouder,  123  Iowa,  17.. 

94,  114,     450 
McCormick  v.   Hyatt^     33     Ind. 

546 579 

McCormick   v.   Smith,    127   Ind. 

230 938,   1005,  1006 

McCormick  v.  Towns,  64  N.  H. 

278 675 

McCormick  v.  Wilder,   61   App. 

Div.    (N.   Y.)    619 278,     669 

^fcDonald  v.  Cohen,  6  App.  Div. 

(N.   Y.)    161 674 

McDonald    v.    Boice,    12    Grant 

Ch.   (U.  C.)  48 43 

McDonald  v.  Dascam,  8  Am.  B. 

R.  543 1162 

McDonald   v.  Farrell,  60  Iowa, 

335 395 

McDonald    v.    First  Nat.   Bank, 

116  Fed.   129    958 

McDonald    v.    Hoover,    142   Mo. 

484 32,  599,  601,     627 

McDonald     v.     May,     1     Rich. 

Eq.    (S.  C.)    91 660 

McDonald   v.   McDonald,   17  N. 

Y.   Siipp.  230    1035,  1060 

McDonald  v.  McQueen^  9  Mani- 


PAGE 

toba,   315    410 

McDonald   v.   Moore,   Fed.   Cas. 

No.   8,763 1098 

McDonald    v.    O'Neill,    161    Pa. 

St.  245 212 

McDonald  v.  Peacock,  37  Minn. 

512 1052 

McDonald    v.    Russell,    16    Fla. 

260 817 

McDowell     V.      Chicago     Steel 

Works,  124  111.  491 839 

McDowell    V.    Cochran,    11    111. 

31 821,     843 

McDowell  V.  Goldsmith,  2  Md. 

Ch.  370    834,     922 

McDowell  V.  Goldsmith,   6  Md. 

319 979 

McDowell  V.  McMurria,  107  Ga. 

812 631,  1025 

McDowell  V.  Rissell,  37  Pa.  St. 

164 673 

McDowell  V.  Steele,  87  Ala.  493 

31,  309,  413,  417,  572,     599 
McCrasley      v.      Hasslock,      63 

lenn.    1 o£ 

McCraw  v.  Welch,  2  Colo.  284 

525,  528,     534 
McCreery    v.    Gordon,    38    Hun 

(N.    Y.),    467 297 

McCreary  v.  Skinner,  83  Iowa, 

362 373,     571 

McCreary  v.  Skinner,  75  lowa^ 

411 574,  951,  964,  1002,  1003 

McCue  V.  McCue,  41  W.  Va.  151 

346,     833 
McCuin  V.   Merchants*   Grocery 

Co.   (Ark.),  93  S.  W.  563...     917 
McCulloch     V.     Hutchinson,     7 

Watts    (Pa.),   434 

13,   14,   17,  435,     445 
McCullough  V.   Colby,   5   Bosw. 

(N.  Y.)    477    792 

McCullough  V.  Colby,  17  N.  Y. 

Super.  Ct.  603 872,     873 

McCullough  V.  Colby,  18  N.  Y. 

Super.  Ct.  477    793 

McCullough    V.    Sommerville,    8 

Leigh    (Va.),  415 463 

McCullough  V.  Willey,  200  Pa. 

St.  168   527,     639 

McCully  V.  Swackhamer,  6  Or. 

438 522 

McCutcheon's    Appeal,    99    Pa. 

St.    133 ...120,    124.     128 

McCutcheon  v.  Pigue,  51  Tenn. 

565 821 

McDaniel  v.  Parish,  4  App.  Cas. 


czc 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

(D.  C.)    213    

892,  906,  953,  964,     972 
McDaniels  y.  Perkins,  64  Iowa> 

174 966 

McDermott  y.  Bamnm,  19  Mo. 

204 999 

McDermott  y.  Bamum,  16  Mo. 

114 527 

McDermott    y.     Blois,    R.     M. 

Charlt.    (Ga.)    281    773 

McDermott   v.    Ebom,    90    Ala. 

258 418,  433,  440,  1036 

McDermott  y.  Strong,  4  Johns. 

Ch.   (N.  Y.)    687 98,     117 

McDonald    y.    Dascam,    8    Am. 

B.  R.  643    1162 

McDowell  y.  McMurria,  107  Ga. 

g22     1202 

McElroy  y."  Hiner,  iss  111.  ise 

634,  665,     668 
McElwain   y.    Willis,    9    Wend. 

(N.  Y.)   648... 772,  796,  842,     844 
McElwee  y.  Kennedy,  56  S.  C. 

154.  .  .253,  366,  462,  481,  488,     492 
499,  562,  581,  695,     698 
McElwee    y.    Sutton,    2    Bailey 

(S.    C.)     128 

128,  194,  196,  270,  275,  924 
McEvony  y.  McCann,  31  Neb. 

697 396 

McFadden  y.  Mitchell,  64  Cal. 

628 346 

McFadden    y.    Ross,    126    Ind. 

341 466,     510 

McFadyen  y.  Masters,   8   Okla. 

174 581,  669,  705,     706 

McFarlane  y.  Louden,  99   Wis. 

620 261,  253,  443,     662 

McFarland  y.  Elliott,  71  Iowa, 

766 366 

McFarland  y.  Goodman,  6  Biss. 

(U.   S.)    Ill    162 

McFarland  y.  Goodman,  16  Fed. 

Cas.  No.  8,789  92 

McFarland  y.  McFarland,  1  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  422    588 

McFarland     Carriage     Co.      y. 

Solanas,  6  Am.  B.  R.  221 .. . 

1179,  1216 
McFerran     v.     Jones,     2     Litt. 

(Ky.)   219   99,    597 

McGahan    y.    Crawford,    47    S. 

C.  566 686,  688,  689,     970 

McGay  y.  Keilback,  14  Abb.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)   142  103 

McGee  v.  Baird,  3  Out.  Pr.  9 .  .       45 
McGee    v.    Campbell,    7    Watts 


PAGE 

(Pa.),  645    632 

McGee  y.  Jones,  34  S.  C.  146. .  207 
McGee  y.  Importers',  etc.,  Nat. 

Bank,  93  Ala.  192 860 

McGee  y.  Wells,  67  S.  C.  280. 

366,  366,  473,  614,     920 
951,  954,  976,     999 
McGhee  y.  Importers',  etc.,  Nat. 

Bank,  93  Ala.  192 199 

McGhee  y.  Wells,  57  S.  C.  280. 

234,  927,  1002 
McGinnis  y.  Curry,  13  W.  Va. 

29 141,     368 

McGiyney    y.    Childs,    41    Hun 

(N.   Y.),   607    151 

McGoldrick   v.    Sleyin,   43   Ind. 

622 43 

McGowan  y.  Knittel  (C.  C.  A.), 

16  Am.  B.  R.   1 1106 

McGowan  y.  Hitt,  16  S.  C.  602 

324,     838 
McGregor    Bank    y.    Hostetter, 

61  Iowa,  396   138 

McGregor  y.  Chase,  37  Vt.  226 

474,     486 
McGregor    v.    White,    16    Tex. 

Ciy.  App.  299    717 

McGrew  v.  Hancock   (Tenn.  Ch. 

App.),  62  S.  W.  600 

462,  474,  481,  488,   490,   492,     664 
McGrew  y.  Hancock,  52  S.  W. 

(Tenn.)    500    '..316,     319 

McGuire  v.  James,  143  Pa.  St. 

521 641 

McGuire  y.  Miller,  15  Ala.  394  631 
McGuire  y.  Miller,  15  Ala.  294  216 
McGuire    v.    West,    19    Ky.    L. 

Rep.    1364    538 

McHenry    y.    Shepard,    2    Mo. 

App.   378    49 

Mcllvaine  y.  Smith,  42  Mo.  46  422 
Mclnnis  y.  Wiscassett  Mills,  78 

Miss.  52.. 200,  856,  893,  962,     970 
Mcintosh    y.    Smiley,    107    Mo. 

377 552 

Mcintosh   y.   Wilson,   81    Iowa, 

339 626 

Mclntyre  y.  Legon,  38  S.  C.  457  696 
Mclntyre  v.  Malone,  3  Neb.  169  336 
Mclntyre    y.    Malone,    3    Neb. 

(Unoff.)    159    869 

McKamey  v.  Thorp,  61  Tex.  648 

141,  146,  370 
McKay  y.  Clapp,  47  Iowa,  418.  525 
McKay  v.  Funk,  13  N.  B.  R.  334  1225 
McKay  v.  Gilliam,  65  N.  C.  130 

218,     468 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxci 


PAGB 

HcKeagae  v.  Armstrong,  50  N. 

J.  Eq.  309 28 

McKee  v.  Bassick  Min.  Co.,   8 

CJolo.  392   216,     219 

IfeKee  y.  Garoelon,  60  Me.  165 

521,  531,     548 
McKee    y.    Gilchrist,    3    Watts 

(Pa.),  230   67 

McKee     Stair     Bldg.     Ck>.     y. 

Martin,  126  Cal.  657.... 524,    528 
McKee  y.  Tyson,    10   Abb.   Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    392 48 

McKee  y.  West   (1904),  37  So. 

(Ala.)   740   294 

McKee  y.  West,  37  So.    (Ala.) 

740   717,  876,     877 

McKee  y.  West   (Ala.),  37  So. 

740 876,     877 

McKeldin  y.   Gouldy,  91   Tenn. 

680 774 

McKenna  y.  Crowley,   16  R.  I. 

364 201,  344,  686,  844,     845 

McKenney  y.  Cheney,  11  Am. 

B.  R.  64 1141,  1144,  1200 

McKentry  y.  Gladwin,  10  Cal. 

227 63 

McKenzie  y.  Salyer,  19  Ky.  L. 

Rep.    1414    697,     897 

McKenzie   y.   Thomas,    118    Ga. 

728 260,     866 

McKeown  y.  Allen,  37  Fla.  420 

293,  341,  343,  672,     685 
McKeown   y.    Coagler,    18    Fla. 

866 458,     493 

McKey  y.  Lee,  6  Am.  B.  R.  267.   1173 
McKibben   y.    Barton,    1    Mich. 

213 804 

McKibbin  y.  Brigham,  18  Utah, 

78 741 

McKibbin  y.  Martin,  64  Pa.  St. 

356 2,  3,  7,  8,  627,     529 

631,  641,  569,  573,     996 
McKinlay  y.  Bowe,  97  N.  Y.  93 

750,     844 
McKinley    y.    Combs,    1    T.    B. 

Mon.    (Ky.)    105    186,    293 

McKinley    y.    Ensell,   2    Gratt. 

(Va.)    333    563 

McKinney     y.     Farmers'     Nat. 

Bank,  104  HI.  180 

67,  741,  742,  1036 
McKinney    y.    Finley,    33    Mo. 

App.    645    599 

McKmney   y.   Hensley,   74   Mo. 

326 408 

McKinney    y.    Wade,    43    Mo. 

App.   152    236 


Pi  OB 

McKinney  y.  Ward,  39  Kan.  279    680 
McKinnon  y.   Reliance  Lumber 

Co.,  63  Tex.  30 603 

McKinster  y.  Babcock,  26  N.  Y. 

378 226,  227,    228 

McKluskey  y.  Cnbbison,  8  Kan. 

App.   857    1001 

McLaggan   y.    Smith,    35    Misc. 

Rep.  664    (N.  Y.) 182 

McLane  y.  Hamilton,  43  Vt.  48    916 
McLane  y.  Johnson,  43  Vt.  48 . 

188,  192,  209,  379,  435,     804 
McLarren  y.  Thompson,  40  Me. 

284 584,     694 

McLaughlin   y.    Bank   of   Poto- 
mac, 48  U.  S.  220 199 

McLaughlin  y.  Carter,   13  Tex. 

Civ.  App.  694    484 

McLaughlin  y.  Lange,  42  Mich. 

81 531,  633,     990 

McLaughlin  y.  McLaughlin,  91 

Pa.  St.  462.. 64,  69,  177,  634,     641 
McLaughlin  y.  Potomax   Bank, 

7  How.   (U.  S.)   220 182,     985 

McLaurie    y.    Partlow,    53    111. 

340 140 

McLean  y.  Button,  19  Barb.  (N. 

Y.  450 383,  421,  426,     427 

McLean  y.  Cary,  88  N.  Y.  391.     679 
McLean  y.  Hess,   106   Ind.  555 

119,     146 
McLean  v.  Lafayette  Bank,    16 

Fed.  Cas.  No.  8,888 . .  252,  869,  1207 
McLean  y.  Letchford,   60  Miss. 

169 696,     697 

McLean  y.  Mayo,  7  Am.  B.  R. 

115 1223 

McLean  y.  Meek,    18  How.   Pr. 

(U.  S.)   16   781 

McLemore  y.  Nuckolls,  37  Ala. 

62 105,     362 

McLendon    v.    Grice,    119    Ala. 

513 309,  313,     937 

McLeod  y.  Lloyd,  43  Or.  260..     913 
McLeod  y.  McLeod,  28  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  284..  136,  151.  152,  158,     170 
McLeod   y.   O'Neill,    15   Ky.   L. 

Rep.  162    725 

McMahon   y.    Allen,    36    N.    Y. 

403 203 

McMahan   y.   Bowe,    114   Mass. 

145 23 

McMahan  y.  Dawkins,  22  S.  C. 

314 54 

McMahan  y.  Morrison,  16  Ind. 

172 702 

McMahon   v.   Rooney,    93   Mich 


•CXCll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

390 868 

McMahon    v.    Specht,    64    App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)    128 1033 

McMakin  v.  Sheltx>n,  6  Ky.  L. 

Rep.    154    798 

McMakin   v.    Stratton,    82    Ky. 

226 791 

McManns  v.  Jewett,  6  La.  530.   1026 
McMannomy    v.    Chicago,    etc., 

R.  Co.,  167  III.  497 832 

McMaaus  v.  Jewett,  9  La.  170.     580 
McManuB  v.  Mills,  19  HI.  App. 

398 330 

McManus  ▼.  Tarleton,  126  N.  C. 

790 632,     656 

McMarlan  v.  English,  74  Pa.  St. 

296 529,  634,     552 

McMasters     v.     Campbell,     41 

Mich.  613    63 

McMaster    v.    Clare,    7    Grant. 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   650 463,  466,     495 

McMasters  v,  Edgar,  22  W.  Va. 

673 37,  364,  716,  718,     898 

McMaster  v.  Garland,  31  U.  C. 

C.  P.  320   634 

McMeekin   y.   Edmonds,    1    Hill 

Eq.    (S.   C.)    288 331,     691 

McMenomv     v.      Roosevelt,      3 

John.  Ch.    (N.  Y.)    446.  .467,     465 
McMichael    v.    McDermott,    17 

Pa.   St.   363 934 

McMillan  v.    Edfast,   50   Minn. 

414 893 

McMillan      v.      McSherry,      15 

Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)   133 634 

McMillan   v.   Stephens,   20   Ky. 

L.  Rep.  1528    968 

McMinn  v.  Whalen,  27  Cal.  300 

773,     783 
McMurtrie   v.   Riddell,   9    Colo. 

497 291 

McNaboe     v.     Columbian    Mfg. 

Co.,  18  Am.  B.  R.  684..  1169,  1169 
McNaboe  v.  Marks,   16  Am.  B. 

H.    767    1187 

McNally  v.  White,  154  Ind.  163 

93,   423,  1029 
McNair  v.  Mclntyre,  7  Am.  B. 

R.    638    1158 

McNair  v.  Moore,  64  S.  C.  82. . 

133,  135,  161,     166 
McNair   v.    Riesher,   8   Pa.   Co. 

Ct.  494    279 

McNaughton    v.    Lamb,    2    Ind. 

642 1031 

McNeal  Pipe  &  F.  Co.  v.  Bul- 
lock, 174  Pa.  93 480 


PAGE 

McNeal  v.  Glenn,  4  Md.  87 . . . 

386,  1039 
McNeal  v.  Hayes  Mach.  Co.,  103 

N.  Y.  Supp.  312 291 

McNeelv   v.   Rucker,    6   Blackf. 

391  .' 219,    221 

McNeil,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Hovland,  91 

111.  App.  315   434 

McNeil,  etc.,   Co.   v.  Plows,   83 

111.  App.  186 252,  499,     599 

McNew     V.     Smith,     5     Gratt. 

(Va.)    84    1023,  1050 

McNichoIs    v.    Richter,    13    Mo. 

App.  515 72,  609,     696 

McNorton    v.    Akers,    24    Iowa, 

369 942 

McNulty    V.    Feingold,    12   Am. 

B.  R.  338   1133 

McNultv  V.  Wiesen,  12  Am.  B. 

R.    341     1140 

McPhee   v.    O'Rourke,    10   Colo. 

301 85,  168,     820 

McPherson    v.    McPherson,    21 

S.  C.  261 .  .233,  234,  320,  350,     353 

451,  452,  462,     466 
McQuade      v.      Rosecrans,      36 

Ohio  St.  442 667 

McQuade      v.      Williams,      101 

Tenn.  334   1063 

McQupwn  V.  Law,  18  111.  App. 

34 309,   330,  369,     372 

McRea     v.     Alabama     Branch 

Bank,  19  How.  376 959,     961 

McRea  v.  Branch  Bank,  60  U. 

S.  376  965 

McRea  v.  Mobile  Branch  Bank, 

19  How.    (U.  S.)    376 260 

McSween  v.  McCown,  23   S.  C. 

342 75,77,      83 

McTeer     v.     Huntsman      (Ch. 

App.),    (Tenn.)    49  S.  W.  57 

234,     555 
McTeer  v.  Huntsman,  49  S.  W. 

(Tenn.)    67    366 

McTeers   v.    Perkins,    106    Ala. 

411 397,    904 

McVeagh  v.  Baxter,  82  Mo.  618    604 
McVeigh   v.   Ritenour,   40   Ohio 

St.    107    201,     239 

McWhorter    v.    Wright,    6    Ga. 

555    307,    468,     487 

McWilliaros  v.  Rodger,  66  Ala. 

87 473 

McWilliams   v.   Thomas,    74    S. 

W.    (Tex.)    596 701 

McQuinnay     v.     Hitchcock,     8 

Tex.    33     623 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxciii 


V 

l^adal  ▼.  Brittcm,  112  N.  C.  180 

681,  597,  025,  908, 

Nailer  t.  Toung,  75  Tenn.  735. 

Kaime  v.  Prowse,    6    Ves.    Jr. 

(Eng.)   752 

Kalle  ▼.  Lively,  15  Fla.  130... 

Nanoe  ▼.  Nanoe,  84  Ala.  375 . . . 

Ill,  114,  151,  322,  326, 

Napanee  Caimiiig  Co.    v.    Reid, 

159  IncL  614  

Napier  v.  Wightman,  Speers  Eq. 

(S.  C.)    167    

Napper  v.  Tager,  79  Kv.  241 . . 
Narton  ▼.  Perkins,  67  Vt.  203. . 
Nary     v.      Merrill^      8      Allen 

(Masa.),  451 

Nash    y.    Geraghty,    105    Mich. 

382 

Nash  V.  Stevens,  96  Iowa,  616.. 

166, 

Nason  t.  Hobbs^  75  Me.  396 

152,   154, 
Nassauer  v.  Techner,    65    Wis. 

388 43,  45, 

Natba  v.  Maganchand,    27    In- 
dian L.  Bep.  327 

Nathan  v.  Sands^  52  Neb.  660. . 
Natalie  Anthracite  Coal  Co.  v. 

Ryon,   188  Pa.  St.   138 

National  Bank  of  Commerce  v. 

Appei   Clothing    Co.     (Colo.), 

83  Pac.  966 846, 

National  Bank  of  Commerce  v. 

Brunswick     Tobacco     Works 

Co.,   165  Mo.  602 997, 

National  Bank  of  Commerce  v. 

Chamberlain    (Neb.),    100   N. 

W.  943 

National  Bank  of  Commerce  v. 

Chapman,  50  Neb.  484   

National  Bank  of  Commerce  v. 

Chapman,  60  Neb.  484  

National  Bank  of  Commerce  v. 

Morris   (Mo.),  21  S.  W.  611. 
National  Bank  of  Greensboro  v. 

Gilmer,  116  N.  C.  684 

272,  273, 
National  Bank  of  Metropolis  ▼. 

Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13 

62,  107,  108,  113, 
National  Bank  of  Metropolis  r. 

Sprague,  21  N.  J.  Eq.  530. . . 
National  Bank  of  Newberry  v. 

Kinard,  28  S.  C.  101 

National   Bank    of    Orange  Co. 

▼.   Van   Sieenburgh,   65    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  621    

National  Bank  of  Port  Jenris  v. 
m 


PAGC  FAOX 

Bonnell,   26   Misc.   Rep.    (N. 

Y.)  541 407,  410,     610 

1036     National  Bank  of  Port  Jervis  v. 
778         Bonnell,  46  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.) 

302 383 

323      National   Bank  of  Republic   ▼. 

358  Dickinson,   107   Ala.   265 

306,  307,    513 
584      National   Bank   of   Republic  t. 

Hobbs,  118  Fed.  626 

609  913,  1047,  1226 

National  Bank   of    Republic  v. 
328  Thurber,   39   Misc.   Rep.    (N. 

774         Y.)   13 766 

642      National  Bank  of  West  Troy  v. 

Levy,  127  N.  Y.  649 208,    209 

258      National  Brewery  Co.  v.  Lind- 
say, 72  Mo.  App.  591 968 

160      National     Broadway     Bank     v. 
Tuengling,   58  Hun    (N.  Y.), 

836  474 816 

National  Ezch.  Bank  v.  Watson, 

157  13  R.  L  91    324 

National  Hudson  River  Bank  v. 
765  Chaskin,   28   App.    Div.     (N. 

Y.)   311 519,     547 

6      National  Hudson  River  Bank  v. 
605  Davison,  28  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.) 

311 266 

893      National   Metropolitan  Bank  v. 

Hitz,  1  Mackey  (D.  C),  111.     147 
National  Park  Bank    v.    Whit- 

851  more,  104  N.  Y.  297 

465..   466,     502 
National  State  Bank  v.  Sanford 
1002         Fork,  etc.,  Co.,  157  Ind.  10 . . 

262,     660 
National  State    Bank    v.    Vigo 
160  L/Ounty  Nat.   Bank,    141   Ind. 

362 869 

683      National    Tradesman's  Bank  v. 
Wetmore,  42    Hun     (N.  Y.), 

896  369 770,     786 

National    Tube    Works    Co.    v. 

87  Ballon,  146  U.  8.  617 796 

National    Tube    Works    Co.    v. 
Ring    Refrigerator,    etc.,    Co., 

378  118  Mo.  364 997 

National  Tube  Works    v.    Ring 
Refrigerating,    etc.,    Co.,    118 

189  Mo.  366 229,  332,     627 

National  Union  Bank  v.  Brain- 

276  erd,  65  Vt.  291 746 

National   Union  Bank   v.   Reed, 

800  12  N.  Y.  Supp.  920 859 

National  Union  Bank  v.  Riger, 
38  App.  Div.    (N.  Y.)    123... 
866  1047,    1048,  1060 

National   Valley  Bank  v.  Haa- 


CXCIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

oock,  100  Va.  101 485,    600 

National  Wall  Paper  Co.  v.  Mc- 

Pheraon,  19  Mont.  365    875 

National  Bank  t.  Buckeye  Iron, 

etc..  Works,  46  111.  App.  626.     644 
Nat.  Bank  v.  HobbB«  9  Am.  B. 

R.  190 1226 

National  Bank  ▼.  Kinnard,  28 

S.   C.   101 838,  840,  1017 

Namnburg   v.    Hyatt^    24    Fed. 

898 163 

Nazro  v.  Ware,  38  Minn.  443 . .     238 

Neal  V.  Foster,  36  Fed.  29 

266,  291,  312,  1036 
Neal  V.  Gregory,  19  Fla.  356 .. . 

721,  893,  911 
Neal   V.  Neal,  26  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

962 641 

Neal  V.  Williams,  18  Me.  391 . .     721 
Neale  v.  Day,  4  Jur.  N.  S.  1226 

92,  116,     414 
Neale  v.  Neale,  9  Wall.  (U.  S.) 

1 871 

Nealis  v.   American  Tube,  etc., 

Co.,  76  Hun   (N.  Y.)  220....     864 
Nebraska    Moline    Plow    Co.    v. 

Klingman,  48  Neb.  204 245 

Nebraska  Nat.  Bank    v.    Hallo- 
well,  63  Neb.  309    686,'    863 

Neece  v.  Haley,  23  111.  416....     633 
Needles  v.  Ford,  167  Mo.  495.. 

274,  341,  1017 
Neely  v.  Wood,  18  Tenn.  486..  634 
Negeler  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  129 

111.  157 254 

Neighbor  v.  Hoblitoel,  84  Iowa, 

698 366 

Neighbors   v.   Holt,    14    Ky.   L. 

Rep.  237 219,  220,     691 

Neiman  v.  Shoolbraid,  2  N.  B. 

N.  Rep.  688    1234 

Neil  V.  Tenney,  42  Me.  322 ... .     339 
Neisler  v.  Harris,  115  Ind.  560. 

679,     986 
Nelden-Judson      Drug      Co.     v. 

Commercial     Nat.     Bank,    27 

Utah,  59 627 

Nellis  V.  Clark,  20  Wend.    (N. 

Y.)  24 13 

Nellis  V.  Clark,  4  Hill  (N.  Y.), 

424 662 

NelniB  v.  Steiner,  113  Ala.  562. 

74,  914,  916,  929,  1004 
Nelson  v.  Buchanan,    7    Gratt. 

(Va.)   334 266 

Nelson  v.  Kinney,  93  Tenn.  428. 

462,     510 
Nelson  v.  Leiter,  190  111.  414. . 


PAOB 

489,  492,  493,    99» 
Nelson  ▼.   Leiter,   93   HI.   App. 

176 917 

Nelson  v.  Smith,  28  HI.  496 .. . 

256,  259,  262,     392 
Nelson  v.  Venden,  99  Tenn.  224. 

192,  195,  349,     350 
Nelson  v.  Warren,  93  Ala.  408. 

66,       69 
Nelson   Distilling   Co.   v.   Voss- 

meyer,  25  Mo.  App.  678.. 233,  353 
Neppach  v.  Jones,  20  Or.  491 . .  840 
Neresheimer   v.   Smyth,   167   N. 

Y.  202 636 

Nesbitt  V.  Digby,  13  HI.  387. . .  297 
Neslin  v.  Wells,  104  U.  S.  428.  266 
Neuberger  v.   Keim,   134  N.  Y. 

35 190,  363,    86^ 

Neubert  v.   Massman,    37    Fla. 

91 434,  440,     446 

Neuffer  v.  Pardue,  36  Tenn.  191  301 
Neusbaum   v.   Keim«  24   N.   Y. 

325 48,     780 

Neustadt  v.  Joel,  9  N.  Y.  Super. 

Ct.  530 1041 

Nevers  v.  Hack,  138  Ind.  260.. 

852,  901,    902 
New   England   L.    ft   T.    Co.   v. 

Avery    (Tex.   Civ.    App.),   41 

S.  W.  673 898 

New    England   L.    ft   T.    Co.   v. 

Avery,  41  S.  W.  (Tex.)  673.  717 
New   England   Marine   Ins.   Co. 

V.  Chandler,  16  Mass.  275 . . . 

428,  443,  440,  460,     472 
New  Haven  Steamboat,  etc.,  Co. 

V.  Vanderbilt,  16  Conn.  420.  264 
New    Home    Sewing  Mach.   Co. 

V.  Wray,  28  S.  C.  86 814 

New  Orleans    Gas,    etc.,  Co.  v. 

Currell,  4  Rob.  (La.)  438...  861 
New  Orleans  Acid,  etc.,   Co.  ▼. 

0.  Guillory  ft  Co.    (La.),  42 

So.  329 269 

New    South    Bldg.,  etc.,  Assoc. 

V.  Reed,  96  Va.   346 

349.  350,     368 
New   York    Commercial    Co.    v. 

Carpenter,   4  Misc.  Rep.    iN. 

Y.)  240 673 

New  York  County  Nat.  Bank  ▼• 

American  Surety  Co.,  69  App. 

Div.  (N.  Y.)  153... 696,  618,  985 
New  York  County  Nat.  Bank  v. 

American  Surety  Co.,   174  N. 

Y.  544 310,  472,  492,  994,     970. 

New    York    Co.    Nat.    Bank    v. 

Massey,   192  U.   S.   138 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxcv 


1157,  1169, 
New  York,  etc.,  R.  Oo.  v.  Kyle, 

18  N.  Y.  Super  Ct.  687 

New  York,  etc.,  R.  Oo.  v.  Kyle, 

6  Boew.   (N.  Y.)   687 586, 

New    York    Fire    Ina.    Co.    v. 

Tooker,  36  N.  J.  Eq.  408.581, 
New  York  Fourth  Nat.  Bank  v. 

American  Mills  Co.,  137  U.  S. 

234 

New  York  Ice   Co.   v.   Cousins, 

23  App.  Div.   (N.  Y.)   660... 

497,  619,  687, 
New    York    Public    Library    ▼. 

Tilden,  29  Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.) 

169 

New  York  Stove  Mercantile  Co. 

V.  West,  107  Mo.  App.  254.. 

915,  954, 

New  V.  Driver,  89  Ga.  434 

New  V.  New,  127  Ind.  576 

New  V.  Oldfield,  110  111.  138... 
New  V.  Sailors,  114  Ind.  407.. 

436, 
New  V.   Young    (Ala.),  41    So. 

623 

Newall  V.  Newall,  34  Miss.  386. 
Newark   v.   Funk,    15   Ohio   St. 

462 

Newberry  v.  Princeton  Bank,  98 

Va.  471 

Newbould  v.  Warrin,    14    Abb. 

Pr.    (N.   Y.)    80 

Newdigate  v.   Jacobs,    9    Dana 

(Ky.),   17 478, 

Newell     V.     Morgan,     2     Harr. 

(DeL)    225 36,   44,   136, 

Newell  ▼.  Wagness,  1  N.  D.  62. 

435,  439,  442,  445, 

Newhoff  V.  Clegg,  99  Ga.  167 . . 

Newkirk  v.  Newkirk,  56  Mich. 

526 

Newlin  v.  Garwood,  18  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  10,172 

Newlove  v.  Callaghan,  86  Mich. 

297 

Newman  Grove  State    Bank    v. 

Linderholm   (Neb.),  94  N.  W. 

616 

Newman  v.  Baer,  50  Ia.  Ann. 

323 42, 

Newman  v.   Cordell,    43    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)   456 

Newman  v.    Cordell,    43    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)   448   678, 

Newman  v.  Kirk,  45  N.  J.  £q. 

677 227,  711, 

Newman  v.  Van  Duyne,    42    N. 


PAOB 

1162 
966 
832 
613 

612 

690 

692 

977 

1001 

816 

363 

449 

784 

635 

100 

613 

870 

782 

1036 

448 
582 

301 

275 

92 

759 

56 

9 

1004 

712 


PAGB 

J.   Eq.   485    418,     847 

Newman  v.  Willette,  62  111.  98. 

794,  796,  844 
Newsom  v.  Roles,  23  N.  C.  179.  442 
Newsom  v.  Russell,  77  N.  C.  277  667 
Newton  t.  Manwarring,  66  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  645    177 

Newton     v.     Shaffer,     6     Kulp. 

(Pa.)   367 392 

News  Pub.    Co.    v.    I^ndale,  2 

Neb.  (Unoff.)  266 562 

Niagara   County   Nat.   Bank  v. 

Lord,  33  Hun   (N.  Y.),  567..     646 
Nichol  V.  Davidson    County,    8 

Lea   (Tenn.),  389   163 

Nichol  V.  Levy,  6  Wall.  (U.  S.) 

433 86 

Nichol  V.  Nichol,  63  Tenn.  146. 

192  214  633 
Nicholas  v.  Eaton,  91  U.  S.  716  1188 
Nicholas  v.  Higby,  35  Iowa,  401.  264 
Nicholas  v.  Ward,  38  Tenn.  323. 

188      192 
Nicholl   V.   Mumford,   4   Johns! 

Ch.   (N.  Y.)   522 465 

Nichols,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Burch,   128 

Ind.  324 160 

Nichols,  etc.,  Oo.  v.  Gerlich,  84 

Minn.  483 408,  971,     976 

Nichols  Shepard  &  Co.  v.  Burch, 

128  Ind.  324 384 

Nichols  V.   Bancroft,    74    Mich. 

191 386 

Nichols  V.  Eaton,  91  U.  S.  716. 

86,  134,     163 
Nichols  V.  H.   Seiter  ft  Co.,  41 

111.  App.  627    280 

Nichols  V.  Levy,    6    Wall.    (U. 

S.)   433 134 

Nichols  V.   McCarthy,   53  Conn. 

299 649 

Nichols    V.    Morrow,    11   N.  Y. 

Supp.  878 407 

Nichols  V.  Morrow,  68  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  606 967 

Nichols  V.  Nichols,  40  Misc.  Rep. 

9 693,  828,     964 

Nichols  V.  Patten,   18  Me.  231. 

549,  650,  631,     647 
Nichols  V.   Walker,    7    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  295 384 

Nichols  V.  Wallace,  41  111.  App. 

627 280 

Nichols  V.  Ward,  38  Tenn.  323.  349 
Nicholson  v.  Condon,  71  Md.  620  897 
Nicholson   v.    Leavitt,   6   N.    Y. 

Super.   Ct.   252    

171,  430,  448,  684,  1017 


CXCVl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

NidioUoii  T.  LeaTitt>  4  Saadf . 

(N.  Y.)  252 74,  78,    670 

669,  763,     812 
Kieholflon  t.  Schmiicker,  81  Md. 

469 469 

Nicholson  y.  Shannoo,  20  Gnat 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   378 166 

KiehthauBer     ▼.     Lehman,     17 

MiBC  Rep.  (N.  T.)  336 965 

NidEenaa  v.  Meacham,  14  Fed« 

881 711 

Kickle    y.    Emenon  Meroantile, 

etc.,  Go.  (Ark.),  13  S.  W.  78. 

62,  112,    113 
Nieol  y.  Grittenden,  66  Ga.  497. 

256,  257,  669,  670,  573,  610,    985 
Kictere  y.   Brockman,     11    Mo. 

App.  600 789 

Niederhofer  y.  Bange,  12  Lane 

Bar.  (Pa.)  37  738 

Kiles  y.  Mathusa,  162  N.  Y.  546    648 
Kill   y.   Phelps,   20   Misc.   Rep. 

(N.   Y.)    488    766,    789 

Nippes'  Appeal,  75  Pa.  St.  472. 

118,     119 
Nisbet  y.  (Juimi,  7  Fed.  760 .. . 

28,  257,    258 
Niver  y.  Crane,  98  N.  Y.  40 . . .     682 

Nix  y.  Dukes,  58  Tex.  96 827 

Nixon     y.     Goodwin,     85     Pac. 

(Cal.)    169 336 

Nixon  y.  Goodwin   (Cal.  App.), 

85  Pac.  169   66,  926,    928 

935,  936,     938 
Nixon  y.  McKinney,  105  N.  C. 

23 927,     946 

Noble  y.  Coleman,  16  Ala.  77 . .     562 
Noble  y.  Coleman,  86  Ala.  367. 

563,    564 
Noble  y.  Dayies,  4  S.  E.   (Va.) 

206 322,  323,  584,  984 

Noble  y.  Gilliam,  136  Ala.  618. 

861,  875,  876,  882,  885,  896,     965 
Noble  y.  Hines,  72  Ind.  12 ... . 

278      851 
Noble  y.  Holmes,  5  Hill  (N.  Y.)) 

194 784 

Noble   y.    Laidlaw,    100    N.    W. 

(Mich.)    179 234,    355 

Noble   y.   McKeith,     127    Mich. 

163 203 

Noble  y.  Noble,  26  Ark.  317. .. .     639 
Noble   y.   Smith,  2   Johns.    (N. 

Y.)  52 565 

Noblet  y.   St.  John,    29    Minn. 

180 724,     727 

Noel  y.  Gaines,  23  Ky.  L.  Kep. 


PAiQB 

2093 366 

Nollis  y.  Bodgers,  106  Ga.  13 . .     373 
Noooan  y.  Orton,  12  N.  B.  R. 

405 1198,  1234 

Norfoerg  y.  Rioords,  84  Md.  668.  1012 
Narcroas  y.  Nathan,  3  Am.  B.  R. 

613 1072 

Norcutt  y.  Dodd,   1   Cr.  &  Ph. 

100 20,  99,     102 

Norris  y.  Jones^  93  Va.  176 

346,  387,    681 

Norris  y.  Lake,  89  Va.  613 

228  623 
Norris  y.  McOanna,  29  Fed.  767  997 
Norris  y.  Norris,  39  Ky.  317..  655 
Norris  y.  Persons,  49  Wis.  101 . 

961  962 
Norse  y.  Velsy,  123  Ifich.  632*.  961 
North  American   Fire   Ins.   Co. 

y.  Graham,  7  Sandf.   (N.  Y.) 

197 792,    793 

North  Hudson  Mut.  Bldff.,  etc., 

Assoc,  y.  Childs,  86  Wis.  292.     7H0 
North   Platte  Alilling,  etc.,  Co. 

y.  Price,  4  Wyo.  293 161,    326 

North  Stor  Boot  &  Shoe  Co.  y. 

Ladd,  32  Minn.  381 . .  119,  747,     751 
North  y.  Belden^  13  Conn.  376. 

31  226 
North  y.  Crowell,  11  N.  H.  25l!  301 
North  y.   Gordon,    15   La.  Ann. 

221 100,  101,  102,  736,     74l 

North   y.   House,    18    Fed.   Oas, 

No.   10,310 258,  1172 

North  V.  Shearn,  15  Tex.  174..     16K 
North  y.  Taylor,  6   Am.  B.  U. 

233 1160,  1IC5 

North  y.  York,  35  N.  C.  206 .. .  109 
Northington  y.  Faber,  52  Ala. 

45 613 

Norton  y.  Billings,  4  Fed.  623. 

258,  91 S 
North  y.  Bradway,  9  Minn.  183. 

812,  824,     870 

Norton  y.  Cobb,  20  Ga.  44 472 

Norton   y.   Doolittle,    32    Conn. 

405 635 

Norton    y.    Kearney,    10    Wis. 

443 70,     177 

Norton  y.  Mallory,  63  N.  Y.  434     021 
Norton  y.  McNutt,  55  Ark.  59. 

66,  69,  569,  902,   1002,  1003 
Norton     y.     Norton.     5     Cush. 

(Mass.)  524 :>30 

Norton    y.    Norton,    59    Mass. 

624 213 

Norton   y.   Sjvitzer,    93    U.     S. 


Table  of  Cases. 


czcvii 


PAGE 

365 1234 

Norton  ▼.  Thiebes  Stierling  Mu- 
sic Co.,  82  Mb.  App.  216 66 

Kbrwalk  v.  Ireland,  68  Oonn.  1.    397 
Norwegian   Plow    Ck>.    t.   Haw- 
thorn, 71   Wis.  620 623 

Norwegian  Plow  Oo.    t.    Haw- 
thorn, 71   Wis.  629 

674,  940,  1003,  1006 
Norwood    ▼.    Washington,     136 
Ala.  667   ......290,  612,  906,    978 

Northington  v.   Faber,   62  Ala. 

46 370 

Nott  r.  Shutts,  87  111.  App.  341.    964 
Novelty  Mfg.   Co.  ▼.   Pratt,  21 

Mo.  App.   171 360 

Nqyes  t.  Belding,  6  S.  D.  603. .     163 
Noyes  ▼.  Brent,  18  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

10,372 699 

Noyes  v.  Carter  (Va.),  23  8.  E. 
i. 898,  1036 

Noyes  v.   Morris,   66  Hnn    (N. 

Y.),  501 979 

Noyes  v.  Ross,  23  Mont.  426 . . 

396,  408,  664 
Noyes  v.  Sanger,    8    Tex.    Civ. 

App.  388 309,  491,     606 

Noyes  v.  Schner,  70  Wis.  224..     309 
Noyes  v.  Tootle,  2  Ind.  T.  144. 

416,  576,  908 
Nuckolls  y.  Pence,  52  Iowa,  581  628 
Nugent  V.  Goldsmith,  69  Mich. 

593 676 

Nugent  T.    Jacobs,    103    N.    Y. 

126 918,     979 

Nugent  V.  Nugent,  70  Mich.  52. 

774,    779 
Nnman  t.  Kapp,  5  Bin.    (Pa.) 

73 697 

Numsen  v.   Ellis,   3   Tex.  App. 

Civ.  Cas.,  sec.  134 

366,  462,  928,     946 
Nunn    V.    Wilsmore,    8    T.    R. 

(Eng.)  621  336,  337 

Nusbaum  ▼.  Louchheim,  1  Pa. 

Cas.  106  46 

Nutter  V.  Harris,  9  Ind.  88 . . . 

620,  528,  634 
Nuzom    T.    HerxoD,  62  W.  Va. 

499 833 

O 
Oak  Greek  Valley  Bank  t.  Hel- 

mer,  59  Neb.  176 986 

Oakford  v.  Dunlap,  63  111.  App. 

498 71,  331,  458,  471 

679,  687,  693,    626 
Oakland  v.  Carpenter,  21    Cal. 


PAGE 

642 866 

Oakley  V.  Tugwell,  33  Hnn  (N. 

Y.),  367  811 

Oakley  v.  Young,  6  N.  J.  Eq. 

453 1045 

Ober  V.  Howard,  11  Mo.  426...     641 
Oberdorfer    v.    Meyer,    88    Va. 

384 683 

Oberholser  v.  Greenfield,  47  Ga. 

630 1044,  1047 

Oberholtzer  v.  Hazen,  92  Iowa, 

602 895 

Obermeyer    v.    Jung,    61    App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)  247 471 

Obemeir    v.    Treseler,    19    Mo. 

App.   619    276 

O'Brien  v.  Ballon,  116  Cal.  318    665 
O'Brien  v.  Cavanagh,  36  Misc. 

Rep.  (N.  Y.)  362 293 

O'Brien  v.  Chamberlain,  60  Cal. 

286 557 

O'Brien    v.    Coulter,    2    Blackf. 

(Ind.)    421    325,    387 

O'Brien  v.  Gaslin,  20  Neb.  347 .     720 
O'Brien  v.  Stambach,  101  Iowa, 

40 180,  797,  1030 

O'Brien  v.  Whigam,  9  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    113    189 

Ocean  Nat.  Bank  v.  Hodges,  9 

Hun   (N.  Y.),  161.. 269,  296,    365 
Ocean  Nat.  Bank  v.  01cott»  46 

N.  Y.    12    752 

Ockerman  v.  Cross,  54  N.  Y.  29      86 
Ocoee  Bank  v.  Nelson,  41  Tenn. 

186 395,     523 

CConnell   v.    Cruise,    1    Handy 

(Ohio),   164 75,  77,   179,    391 

O'Connell     v.     Kilpatrick,     64 

Md.   122    624 

O'Connor   v.    Boylan,   49   Mich. 

209 790 

O'C^onnor  v.  Coats,  79  Ind.  596    469 
O'Connor  v.  Docen,  60  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    610    

233,  261,  309,  353,     956 
O'Connor  v.  Meehan,  47  Minn. 

247 958 

O'Connor  v.  Ryan,  9  Ohio  Dec. 

675 650 

O'Connor  v.  Ward,  60  Mo.  1026 

4,  152,  160,  162,  644,     656 
0'Ck>nnor  v.  Williams,  53  Atl. 

(N.  J.)    660   691,    072 

ODaniel  v.  Crawford,  16  N.  C. 

197 14 

Odell   V.   Mylins,   63  How.    Pr. 
(N.  Y.)    250    374 


CXCVUl 


Table  of  Ca8£s. 


PAQB 

Odenheimer       v.      Hanson,      4 

McLean   (U.  8.),  437 758 

Oa)ohert7  ▼.  Ontario  Bank,  32 

U.  C.  C.  P.  286 37,     136 

O'Donald   y.  Constant,   82  Ind. 

212 459,     480 

O'Donnell    v.    Hall,    167    Mass. 

463 915,     944 

O'Donnell    v.    Hall,    164    Mass. 

429 988 

O'Donnell    v.    Segar,    25    Mich. 

367 158 

Off  T.  Hakes  (C.  C.  A.),  15  Am. 

B.  R.  696   1166,  1168,  1170 

Officer  V.  Evans,  48  Iowa,  657 . . 

160,     164 
Offutt  V.  King,  1  McArthur  (D. 

C),  312 328,  376,    789 

O'Gara  v.  Lowry,  6  Mont.  427. 

629,  536,  562,     990 
Ogden  V.  Saunders,   12  Wheat. 

(U.  S.)    213    .'....1069,  1071 

Ogden   State   Bank    ▼.    Barker, 

12  Utah,  13 275,  279,     341 

597,  852,  942 
Ogg  Y.  Schultz,  61  Neb.  221. . .  314 
Ogilvie    y.    Knox    Ins.    Co.,    22 

How.    (U.  S.)    380 101 

Ogle  y.  Lichteberger,  1  Am.  L. 

Reg.    (Pa.)    121    692,     702 

Oglesby  v.  Walton,  118  Ga.  203  1003 
O'Gorman  y.  Madden,  9  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  567    105 

O'Harra  y.  Stone,  48  Ind.  417. .     147 
Ohm  v.  San  Francisco,  85  CaL 

545 773 

O'Kane  y.  Terrell,  144  Ind.  599.. 656 
O'Kane  v.  Vinnedge,  198  Ky.  34 

196,  310,  346,  798,     860 
861,  862,     909 
O'Kane  y.  Whelan,  124  Cal.  200     524 
Oldham  v.  McClanahan,  63  Ky. 

416 971 

Old  Nat.  Bank  v.  Heckman,  148 

Ind.   490    305,    855 

O'Leary    ▼.    Duyall,    10    Wash. 

666 689,     851 

O'Leary  y.  Walter,  10  Abb.  Pr. 

N.  S.  (N.  Y.)  439 113 

Oliphant  y.  Hartley,  32  Ark. 

465 822 

Oliphant    y.    Liverridge     (111.), 

27  N.  E.  921 248,     249 

Oliyer     y.     Cunningham,     Fed. 

Cas.    19,493    1233 

Oliver  v.  Eaton,  7  Mich.  108.. 

572,    986 


PACM 

Oliver  v.  King,  8  DeG.  M.  k  G. 

110 211 

Oliver   v.   Moore,    26   Ohio    St. 

298 683 

Oliver    v.   Moore,   23    Ohio    St. 

473 312,    903 

Oliver    v.    McDowell,   100    111. 

App.   45    971 

Oliver  v.  McLaughlin,  24  Ont. 

41 586 

Oliver  v.  Piatt,  3  How.  (U.  S.) 

333 869 

Oliver  v.  Reading  Iron  Co.,  170 

Pa.  St.  396 928,  989,  1006 

Oliver   v.   Townes,   2   Mart.   N. 

S.   (La.)   93  87 

Oliver  v.  Wilhite,  201  111.  552. .  668 
Oliver,      etc.,      Wire      Co.      v. 

Wheeler,   106  Mich.  408 309 

Oliver    Finnie    Grocery    Co.    v. 

Bodenheimer,  77  Miss.  416..   1012 
Oliver- Finnie     Grocer     Co.     v. 

MiUer,  53  Mo.  App.  107 32 

Oliver    Lee    &    Co.'s    Bank    v. 

Talcott,  19  N.  Y.  148 24 

Olmstead  v.  Mattison,  45  Mich. 

617 594 

Olmstead    County    v.    Barbour, 

31  Minn.  256 956 

Olmsted  v.  Hoyt,  11  Conn.  376  939 
Olney  v.  Balch,  154  Mass.  318.  144 
Olney  v.  Tanner,  18  Fed.  636..  204 
Olney  v.  Tanner,  10  Fed.  101 . . 

637,  1207 
Olsen  V.  Kern,  10  111.  App.  578  114 
Olson  v.  Hanson,  74  Minn.  337  220 
Olson  V.  O'Connor,  9  K.  D.  604 

161,  167 
Omaha  Brewing  Assoc,  v.  Zel- 

ler,  4  Neb.   (Unoff.)    198 

180,   183,  350,     403 
Omaha  Coal,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Suess, 

64  Neb.  379   986 

Omaha  Hardware  Co.  v.   Dun- 
can, 31  Neb.  217 973 

O'Melia     v.      Hoffmeyer,      119 

Iowa,  444   969 

O'Neal  V.  Boone,  82  111.  689 892 

O'Neal    V.    Clymer    (Tex.    Civ. 

App.),  61  S.  W.  545., 

349,  823,  834,  910,  950,  961,     967 
O'Neal      V.     Smith,      10      Lea 

(Tenn.),  340   206 

O'Neal  V.  Seixas,  85  Ala.  80. . .  371 
O'Neil  V.  Birmingham  Brewing 

Co.,   101  Ala.  383 186,     807 

O'Neil  V.  Chandler,  42  Ind.  471 

177,  631,     666 


Table  of  Cases. 


cxcix 


PAOE 

<yNeil     T.     Glover,     6     Gray 

(Mass.),  144   1087 

CVNeil  ▼.  Orr,  6  111.  1 296 

CXeil    T.    Patterson,    62    III. 

App.  26    721 

Ontario    Bank    v.    Hurst,    103 

Fed.   231    457,    472 

Oppenheimer     v.     Collins^     116 

Wis.  283   293,  797,     801 

Oppenheimer   ▼.   Guckenheimer, 

39  Fla.  617    297 

Oppenheimer  v.  Halff,  68  Tex. 

409.. 314,  316,  462,  603,  686,     940 
Oppenheim    v.    LootIs,    9    La. 

Ann.   261    62 

Orehard  v.  Collier,  171  Mo.  390    969 
Orendorf  ▼.  Budlong,  12  Fed.  24 

731,  760,  769 
Oriental   Bank   t.   Haskins,   44 

Mass.  332 68,  82,  211,     434 

443,  462,  621 
Orr  V.  GUbert,  68  111.  App.  429  626 
Orr   V.    Gilmore,    7    Lans.    (N. 

Y.)    345    944,  1020 

Orr  V.  Moore,  1  Tex.  App.  Civ. 

Cas.,   sec.   688 1043 

Orr  V.  Peters,  197  Pa.  St.  606 

318,     760 

Osbom  V.  Koenigheim,  67  Tex. 

91 662 

Osbom    V.    McCallum,    38    So. 

(Miss.)    609    680 

Osbom    V.    Ratliff,     53    Iowa, 

748 216,  217,  620,    961 

Osbome  v.  Carey,  6  Manitoba, 

237 8»8 

Osbome  v.  Evans,  186  Mo.  609.     364 
Osbome  v.  Moss,  7  Johns.    (N. 

Y.)    161 69,  631,  63^    736 

Osbome    v.    Osborne,    6    Grant 

Ch.    (U.  C.)    619 216 

Osbome  v.  Tuller,  14  Conn.  620    620 
Osbome  v.  Tunis,  26  N.  J.  L. 

633 032,    666 

Osbome   v.   Wilkes,    108   N.   C. 

661    114,   116,  364,     400 

899,  918,  994 
Osen  V.  Sherman,  37  Wis.  601 . .  630 
Osgood    V.    Franklin,    2    Johns. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    1 231,    363 

Osgood  V.  Thome,  63  N.  H.  376 

461,    490 
Oshkosh    Nat.    Bank    v.    First 

Nat.  Bank,  100  Mich.  486 .. .     697 
Osmun  V.  Galbraith,  9  Am.  B. 

R.  339   1186 

Osierbag  v.  Galbraith,  23  Neb. 


PAGE 

730 33 

Ostrander  v.   Fay,  3  Abb.  Dec. 

(N.  Y.)    431    564 

O'Sullivan's    Trustee    v.    Doug- 
lass, 30  Ky.  L.  Rep.  366 1131 

Otis  V.  Hadley,  112  Mass.   100 

268,  1162 
Otis  V.  Rose,  9  Colo.  App.  449 

967  971 
Otis  V.   SiU,  8  Barb.    (N.  Y.)' 

102 18 

Otis  V.  Spencer,  102  111.  622...  324 
Otis  V.  Sprague,  118  Mich.  61. .  356 
Otley  V.  Manning,  9  East,  64. .  3 
Ott  V.  Doroshow,  17  Am.  B.  R. 

417 1128 

Ouerbacker  v.  White,  6  Ky.  L. 

Rep.    739    823 

Overall   v.    Parker    (Tenn.   Ch. 

App.),  58  S.  W.  906 

297,  536,  979 
Overmire  v.  Haworth,  48  Minn. 

372    682,  767,  774,     788 

Overstreet  v.  Manning,  67  Tex. 

667 774 

Owen  V.  Arvis,  26  N.  J.  L.  22 

78,  80,  296 
Owen  V.  Brown,  9  Am.  B.  R.  717  1098 
Owen  V.  Dixon,  17  Conn.  492.. 

66,  631,  646,  734,  735,     764 
Owens  V.  Clark,  78  Tex.  647.. 

462,  490,  695 
Owens  V.    Foley,   30   Tex.   Civ. 

App.   86    564 

Owens  V.  Gascho,  154  Ind.  225 

468,  482,  1007 
Owens  V.  Gentry,  30  S.  C.  490.  960 
Owens  V.  Hobbie,  82  Ala.  467. . 

503,  508,  511,  603,     973 
Owen  V.  Sharp,  12  Leigh.  (Va.) 

427 633,     658 

Oxford  Iron  Co.  v.  Slafter,  Fed. 

Caa.  No.  10,637    1093 

P 
Pabet  Brewing  Co.  v.  Butchart, 

67  Minn.  191   413 

Pace  V.  Robbins,  67  Ark.  232..  901 
Pacific    Bank   v.    Robinson,   67 

Cal.  520    118 

Pacific  Nat.  Bank  v.  Windram, 

133   Mass.    176 248,  413,    423 

Pack  V.  Bathurst,  3  Atk.  269..  144 
Packard  v.  Wood,  70  Mass.  307 

639,  648 
Paddock  v.  Fish,  10  Fed.  126 . .  724 
Paddock    v.    Jackson,    16    Tex. 

Civ.  App.  656    619 


oc 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Paddoek-Hawl«y    Iron    Co.    ▼. 

McDonald,  61  Mo.  App.  569. 

422,    428 
Faddon    ▼.    Willianu,    1    Rob. 

(N.  Y.)   240   646,    646 

Padgitt   V.    Porter    (Tex.    Civ. 

App.),  26  S.  W.  429 486 

Page  V.  Dixon,  59  Mo.  43 78 

Page  V.  Edmunds,  187  U.  8.  596  1190 
Page  V.  Francis,  97  Ala.  379.. 

436,  904,    973 

Page  V.  Grant,  9  Or.  116 854 

Page  ▼.  Kendrick,  10  Mich,  300 

78,  265,  281 
Page  y.  Simpson,  188  Pa.  393 . .  596 
Page  ▼.  Smith,  25  Me.  256 . .  748,  894 
Page  V.  Williamsport  Suspender 

Co.,    191    Pa.   St.   611.... 47,    756 
Paige  V.   Edmunds,    187   U.   S. 

596 117 

Paige  T.  CTNeal,  12  Cal.  483. . .     721 
Paine  v.  Doe,  7  Blackf.    (Ind.) 

485 192,     219 

Painter    v.    Drum,    40   Pa.    St. 

467 923,     999 

Palen  v.  Bushnell,  18  Abb.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    301    819,    839 

Palmer  v.  Bray  (Mich.),  98  N. 

W.  849 161 

Palmer  v.  Hawes,  80  Wis.  474.     169 
Palmer  v.  Henderson,    20    Ind. 

297 679 

Palmer  v.  Martindell,  43  N.  J. 

Eq.  90 337 

Palmer  v.  Smith,  126  Midi.  352    376 
Palmer  v.  Wyoming  Mfg.  Co.,  1 

Lack.  Leg.  N.   (Pa.)  271....     848 
Palmour  v.  Johnson,  84  Qa.  91 

596,    979 
Pancoast  v.  Gowen,   93  Pa.  St. 

66 117 

Panhandle  Nat.  Bank  v.  Foater, 

74  Tex  614 1002 

Pannebaker  y.  Bitting,   11   Pa. 

Dist.  637 1069 

Pappenheimer  v.  Roberts,  24  W. 

Va.  702 816,    824 

Paper  Co.  v.  Morse,  127  Fed.  643  1072 
Paris  V.  Du  Pre,  17  S.  C.  282 

67,  208,  738,  739,  749,  884,    922 
Parish  y.  Danford,  18  Fed.  Gas. 

No.  10,770 609 

Parish  r.  Lewis,  Freem.  (Miss.) 

299 774,     796 

Parish  y.  Murphree,    13    How. 

(U.  S.)  99 190,     343 

Parish      y.      Rhodes,      Wright 


(Ohio),  339 38,     364 

Park  y.  Bamberger,  52  Miss.  665  470 
P^k  y.  Battey,  80  Ga.  363. .  365,  612 
Park  y.  Snyder,  78  Ga.  571 .690,  948 
Parke  County  Coal  Co.  y.  Terre 

Haute  Paper  Co.,  129  Ind.  73     195 
Parker  y.  Barker,  43  Mass.  423 

291,  225,  291,     317 
Parker     y.     Barkenowitz,     116 

Mich.  58 366 

Parker  v.  Black,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

202 978,  1166,  1170 

Parker  y.  Cain,  28  111.  App.  698  299 
Parker  y.  Conner,  118  N.  Y.  24.  1165 
Parker  y.  Conner,  93  N.  Y.  118  614 
Parker  y.  Crittenden,  37  Conn. 

148 721,  722 

Parker  y.  Flagg,  127  Mass.  28.  765 
Parker  y.  Freeman,  2  Tenn.  (Th. 

612 669 

Parker  y.  Holmes,  2  Hill  Eq.  (S. 

C.)   95 691,     696 

Parker  y.  Kendrick,  29  Vt.  388  529 
Parker  v.  Maryell,  60  N.  H.  30.  522 
Parker  y.  Moore,  115  Fed.  709.  1137 
Parker  y.  Parker,  4  Neb.  692. .  639 
Parker  y.  Parker,  56  Iowa,  111  645 
Parker  y.  Pattee,  4  N.  H.  176 

434,  441,  442,     445 
Parker  y.  Roberts,  116  Mo.  657 

60,  65,    962 
Parker  y.  Tiffany,  62  111.  286.. 

269,    453 
Parker  y.  Valentine,  27  W.  Va. 

677 965,    978 

Parichurst  y.  McGraw,  24  Miss. 

134 637,893,     964 

Parkinson  y.  Hanna,  7  Blackf. 

(Ind.)  400 609,     706 

Parkman  y.  Welch,    36    Mass. 

231 192,  266,  433,     434 

P&rks  y.  Murray,  2  St.  Rep.  (N. 

Y.)  628 895,    967 

Parlin,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Daniels,  111 

Iowa,  640 434,    961 

Parlin,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Hanson,  21 

Tex.  Ciy.  App.  401 42a 

Parlin,  etc.,   Co.  y.  Ulrich,  67 

Neb.  780 1061 

Parmelee  y.  ijgan,  7  Paige  (N. 

Y.),610 827 

Parmenter   y.    Fitzpatrick,    135 

N.  Y.  190 1052 

Parmenter  y.  Fitzpatrick,  14  N. 

Y.  Supp.  748 519 

Parmenter  y.  Lomax,  68  Kan.  61 

580,  780,     789 


Table  of  Cases. 


oci 


Pftmwnfter  Mfg.  Go.  ▼.  Stoever, 
3  Am.  B.  R.  220 1098,  1142 

Pkinner  t.  Mftitghftm,  81  La, 
Ann.  348 ,..     563 

Paniell  v.  Stedman,  1  Gab.  It 

B.  163 682 

Parr   v.    Saunders,     11    S.    B. 

(Va.)  979 378,    688 

Parriott  V.  BowerB,   111  lo^a, 

740 311 

Parris  v.  Thompson,  46  N.  C. 

67 764 

Parrish  y.  Danforth,    18    Fed. 

Gas.  No.  10,770 626 

Parrott  y.  Baker,  82  Ga.  364.. 

631,  639,  642,  660,    666 
Parrott  v.  Crawford  (Ind.  T.), 

82  S.  W.  688 

68,  69,  733,  740,  770,  842,  848 
Parsons  v.  Black,  2  Grant  Gas. 

(Pa.)  339 66 

Parsons  v.  Dickinson,  28  Mass. 

362 618,    621 

Parsons  ▼.  McKnight,  8  N.  H. 

35 182,  183,    242 

Parsons   v.   Topliff,    119  Mass. 

246 443 

Partelo  v.  Harris,  26  Conn.  480  683 
Parties  y.  Gibson,  17  Fed.  293. .  612 
Partlow  y.  Lane,  42  Ky.  424. . .  205 
Partlow  y.  Swigart,  90  Mich.  61 

960,  1000 
Parion  y.  Yates,  41  Ind.  456. . 

346,    986 
Partridge  y.  Arnold,  73  111.  600 

106,    110 
Partridge  y.  Gopp,  Ambl.  696. . 

96,    99 
Pisrtridge  y.  Stokes^    66  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)   686   360,    971 

Paryin  y.  Gapewell,  46  Pa.  St. 

80 898 

Pashby  y.  Mandigo,    42  Mich. 

172 182,    206 

Pass  y.  Lynch,  117  N.  C.  463. .  220 
Passayant  y.  Bowdoin,  60  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  433 1060 

PtMsayant  y.  Cantor,  21  Abb.  N. 

C.  (N.  Y.)  259 880,    881 

Passayant    y.    Sickle,    14    Ciy. 

Proc.  R.   (N.  Y.)  67 858 

Passmore  y.  Eldridge,  12  Serg. 

A  R.   (Pa.)   198 435,     442 

Patchen  v.  Rofkar,  52  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)  367 761,    762 

Patchen  y.  Rofkar,  12  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)  475 780,     788 

# 


PAQB 

Paterson  y.  Whittier,  19  N.  H. 

192 667 

Patnode  y.  Daryeau,  112  Mich. 

127 162,    654 

Patrick  y .  Ford,  37  Tenn.  532 . .     200 
Patrick  y.  Patrick,  77  HI.  655 

266     339 
Patrick  y.  Riggs,  106  Mich.  616 

227,  237,  317 
Patrick  y.  Smith,  2  Pa.  Super. 

Ot.  113 

67,  418,  424,  646,    732 
Patten  y.  Carley,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

4^2      .  .  , 1118 

Patten'  y.  Casey,'  57  Mo.  118. '. ! 

264,  284,  344 
Patten  y.  Clark,  22  Mass.  6..  34 
Patten  y.  Smith,  4  Conn.  450. 

151,    620 
Pattersbee    y.     Farrington,     1 

Swanst.  106 349 

Patterson  y.  Campbell,    9  Ala. 

933 411 

Patterson  y.  Johnson,  59  Iowa, 

397 166 

Patterson  v.  McKinney,  97  111. 

41 280,  281,  283,     286 

Pattison  v.  Bragg,  95  Ala.   56 

957,  1017 
Pattison  y.  Letton,  56  Mo.  App. 

326 251,  434,  441,     442 

Pattison  v.  Stewart,  6  Watte  & 

S.  (Pa.)  72 385 

Patton  y.  Beecher,  62  Ala.  579.     658 
Patton  V.  Bragg,  113  Mo.  596. 

37,  40  806,  897 
Patton  y.  Gates,  67  III.  164. .. .  116 
Patton  y.  Mc(>ne,  54  Ky.  656  723 
Patty-Joiner,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Cum- 

mings,  4  Am.  B.  R.  269 1071 

Patulo  y.   Boyington,  4  U.   C. 

C.  P.  125 358 

Payne  y.  BruUm,  10  Atk.  53.. 

639,  665,  656 
Payne  y.  Buford,  106  La.  83  .. .  962 
Payne  y.  Burke,  43  Ky.  492. . .  1020 
Payne  y.  Freer,  4  N.  Y.  Supp. 

644 283 

Payne  y.  Hutcheson,   32   Gratt. 

(Va.)  812 369 

Payne  v.  Kemp,  33  La.  Ann.  818 

85,  184,     371 
Payne  v.  Sheldon,  63  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)   109 793,    806 

Payne  v.  Stanton,  59  Mo.  168 

191,  284,  344,  348,     672 
Payne  v.  Wilson,  70  Iowa,  377 


CGll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

141,  152,  369,  609 
Payson  v.  Whitoomb,  32  Mass. 

212 663 

Paul  ▼.   Baugh,  86  Va.   956.. 

463,    703 
Paul  y.  Crooker,  8  N.  H.  288. . 

201,    436 
Paulk  y.  Ckx>ke,  39  Conn.  666. . 

194,  270,  356,  372 
Paulk  y.  Wolfe,  34  Ala.  541 .. .  402 
Paulling   y.    Sturgus,    3    Stew. 

(Ala.)  96 562 

Paulson  y.  Ward,  4  N.  D.  100 

798,  802,  867,  869 
Paxton  y.  bmith,  41  Neb.  66..  622 
Pazton  y.  Sutton,  53  Neb.  81. .  168 
Peabody   y.   Knapp,   163  Mass. 

242 258 

Peacock  y.  Williams,   110  Fed. 

917  .  846 

Pearce  y.  Jennings,  94  Ala.  524 .   1048 

Pearce  y.  Nix,  34  Ala.  183 940 

Pearsall   y.    Smith,    149   U.   S. 

231 866 

Pearson  y.  Cuthbert,    58    App. 

Diy.  395 310,     386 

Pearson  v.  Hudson,  52  Tex.  362  184 
Pearson  v.  Quist,  79  Iowa,  64. .  158 
Pease  y.  Barkowsky,  67  111.  App. 

274 116 

Pease  y.  Bridge,  49  Ck>nn.  58  . .  980 
Pease  y.  Dawson,  97   111.  App. 

620 260 

Pease  y.  McKusick,  25  Me.  73.  856 
Pease  y.  Shirlock,  63  Vt  622 . . 

161,  731,    748 
Peaalee  y.  Barney,  1  D.  Chipm. 

331 641 

Peaslee  y.  Collier,  83  Mich.  549  359 
Peasley  y.  Barney,  1  D.  Chipm. 

(Vt)    331  ..    .   821 

Peasley  y.  Ridgeway,  82  Minn. 

288 794 

Peayey  y.  Cabaniss,  70  Ala.  263 

36,      38 
Peay   y.   Morrison,     10    Gratt. 

(Va.)   149 787 

Peck  y.  Carmichael,  17  Tenn. 

325 1005 

Peck  y.   Crouse,  46  Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   161 986 

Peck  y.  Dyer,  147  111.  692...  717 
Peck  V.  Jenness,  7  How.  (U.  S.) 

612 1112 

Peck  y.  Lincoln,  76  Iowa,  424  366 
Peck  y.  Land,  2  Ga.  1 ...  12,  13, 


PAOB 

16,  19,  247,  314,  520,  663,    587 

Peck  y.  Peck,  77  Cal.  106 322 

Peck  y.  Richardson,  9  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  667 44 

Peck  y.  Sprucks,  6  Lack.  L^. 

N.  (Pa.)  132 490,  495 

Pedc  Lumber  Co.  y.  Mitchell,  95 

Fed.  258 1141,  1144 

Peckenhaugh  y.  Cook,  61  Iowa, 

477 363 

Pecot  y.  Armelin,  21  La.  Ann. 

667 272 

Peebles  y.  Horton,  64  N.  C.  374 

223,  227,     264 
Peeler  y.  Peeler,  109  N.  C.  628 

574,  588,  600,  897,  899,  1005 
Peerson  y.  Maxfield,  51  iowa,  76  278 
Peet  y.  Morgan,  6  Mart  N.  S. 

137 741 

Peetsch    y.    Sommers,    31    App. 

Diy.  266 303.     614 

Peevey  y.  Cabaniss,  70  Ala.  253  363 
Pehrson  y.  Hewitt,  79  Cal.  694.  865 
Peigne   y.    Snowden,    1    Desauss 

Eq.    (S.  C.)    591 329 

Peiser  y.  Peticolas,  50  Tex.  638  987 
Pell  y.  Prewitt,  62  111.  361....  317 
Pell  y.  Treadwell,  5  Wend.   (N. 

Y.)  661 195,  211,  407,     410 

Pemberton    y.    Klein,  43  N.  J. 

Eq.  98 302 

Pence  y.  Ooan,  61  Ind.  336 

15.  290,  346,  571,  892,     986 
Pence    y.    Makepeace,    65    Ind. 

345 122,     124 

Pender   State  Bank  y.   Frey,   3 

Neb.    (Unoff.)    83    187 

Pendery  y.   Allen,   9  Ohio   Cir. 

Ct  246 1031 

Pendleton  y.  Eaton,  23  La.  Ann. 

435 620 

Pendleton  y.  Hughes,  65  Barb. 

(N.   Y.)    136    200 

Pendleton  y.   Perkins^    49    Mo. 

665 99 

Penhall  y.  Elwin,  1  Smale  &  G. 

(Eng.)  258 250,  311 

Peninsular  Stoye  Co.  y.  Roark, 

94  Iowa,  560 367 

Peninsula  Stoye  Co.  y.   Sacket, 

74  Wis.  526    226,    254 

Penman  y.  Slocum,  41  N.  Y.  59.  689 
Penn  y.  Trompen    (Neb.),   100 

N.  W.  312 393 

Penn  v.  Whitehead,    17    Gratt 

(Va.)   503.  .  .  .108,  110,  112,     115 
Penn  y.  Young,  10  Bush  fKy.), 


Table  of  Cases. 


cciu 


PAGE 

626 106 

Pennett  v.  Warner,  53  Neb.  780  968 
Penney  v.  McCulIough,  134  Aku 

580 905,  979 

Penniman  v.  Cole,  49  Mass.  496.  469 
Pennington  v.  Chandler,  5  Harr. 

Pennington  v.  Clifton,    11   Ind. 

162 61,  200,    434 

Pennington   v.    Flock,    93    Ind. 

378 563,     892 

Pennington  v.  Seal,  49  Miss.  618 

16,  19.  182.  187,  339,     348 
Pennington  ▼.  Woodall,  17  Ala. 

685 307,  318,  334,  482,  483 

Penn  Plate  Glass  Co.  v.  Jones, 

189  Pa.  St.  290  461,  492 

Penrod  v.  Mitchell,  8  Serg.  A  R. 

622 686 

Penrod  v.   Morrison,  2  Pen.  & 

W.  (Pa.)  126 767 

Pennsylrania    Knitting    Co.    ▼. 

Bibb  Mfg.  Co.,  21  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 

637 58,  346,     414 

Peoples'     Bank    v.     Smith,     75 

Miss.  753 744,     747 

Peoples  Nat.  Bank  v.  Kern,  193 

Pa.  St.   59    761 

Peoples  NaA.   Bank  v.   Loeffert, 

184  Pa.  St.   164....  130,  758,     761 
Peoples  Sav.  Bank  v.  Bates,  120 

U.  S.  666 199,  467,  773,     804 

People  V.  Bristol,  36  Mich.  28.     460 
People  V.  Colorado  Ct.  App.,  06 

Pac  42 987 

People   V.   District   Police   Jus- 
tice, 41   Mich.  224 1061 

People  ▼.  Duncan,  41  Cal.  607.   1189 
People  V.  New    York    Common 

Pleas,  28  How.  Pr.    (N.  Y.) 

477 813 

People  ▼.  Rice^  79  Mich.  354 .. . 

961,    966 

People  ▼.  Tatum,  36  N.  C.  414. 

776,    796 
People  V.  Underwood,  16  Wend. 

(N.  Y.)  546 1062 

People  V.  Van  Buren,  136  N.  Y. 

252 784,  1045,  1046 

Pepper  v.  Carter,  41  Mo.  540..  207 
Pepper  v.  Carter,  11  Mo.  540.. 

191,  193,  348 
Pepperdine  v.  Bank  of  Seymour, 

10  Am.  B.  R.  670 1144 

Percival   v.   Hichbom,    56    Me. 

575 1057,  1058 

Perea   v.   DeGallegos,   3   N.   M. 

161 768 


PAGE 

Perego  y.  Bonesteel,  5  Biss.  (U. 

S.)   69 744,     746 

Peregoy  v.  Krautz,  31  Neb.  58.    610 
Perham  v.  Hayerhill  Fiber  Co., 

64  N.  H.  2   782 

Pericho  v.   Quinn,  62  111.   App. 

102 434 

Perisho  v.  Perisho,  95  111.  App. 

644 212,     639 

Perkins  v.   Baer,   95   Mo.   App. 

70 870 

Perkins  v.  Brierfield  Iron,  etc., 

C6.,  77  Ala.  403   818 

Perkins  v.  Center.  36  Cal.  713.     865 
Perkins   v.    Douglass,   52   S.   C. 

129 462,  623,  532,     986 

Perkins  v.  Mann,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

575 959,     969 

Perkins  v.  McCuUough,   31   Or. 

69 652,     728 

Perkins    v.    Meighan,    147    Mo. 

617 138 

Perkins  v.  Perkins,  1  Tenn.  Ch 

637 328 

Perkins  v.  Petten,  10  Ga.  241 . .  564 
Perkins  v.  Scott,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

596 300 

Perkins  v.  Swank,  43  Miss.  349  610 
Perkins  v.  Warren,  6  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    341    1042,  1043 

Perrin  v.  Reed,  35  Vt.  2 568 

Perrine  v.  Perrine,  50  Atl.    (N. 

J.)  694 181,  564,  603,  955,     967 

Perry  Ins.  Co.  v.  Foster,  58  Ala. 

502 428,  457,     483 

Perry  v.  Bedell,  59  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

619 977 

Perry  v.  Calvert,  22  Mo.  361 . .  648 
Perry  v.  Foster,  3  Harr.   (Del.) 

293 526,    667 

Perry  v.  Hardison,  99  N.  C.  21. 

227,  298,  915,  943 
Perry  v.  Hayward,  12  Cush. 

(Miws.)  344 69 

Perry  v.  Hayward,  66  Mass.  344  177 
Perry  v.  Lorillard,  61  N.  Y.  214  1189 
Perrv     v.     Patton     (Tex.     Civ. 

App.),  68  S.  W.  1018 623 

Perry  v.  Ruby,  81  Va.  317 

328,  367,     898 
Perrydear  v.  Jacobs,  2  Hill  £q. 

(S.  C.)    504    149 

Personette    v.    Cronkhite,     140 

Ind.  686 275,  576,     892 

Persse,    etc..    Paper    Works    v. 

Willett,  24  N.  Y.   Super  Ct. 

131 57,  58,  914,  917,     918 

Pessels  V.  Schwab  Clothing  Co. 


OCIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


186 

17 

676 
173 
642 


763 

782 

149 
620 


PAGI 

(Tex.   Civ.  App.),  26  S.  W. 

814 472 

Peters-Miller  Shoe  Go.  ▼.  Gaae- 

beer,  63  Mo.  App.  640 909 

Peters    Saddlery,     etc.,    Co.    ▼. 

Schoelkopf,  71  Tex.  418 448 

Peters  Shoe  Co.  v.  Arnold,  82 

Mo.  App.   1    

Peters  v.  Bain,  133  U.  6.  670. . 

Peters  ▼.  Kahn,  93  Ala.  201 .. . 
Peters  v.  Light,  76  Pa.  St.  289. 
Peterson  v.  Brown,  17  Nev.  172 
Peterson  v.  Doak    (Waah.),   86 

Pac.  663 174 

Peterson  v.  Farmer^  121   Mass. 

476 752, 

Peterson  v.  Gittings,  107  Iowa, 

306 781, 

Peterson  ▼.  Mulford,   36  N.  J. 

L.  481 107, 

Peterson  v.  Home,  76  Iowa,  447 
Petetin  v.  His  Creditors,  61  La. 

Ann.  1660 467 

Petingale  v.  Barker,   21   D.   C. 

156 362, 

Petit  V.  Hubbell,  105  Mich.  406. 

97, 
Petree  v.   Brotherton,   133   Ind. 

692 200,  360, 

Pettee  v.  Dustin,  58  N.  H.  309. 

76, 

Pettibone  v.   Byrne,    97    Mich. 

85 

Pettibone  v.  Stevens,   16   Conn. 

19 

Pettibone  v.   Stevens,   16  Conn. 

26 

Pettingill  v.  Jones,  30  Mo.  App. 

280 

Pettit  V.  Coachman  (Fla.),  41 

So.  401 263, 

Pettit     V.     Seaman,     2     Root 

(Conn.),  178 1069 

Pettit  V.  Shepherd,  6  Paige  (N. 

Y  \    493 5 

Pettus  V.  Glover,  68  Ala.  417..     769 
Pettus   V.    Smith,    4    Rich.    Eq. 

197    (S.   C.)     240, 

Pettyjohn  v.  Newhart,   7   Kan. 

App.  64 299,  378,  469, 

Pewett    V.    Coopwood,  30  Miss. 

369 

Peyser   v.   Myers,   66   Hun    (N. 

Y.),  175 

Peyton  v.  Lamar,  42  Ga:  131.. 
Pfister  V.  Dascey,  05  Cal.  403.. 
Pharis    v.    Leachman,    20    Ala. 


713 

139 

862 

77 

32 

299 

3 

907 

358 


696 
510 
644 

335 

1045 
821 


PAGB 

662 790,    821 

Phelps     V.     Cutler,     4     Gray 

(Mass.),  137 633 

Phelps  V.  Curtis,  80  HI.  109...  691 
Phelps  T.  Foster,  18  HI.  309...  1044 
Phelps  y.  Jackson,  27  Ark.  686.  773 
Phelps   V.    Morrison,   24   N.   J. 

Eq.  196 206,  337,  376,     706 

716,    722 
Phelps  V.  Piatt,   60  Barb.    (N. 

Y.)   430 789 

Phelps  V.  Smith,  116  Ind.  387.. 

42,  52,  171,  172,  278,  671,    778 
Phenix  Ins.  Co.  v.  Feilder,  133 

Ind.  557..  152,  157,  164,  631,    649 
Phettiplace   v.   Sayles,    19   Fed. 

Cas.   No.   11,083 627,     662 

Phifer  v.  Erwin,  100  N.  C.  59. . 

622,  572,  918,  927,  928,    949 
Philbrick  v.  O'Connor,  15  Or.  15 

615,    622 
Philbrook   v.   Handley,    27    Me. 

53 1060 

Phillips-Buttorff     Mfg.     Co.    v. 

Williams,  63   S.  W.    (Tenn.) 

185 958,     965 

Phillips     V.     Chamberlain,     61 

Miss.  740 697,  701,    702 

Phillips  V.   Cunningham,   58   S. 

W.    (Tenn.)    463.... 378,  473,     696 

697,    627 
Phillips  V.  Hall,    160    Pa.    St. 

60. 107 

Phillips  V   Kennedy,    139    Ind. 

419 359,  625,     861 

Phillips  V.  Kesterson,    154    111. 

672 336,     764 

Phillips  V.  Meyers,  82  111.  67 . . .  327 
Phillips  V.  North,  77  111.  243.. 

85,  140,     192 
Phillips  V.  Reitz,  16  Kan.  396. 

520,     910 
Phillips  V.  Rhodes,  2  Colo.  App. 

70.  r. 363 

Phillips  V.  Rhodes,  21  Colo.  217.  375 
Phillips  V.  Shipp,  81  Ky.  436.. 

833,     836 

Philips  V.  Turner,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

niV 1211 

Phillips  V.  Wesson,  16  Ga.  137.  761 
Phillips  V.   Wooster,    36  N.  Y. 

412 186,  212,  347,     375 

Phimay  v.  Clark,  62  Ga.  623 .. .  226 
Phinizy  v.  Clark,  62  Ga.  623 

497,  596,  603 
Phinney  v.  Holt,  50  Me.  570..  924 
Phipps  v.  Boyd,  54  Pa.  St.  342.  177 
Phipps  V.   Sedgwick,   95   U.   S. 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccv 


PAOI 

3 680,  680,  1024 

Phoenix  Bank  ▼.  Staffor«U  89  N. 

T.  406 186,  104,    347 

Phoenix  Ins.  Go.  t.  Fielder,  133 

Ind.  567 877 

Phoenix   Ins.   Co.  v.   Moog,   78 

Ala.  284 866 

Phoenix   y.   Dey,   6  Johns.    (X. 

Y.)  412 466 

Piatt  ▼.  St.  Clair,  6  Ohio,  227. . 

28,  63 
Pickens  v.  Dent,  187  U.  8.  177 .  1226 
Pickens  y.  Roy,  187  U.  8.  177.  1228 
Pickens  y.  Taylor,  47  Kan.  294.  677 
Picket    y.    Garrison,    76    Iowa, 

347 202,  916,  919,  921,    970 

Pickett  y.  Pickett,  14  N.  C.  6. . 

675,    676 
PickeU  y.  Pickett,  2  Hill.  Eq. 

(8.  O.)    470   600 

Piekett  y.  Pipkin,  64  Ala.  620 . . 

85,  178,  226,  396,  686,     670 
631,   830,   832,   855,     868 
900,  953,    978 
Pickstock  y.  Lyster,  3  M.  ft  a 

371 463 

Pidcock   y.   Voorhies,   84   Iowa, 

706 892,    900 

Piedmont  Bank  y.  Bowman,  39 

W.  Va.  622   968 

Pierce    Steam    Heating    Co.    y. 

Ransom,    16    App.    Diy.    (N. 

Y.)  268 ■*.     603 

Pierce  v.  Bowers,  67  Tenn.  353.  204 
Pierce  y.  Chipman,  8  Vt.  334 . .  544 
Pieroe  v.  Clark,    25    La.    Ann. 

Ill 8»2 

Pierce  y.  Curtis,  6  Mast.   (La.) 

418 521 

Pierce    v.    Harrington,    68    Vt. 

649 - 322 

Pierron  y.  Heisey,  19  Iowa,  114  533 
Pieroe  y.  Hill,  36  Mich.  194... 

67,  131,  208,  734,  735,    749 
Pieroe  v.  Hower,  142  Ind.  626. 

587,    852 

Pieroe  y.  Jackson,  6  Mass.  242. 

42,      66 

Pierce  y.  Kelly,  25  Or.  95 

622,  629,    530 
Pierce  y.  LeMonier,   172  Mass. 

508 636,  637,  655,     669 

Pieroe  y.  Lowder,  54  Mo.  App. 

26 309 

Pierce     y.    Milwaukee     Constr. 

Co.,  38  Wis.  253   101,  1040 

Pierce    y.    O'Brien,    189    Mass. 

68 306 


PAOE 

Pierce    y.     Partridge,    3    Mete. 

(Mass.)   44 42 

Pieroe  y.    Partridge,   44   Mass. 

44 475 

Pieroe  y.  Rich,  76  Mich.  648..  806 
Pieroe   y.    Thompson,    17    Pick. 

(Mass.)   391 148 

Pieroe  y.  Thompson,    34    Mass. 

391 361 

Pierce  y.   White,   10  Ohio  Dee. 

662 927 

Pieroe  y.  Winberly,  78  Tex.  187.  320 
Pierson  y.  Dayid,  1  Iowa,  23 . .  870 
Pierson  y.  Manning,  2  Mich.  446  71 
Pierson  y.  Slifer,  62  Mo.  App. 

273 681,    609 

Pierson  y.  Tom,  1  Tex.  577 704 

Pierstoff  y.  Jorges,  86  Wis.  128. 

201,  761 
Pieter  y.  Bales,  126  Iowa,  170.  966 
Pigue    y.    McFerrin,    80    Tenn. 

645 1015 

Pike  y.  Miles,  23  Wis.  164.... 

153.  161,  193,  279,     873 
Pilling  y.  Otis,  13  Wis.  495 .. . 

224,  574,  1001,  1005 
Pillsbury  y.   Kingon,   31   N.   J. 

Eq.  609 638 

Pinckston  y.  Brown,  56  N.  C. 

494 644 

PincuB  y.   Reynolds,    19    Mont. 

664 196 

Pine  Cone  Lumber  Co.  y.  White 

Sand  Mercantile  Co.,  66  Neb. 

48 867 

Pinger  v.  Leach,  70  Mo.  42 1051 

Pinkerton  y.  Manchester  &  L.  R. 

Co.,  42  N.  H.  424 548 

Pinkston  y.  McLemore,  31   Ala. 

308 106,   106,   191,     362 

Pinnell  v.  Stringer,  59  Ind.  556    682 
Pioneer    Printing    Oo.    y.    San- 
bom,  3  Minn.  413  HI 

Piper  V.  Johnston,  12  Minn.  60 

14,  62,  163,  165,  632,  665,  848 
Pipkin  V.  Williams,  57  Ark.  242  159 
Pippin  y.  Tapia,  42  So.   (Ala.) 

646 357 

Pique  y.  Arendale,  71  Ala.  91. 

227,  290 
Pirie  y.  Chicago  Title  &  Trust 

Co.,  182  U.  S.  438  

618,  1070,  1076,  1077,  1078,  1157 
Pirie  y.  Stem,  97  Wis.  150.  .47,  292 
Pitkin  y.  Bumham,  62  Neb.  385  45 
Pitkin  y.  Mott,  66  Mo.  App. 

401 364 

Pittman  v.  Rotan  Grocery  Co., 


CCVl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

16  Tex.  GiT.  App.  676 333 

Pitney  ▼.  Bolton,  46  N.  J.  Eq. 

639 139,  660 

Pitney  ▼.  Leonard,  1  Paige  (N. 

Y.),    461    42,       44 

Pitts  V.  Bullard,  3  6a.  6 36 

Pittsburg    Plate    Glass    Ck>.    v. 

Edwards   (C.  C.  A.),  17  Am. 

B.    R.    447 1168 

Pittsfield    Bank   v.    dough,   43 

N.  H.   178    746 

Place  V.  Hayward,    117   N.   Y. 

487 644 

Place  V.  Rhem,  70  Ky.  686 348 

Plaisted   v.  Holmes,   68   N.  H. 

619 217,  622,  624,     630 

Plant  V.  Billings-Drew  Co.,  127 

Mich.  11    67 

Plant  T.   Geffinger,   22   Ky.   L. 

Rep.    1476    376 

Planters',    etc.,    Bank    y.    Bor- 
land, 6  Ala.  631    985 

Planters',  etc.,  Bank  v.  Walker, 

7  Ala.  926. .  14,  769,  763,  768,     769 
Planters'    Bank    v.    Henderson, 

23  Tenn.  76    91,     133 

Planters'    Bank    v.    Watson,    9 

Rob.  (La.)  272  

621,  669,  680,  837 
Platner  v.  Platner,  66  Iowa, 

378 203 

Plass  y.  Morgan,  36  Wash.  160     176 
Plass   y.   Thomas,   6  Mo.   App. 

167 322 

Plaster  y.  Thome  Franklin  Shoe 

Co.,  123  Ala.  360 866 

Piatt-Barber  Co.  y.  Groyes,  193 

Pa.  St.  476  963 

Piatt  y.  Jones,  69  Me.  232 

1066,  1067,  1069 

Piatt  y.  Jones,  96  N.  Y.  24 117 

Piatt  y.  McClong,  49  Atl.    (N. 

J.)    1126    683,     879 

Piatt  y.  McQuown,  20  Pa.  Co. 

Ct.   401    618,    990 

Piatt  y.  Schreyer,  26  Fed.  83 . .     826 
Piatt  y.  Stewart*  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

11,220 1118 

Pleasanton  y.  Johnson,  91  Md. 

673 87 

Plimpton      y.       Goodell,       143 

Mass.  366   ....  187,  197,  434,     996 
Plows  V.  Maughan,  42  U.  C.  Q. 

B.    129    114 

Plummer  v.  Green,  49  Neb.  316     485 
Plummer  y.  Myers,   14  Am.  B. 

R.    805    1167 


PAOB 

Plummer  y.  Rohman,  61   Neb. 

61 320 

Plummer  y.   Rohman,   62  Neb. 

146 160,     884 

Plummer  y.  Rummell,  26  Neb. 

142 611,  894,     895 

Plunkett  y.  Plunkett,   114  Ind. 

484 418,  434 

Poague  y.  Boyce,  20  Ky.  70 . .  82,  800 
Pochelu  y.  Catonnet,  40  La. 

Ann.  327  736,  867 

Pochel  y.   Read,   20  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  208 313,  669,     674 

Podozinski  y.  Kruger,  44  Mich. 

79 962 

Pohalski  y.  Ertheiler,  18  Misc. 

Rep.   (N.  Y.)   33 616,    943 

Poindexter  y.  Jeffries,  16  Grat. 

363 361 

Poling  y.  Flanagan,  41  W.  Va. 

191 623 

Poling  y.  Williams,  66  W.  Va. 

69 633,  640,  646,  647,     728 

Polk  y.  Boggs,  122  Cal.  114 970 

Polk     County     Nat.     Bank     y. 

Scott»   132  Fed.    (U.  S.)    897 

268  293  338 
Pollack  y.  McNeil,  100  Ala'.  203  164 
Pollak  y.  Searey,  84  Ala.  269. . 

438,     904 
Pollard  y.  Farwell,  48  Mo.  App. 

42 638,     656 

Polley  y.  Johnson,  62  Kan.  478     422 
Pollock     y.      Butler,      23      So. 

(Miss.)   677   620 

Pollock  y.  Jones,  10  Am.  B.  R. 

616  1126,   1129,  1134 

Pollock  y.  Jones,  96  Ala.  492. .     307 
Pollock  y.  Meyer,  96  Ala.  172. 

457,  471,  492,  496,  692 
Polling  y.  Otis,  13  Wis.  496 .. .  224 
Pollock  y.  Van  Camp,  74  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  342   978 

Pomeroy   y.   Bailey,   43   N.    H. 

118 282,  295,  341,     926 

932,  988,  992 
Pomeroy  y.  Hindmarsh,  5  How. 

Pr.    (N.  Y.)    437 1042,  1043 

Pond  y.  Comstock,  20  Hun   (N. 

Y.),   492    690,     692 

Pond  y.  Dayenport,  44  Cal.  481 

47,  48,  49,     319 
Pond    y.    New    York    Exchange 

Bank,  10  Am.  B.  R.  343 1170 

Pond    y.    Wadsworth,    24    Ala. 

531 645,     646 

Pool  V.  Cummings,  20  Ala.  663     941 


Table  of  Cases. 


CCVli 


PAGB 

Pool  ▼.  Gramling,  88  Ga.  653. .  520 
Poole   y.   MitcheU,    1    Hill    (S. 

C),  404    557 

Pope  V.  Andrews,  9  Miss.   135 

245,  257,  580,  626,    954 
Pope  V.  Brandon,  2  Stew.  (Ala.) 

401 234,     355 

Pope  ▼.  Cheney,  68  Iowa,  563 . .  541 

Pope  y.  Cole,  55  N.  T.  124 801 

Pope  y.  Kingman  &  Co.,  2  Neb. 

184 596 

Pope  y.  Pope,  40  Miss.  516 

312,  627 
Pope  y.  Wilson,  7  Ala.  690 . .  79,  572 
Popendiek  y.  Forbenius,  66 

Mich.  317  374 

Popfinger  y.  Yutte,  102  N.  Y. 

38 39,  146,  402,  688,  689,     694 

Poppe  y.  Poppe,  114  Mich.  649 

650,  651 
Porche  y.  Labatnt,  33  La.  Ann. 

544 547 

Porter  y.  Bucber,  98  Cal.  454. . 

536,  552 
Porter  y.  Dunn,  131  N.  T.  314.  363 
Porter  y.  Goble,  88  Iowa, -565. .  367 
Porter    y.    Greene,    10    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  484   346 

Porter  y.  Lazear,  109  U.  S.  84.  1188 
Porter   v.    Parmley,   52    N.    Y. 

185 528,    769 

Porter  y.  Sticker,  33  S.  C.  183.  995 
Porter  y.  Williams,  9  N.  Y.  142  204 
Portland    Bank    y.    Stacey,    4 

Mass.   661    540 

Post    y.     Berwind-White    Coal 

Min.  Co.,  176  Pa.  St.  297. .. .     536 

Poet  y.  Bird,  28  Fla.  1 739,    743 

Post  y.  Roach,  26  Fla.  442 775 

Post  y.  Stiger,  29  N.  J.  £q.  554 

19,  182,  200,  266,  368,  897 
Postlewait  y.    Howes,   3    Iowa, 

'    365 815,  821,  843,     847 

Poston  y.  Balch,  69  Mo.  115. . .  644 
Potier  y.  Harman,  1  Rob.  (La.) 

527 569 

Potter  y.  Adams,  125  Mo.  118. 

676,  731,  748 
Potter  y.  Couch,  141  U.  S.  296.  134 
Potter  y.  Gracie,  58  Ala.  303.. 

24,  294,  688,  692,  698,  699 
Potter  y.  Gratiot,  1  Mo.  368. .  526 
Potter  y.  Mather,  24  Conn.  551. 

530,  990 
Potter  y.  McDowell,  31  Mo.  62 

284,  327,  572,  986,    998 
Potter  y.  Payne,  21  Conn.  361.     528 


PAGE. 

Potter  y.  Pickle,  2  Qnt.  Pr.  391      48 
Potter    y.    Phillips,    44    Iowa, 

353 820 

Potter  y.  Skiles,  114  Ky.  132.. 

135,  358 
Potter  y.  Steyens,  40  Mo.  229. 

67,  663,  696,  745,  825,  1050 
Potter  y.  Washburn,  13  Vt.  568  544 
Potts  y.  Blackwell,  56  N.  C.  449 

216,  217,     724 

Potts  y.  Hart,  99  N.  Y.  168 921 

Poulson  y.  Stanley,  122  Cal.  655  1053 
Poundstone   y.    Jones,    182    Pa. 

St.  574    915 

Potts  y.  Hahn,  32  Fed.  660... 

682,  626,     870 
Powe  y.  McLeod,  76  Ala.  418.. 

819,  821 
Powell  y.  Boulton,  2  U.  C.  Q. 

B.  487   964 

Powell  y.  Burk,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

220 402 

Powell  y.  Inman,  53  N.  C.  436 

69,  632,  637,     662 
Powell  V.  Ivey,  88  N.  C.  266.. 

143,  653,     668 
Powell  y.  Jeffries,  5  III.  387.. 

605,  610,  685,     687 
Powell  y.  Powell,  63  N.  C.  283 

99,     776 
Powell  y.  Stickney,  88  Ind.  310 

307,  520 
Powell    V.    Waldron,    89   N.    Y. 

328 117 

Powell  y.  Westmoreland,  60  Ga. 

572    268,  277,  569,     985 

Powell  y.  Yeazel,  46  Neb.  225 . . 

681,  998 
Powers  y.   Benedict,   88   N.   Y. 

606 768 

Powers  y.  Green,  14  III.  386.. .   1051 
Powers  y.  Patten,  71  Me.  583. . 

882,  931 
Powers  y.  Russell,  13  Pick.  69.  184 
Powers  y.  Wheeler,  63  111.  29. 

766,    861 
Powers  Dry  Goods  Co.  y.  Nel- 
son, 7  Am.  B.  R.  506 1145 

Powers-Taylor     Drug     Co.     v. 

Faulconer,  62  W.  Va.  581 .. .     476 
Powles  y.  Dilley,  2  Md.  Ch.  119 

460,  •  976 
Poynter  y.  Mallory,  20  Ky.  L. 

Rep.   284    

182,  205,  295,  833,  836,     837 
Prats  y.  His  Creditors,  5  Rob. 
La.  288   837 


CCVlll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PACK 

Pratt  V.  Bothe,  12  Am.  B.  R. 

629 1174 

Pratt  V.  Barr,  2  Bias.   (U.  8.) 

36 168,     168 

Pratt  y.  Burr,  6  Bias.  (U.  8.) 

36 1028 

Pratt  y.  Christie,  12  Am.  B.  R. 

1 1164 

Pratt    y.    Columbia    Bank,    18 

Am.  B.  R.  406 1166 

Pratt  y.  Cox,  22  Gratt.   (Va.) 

330 188 

Pratt  y.   Curtis,    19   Fed.   Cas. 

No.  11,376  708,  1138 

Pratt  y.  Green,  26  Iowa,  39. ..     866 

Pratt  y.  Pratt,  96  111.  184 892 

Pratt  y.  Wheeler,  72  Mass.  620  741 
Pregnall  y.  Miller,  21  8.  C.  385  623 
Premo  y.  Hewitt,  66  Vt.  362.. 

108,  153,     161 
Prentice    y.    Madden,    3    Pinn. 

(Wis.)    376    856 

Prentice    v     Steel,    4    Montreal 

Super.   Ct.   319    120 

Prentiss  v.  Bowden,  145  N.  Y. 

342 186,     776 

Prentiss     Tool,     etc.,     Co.     y. 

Schirmer,   136  N.  Y.  306 ... .     997 
Prescott    V.    Hayes,    43    N.    H. 

693 904,     941 

Prescott  y.  Pfeiffer,  67  Mich.  21  204 
Preslar  &  Tier  y.  Walker,  116 

La.   661    294,   366,     371 

Pressel  y.  Bice,  142  Pa.  St.  263  990 
Pressler  y.  Joffrion,  39  La.  Ann. 

1116 971 

Prestidge  y.  Cooper,  64  Mass.  74 

216,  220 
Preston  y.  Crofut,  1  Conn.  527  721 
Preston  y.  Cutter,  64  N.  H.  461 

586,  722 
Preston  y.  Griffin,  1  Conn.  393.  246 
Preston  y.  Jones,  60  Pa.  St.  64  271 
Preston  y.  Smith,  26  Fed.  884.  1040 
Preston  y.  Southwick,    116    N. 

Y.  139 619,    637 

Preston  y.  Turner,  36  Iowa,  671  680 
Preston  Nat.  Bank   y.    Pierson, 

112  Mich.  436 183 

Preston-Parton   Milling    Co.    y. 

Horton,  22  Wash.  236 

68,  646,  647,  739,     740 
Prestwood    v.    Troy    Fertilizer 

.     Co.,  116  Ala.  668 191 

Prewit  y.  Wilson,  103  U.  S.  22 

323,  683,  684,  612,     617 
Pribe  y.  Glenn,  31  Mo.  App.  216    705 


PAGE 

Price  y.  Bradford,  4  La.  36.  .67,    741 
Price  y.  Heubler,  63  Conn.  374 

66,  734,  754 
Price  T.  Mahoney,  24  Iowa,  682  937 
Price  y.  Masterson,  35  Ala.  483 

693,  696 
Price  y.  Mazange,  31  Ala.  701 . .  945 
Price  y.  Price,  48  Fed.  823 .. .  1233 
Price  y.  Thrash,  30  Gratt.  (Va.) 

616 1060 

Priohard  y.  Hopkins,  62  Iowa, 

120 892 

Pride  y.  Andrew,  61  Ohio  8t. 

406 640    660,    651 

Priest  y.    Brown,  100  Gal.  626 
296,  468,  467,  471,  476, 

477,  478,  679,  611,  703,  704,     962 
Priest  y.  Conklin,  38  III.  App. 

180 385,     690 

Prignon  y.  Daussat,  4  Wash.  199  609 
Prim   y.   Mcintosh,  43   W.   Va. 

4  17  V       •        •        •        •••••■■•••■•••vlf  *^A 

Primrose  v.  Browning,    5G  Ga. 

369 207 

Prince  y.  Guillemot,  1  Rich.  Kq. 

(S.  C.)    187 322 

Prince  y.  Shepard,  26  Mass.  176 

73,  333,    608 
Pringey   v.  Warrell,    73    Iowa, 

561 402 

Pringie  y.  Rhame,  10  Rich.  L. 

(S.  C.)   72   623,  639,    987 

Prior  y.  White,  l2  111.  261....  260 
Pritchett  y.  Jones,  87  Ala.  317  696 
Pritchett  y.  Pollock,  82  Ala.  169 

413,    43S 
Pritz  y.  Jones,   117  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  643 31,  174,    271 

Pritz  y.  Jones,  102  N.  Y.  Supp. 

649 769,  869,    868 

Probert  y.  McDonald,    2  8.  D. 

496 869,  907,     977 

Probert  y.  Sonju,  110  Wis.  181  340 
Procter  y.  Cole,  104  Ind.  373..  378 
Procter  y.  Lane,  62  N.  H.  457.  744 
Procter  y.  Prout,  17  Mich.  473.  1063 
Produce  Bank  y.  Morton,  67  N. 

Y.  199 780 

Proetzel  y.  Buck  Stoye,  etc.,  Co., 

26  S.  W.   (Tex.)   1110... 604,     611 
Prosek  y.  Kuehta,  9  Ohio  Dec 

129 161 

Proskauer  y.  People's  Say.  Bank, 

77  Ala.  267... 213,  306,  333,    440 
Prosser  y.  Henderson,    11  Ala. 

484 233,     366 

Prout  y.  Vaughn,  62  Vt.  451.. 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccix 


PAGE 
153,  161,  218,  604 
ProrendieT  v.  Brooks,  64  K.  H. 

479 104,  166 

Providence  City  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Hamilton,  34  N.  J.   Eq.   158 

141,  100,     586 
Proyidence  Sav.  Bank  v.  Huntr 

ington,  10  Fed.  871  .  .   .  .178,    278 
Provident  L.,  etc.,  Oo.  v.  Fidel- 
ity Ins.,  etc.,  Co.,  203  Pa.  St. 

82 121,  128,     322 

Pruden  v.  Leavmsworth,  2  Root 

(Conn.),   129    67,  741,    744 

Pruitt  V.  lennent-Stribling  Shoe 

Co.,  75  Miss.  447 613 

Pruyn  v.  Young,  51  La.  Ann.  320 

895,  961,  967 
Puckett  V.  Reed,  3  Tex.  Civ. 

App.  350 560 

Puckett  V.  Richardson  Drug  Oo., 

1  Tex.  Civ.  App.  634 428 

Puget  Sound  Hotaling    Co.    v. 

Clancy,  21  Wash.  1 657 

Puget  Sound  Nat.  Bank  v.  Levy, 

10  Wash.  499 49 

Pugh    V.     Bussell,     2     Blackf. 

(Ind.)  394 1069 

Pugh  V.  Harwell,  108  Ala.  486 

436,  438,     452 
Pttllen   V.   Hutchinson^   25   Me. 

249 350,  626,  1057 

Pulliam  V.  Taylor,  50  Mise.  551 

794,     799 
Pollins   V.   Pullins,   23   Ky.    L. 

Rep.  313 , 959 

PulliB  V.  Robinson,  73  Mo.  201 

124,    274 
Pullman  v.  Stebbins,  51  Fed.  10 

824,    864 
Pulsifer  v.  Hussey,  9  Am.  B.  R. 

657 154,  1191 

Pulsifer  v.   Waterman    73  Me. 

233  ..  91,  152,  267,  1055,  1056,  1060 
Pulte  V.  Geller,  57  Mich.  560 .. .     321 
Pnrcell  Wholesale    Grocery  Co. 
V.  Bryant,  89  8.  W.  (Ind.  T.) 

662 269,  329,  579,     583 

Purdy  V.   Upton,   10  How.  Pr. 

Purington  v.  Chandler,  5  Harr. 

(Del.)  394 52 

Purkitt  V.  Polack,  17  Cal.  327  250 
Pursel  V.  Armstrong,  37  Afich. 

326 382 

Puryear  v.  Beard,  14  Ala.  121. .  666 
Putnam  v.  Dutch,  8  Mass.  287  540 
n 


PAQK 

Putnam  v.  Osgood,  52  N.  H.  148 

238,  434,  436 
Putney  v.  Fletcher,  148  Mass. 

247 209,  767 

Putney  v.  Kohler,  84  Ga.  528. .   1045 
Putney   v.    Whitmire,    66    Fed. 

385 773,    846 

Putney  V.  Wolberg,  127  Ala. 

124 953 

Putzel  T.    Shulhof,    59    N.   Y. 

Super.  Ct.  88 684 

Pyatt  V.  Powell,  51  Fed.  551 .. .       87 
Pyper  V.  Cameron,  13  Grant  Ch. 

(U.  C.)    131 822,    823 

Pyron  v.  Lemon,  67  Ala.  458. . .     971 

Q 
Quarl  V.  Abbett,  102  Ind.  233 

100,  101,  787,  813 
Quarles  v.  Grigsby,  31  Ala.  172  803 
Quarles  v.  Kerr,  14  Gratt.  ( Va.) 

48 574 

Quarles  v.  Lacy,  4  Munf.  (Ya.) 

251 38,  358,  364,  1029 

Queyrounze    v.    Thibodeaux,  30 

La.  Ann.  1114 274 

Quidort's  Adm'r  v.  Pergeaux  18 

N.  J.  Eq.  472   107,  io8,     146 

Quimby  v.  Carter,  20  Me.  218 

1055,  1060 
yuimby  v.  Diil,  40  Me.  528 .. .  184 
Quimby  v.   Strauss,   90   N.    Y. 

664 766 

Quimby  v.  Williams,  67  N.  H. 

489 216,  220,     441 

Quinn  v.  People,  146  111.  275.. 

162,  166,  820,  822,  843,  854,  1025 
Quinn  v.   People,   46   111.   App. 

647 708 

Quinnipiac  Brewing  Co.  v.  Fits- 
gibbons,  73  Conn.    191 726 

Quinnipiac  Brewing  Co.  v.  Fitz- 

gibbons,  71  Conn.  80 244,    343 

Quiriaque  v.  Dennis,  24  Cal.  164    565 
Quirk  V.  Thomas^  6  Mich.  76. 

720,     722 
B 
Racek  v.   First  Nat.   Bank,  62 

Neb.  669..  193,  348,  420,  434,     439 
Rachofsky  v.  Benson,    19  Colo. 

App.   173 398 

Racine  Wagon,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Rob- 
erts, 54  111.  App.  515. .. .  187,     348 
Radley  v.  Riker,    80  Him    (N. 

^.),  353 357 

Rafferty  v.  McKennan   (Pa.),l 

Atl.  546 551 


cox 


Table  of  Cases. 


PACB 

Raglaad  v.  McFall,  137  111.  81 

939,     948 

Rahn  v.  Kniess,  74  111.  App.  367 

305,    626 
Rahn   v.   McElrath,     6     WatU 

(Pa.),  151 309,    446 

Rains  y.  Dim^gan,  71  Mo.  148.  379 
Rains  y.  Rainey,  30  Tenn.  261 

1031,  1032 
Raley  y.  RaynuMid  ^ros.  Clarke 

Co.,  103  N.  W.  67  (Neb.)...   1127 
Rambaut  y.  Mayfield,  8  N.  C. 

85  .    .    .    1039 

Ramsay  y.  Gilchrist,  A.  C.  4i2  215 
Ramsay  y.  Quiilen,  73  Tenn.  184  676 
Ramsey  y.  Nichols.  73  111.  App. 

643 126,  127,  341,    572 

Ramsey  y.  Richaroson,  Riiey  Eq. 

(S.  C.)  271 322 

Rand  y.  Iowa  Cent.  R.  Co.,  186 

N.  Y.  58 1180,  1199 

Randall  y.  Buffington,   10  Cal. 

491 ...169,  458,  485,     489 

Randall  y.  Cook,  17  Wend.  (N. 

Y.)  53 519,     524 

Randall  y.  Dopp,  22  Ont.  (Can.) 

422 291 

Randall  y.  Howard,  2  Black  (U. 

S.),  585 650,  655,     660 

Randall  y.  Lang,  23  Ala.  751 . .  347 
Randall  y.  Lunt,  51  Me.  246...  369 
Randall  y.  Morgan,  12  Ves.  Jr. 

(£ng. )    67 327 

Randall  y.  Parker,  3  Sandf.  (N. 

Y.)  69 528,  893,    911 

Randall  y.  Phillips,  19  Fed.  Cas. 

11,555 631 

Randall  y.  Shaw,  28  Kan.  419 

459,  473,    499 
Randall  y.  Vroom,  30  N.  J.  Eq. 

353  .  .  .  .6,  240,  306,  308,  337,    627 
Randolph  y.  Allen,  73  Fed.  23 

457,  506,    507 
Randolph  y.  Daly,  16  N.  J.  Eq. 

313 800,  808,  823,  824,     870 

Randolph  y.  Hudson,  50  S.  W. 

(Tex.)   128 1000 

Rankin  y.  Amdt,  44  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)  261 56,      63 

Rankin  y.  Gardner  (N.  J.  Ch.), 

34  Atl.  935  .  .  ..94,  284,  821,    826 
Rankin  y.  Harper,  23  Mo.  579 

70,    753 
Rankin  y.  Holloway,    11  Miss. 

614 521 

Rankin  y.  Shaw,  94  N.  C.  406.  162 
Rankin   y.   Vandiver,     78    Ala. 


PAGE 

562 506 

Rapauno  Chemical  Co.  y.  Victor 

Hardware  Co.,  101  Fed.  948  ..  315 
Rapp  y.  Rush,  96  111.  App.  356.  lOOS 
Rapple  y.  Hughes    (Ida.),    77 

Pac.  722 540,    990 

Rappleya  y.  International  Bank, 

93  111.  396 103ft 

Rappleya  y.  International  Bank, 

1  Ky.  L.  Rep.  71 1036 

Rarro  y.  Bluestion,  84  lex.  57.   lOOS 
Rasher    y.    Thompson,    1   Giff. 

(Eng.)  49 324 

Rath  y.  Rankins,  17  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1120 107 

Rateau  y.  Bernard,  20  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  11,579 711 

Ratiiff  y.  Ratliff,  102  Va.  880 

633,  637,  640 
Ratto  y.  Bluestien,  84  Tex.  67  970 
Rayentas  y.  Green,  57  Cal.  264  565 
Rayen  v.  Subin,  30  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    193    578 

Rayisies  y.  Alston,  6  Ala.  297. 

428,  557,     563 
Rawls  y.  Oarr,  17  Abb.  Pr.   (N. 

Y.)  96 814 

Ray  y.  Harris,  7  La.  Ann.  138. 

215,  915 
Ray  y.  Life  Assoc,  of  America, 

6  Ky.  L.  Rep.  614 366 

Ray  y.  Roe,  Blaekf.  (Ind.)  268. 

240,     242 

Ray  y.  Simons,  76  Ind.  150 

78,      80 
Ray  y.  Teabout,  66  Iowa,  167. 

266,  884 
Ray  y.  Yamell,  118  Ind.  112..  162 
Raymond  y.   Harris,     84    App. 

Diy.    (N.  Y.)   646 137 

Raymond  y.  Richmond,  78  N.  Y. 

361 660 

Rayinond  y.  Whitney,  6  Ohio  St. 

201 947 

Rayner  y.  Whicher,    88    Bliass. 

292 157,     681 

Raynor  y.  Mintaer,  67  Cal.  169.    817 
Raynor  y.  Page,  2  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

662 939 

Rea  y.  Alexander,  27  N.  C.  644. 

622  987 
Rea  y.  Missouri,  17  Wall.  632.' 

671,    678 

Read  y.  Moody,  60  Vt.  668 

29,  268 
Read  y.  Mosby,  87  Tenn.  769.. 

91,   92 
Read  y.  Stanton,  4  Tenn.  159..  721 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccxi 


PAOB 

Bead  v.  Wilmm,  22  HI.  376...     638 
Reade  ▼.  Waterhoiue,  52  N.  Y. 

587 1223,  1233,  1234 

Rsade   v.   Livingston,   3   Johns. 

Oh.   (N.  Y.).  481....  191,  264,    268 
269,  327,  337,  793,  1030 
Reagan  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  157 

Ind.  623. . .  .71,  212,  213,  331,    332 
Ready  y.  Bragg,  38  Tenn.  511.     374 
Ready  v.  Smith,  170  Mo.  163..     777 
Real  Estate  Trust  Co.  v.  Thomp- 
son, 7  Am.  B.  R.  520 1212 

Reamne  v.  Gnichard,  6  U.  0.  0. 

P.  170 1052 

Re    Boesart's    Estate^    77    Pa. 

Super.  Ct.  100   231,    232 

Re    Boseart's    Estate,    11    Pla. 

Super.  Ct.    100    232 

Receiver  Graham  Button  Go.  y. 

Spielman,  50  N.  J.  £q.  120..  196 
Receivers,    etc.,    v.    Staake,    13 

Am.  B.  R.  281 1118,  1180 

Reckers  v.  AUmond,   29  Wash. 

238 960 

Rector    v.    City    Deposit    Bank 

Co.,  15  Am.  B.  R.  336.. 1159,  1211 
Rector  v.  Danley,  14  Ark.  304.  533 
Redd  V.  Redd,  23  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

2379 408,  469,     896 

Redd  v.  Wallace,  40  So.   (Ala.) 

407 315 

Redden  v.  Potter,  16  111.  App. 

265 162,     794 

Redfield  v.  Buck,  35  Conn.  328. 

244,  295 
Redfield  v.  Hewes,  67  Miss.  479  680 
Redfield,  etc.,  Mfg.   Co.  v.  Dy- 

sart,  62  Pa.  St  62 

240,  894,  905,    941 
Redford  v.  Cramer,  30  N.  J.  L. 

250 088 

Redford  v.  Penny,  68  Mich.  424    613 
Redhead  v.  Pratt^  72  Iowa,  99. 

590,  612,  879,  958,    960 
Redmond  v.  Oandley,  119  N.  C. 

675 8»7 

Rednath    v.    Lawrence,    42    Mo. 

A^.  101 201 

Red  River  Valley  Nat.  Bank  v. 

North  Star  Boot  &  S.  Co.,  8 

N.  D.  432    44» 

Red  River  Valley  Nat.  Bank  v. 

Barnes,  8  N.  D.  432.... 349,  554 
Redwite  v.  Waggaman,  33  La. 

Ann.  26 736 

Reed  v.  Baker,  42  Mich.  272 .. .  1043 
Reed  v.  Bott,  100  Mo.  62 885 


PAGE 

Reed  v.  Bott,  167  Mo.  185 856 

Reed   v.   Carl,    3     Sm.    k    M. 

(Miss.)  74 627 

Reed  v.  Jewett,  5  Me.  96 

251,  443,  521 
Reed  v.  Loney,  22  Wash.  433. . 

854,  861 
Reed  v.  Mclntyre,  98  U.  S.  510  463 
Reed  v.  Mellor,  5  Mo.  App.  567. 

292,    481 

Reed  v.  Minor,  20  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

11,647 637 

Reed  v.  Noxon,  48  III.  323 

83,     804 

Reed  v.  Reed,  70  Me.  504 521 

Reed  v.  Smith,  14  Ala.  380 ... . 

723,    948 

Reed  v.  Stryker,    4    Ahb.    Dec. 

(N.  Y.)   26   811,  823,  870 

Reed  v.  Thayer,  9  Ind.  157 332 

Reed  v.  Wilson,  22  111.  377 .. .  260 
Reed  v.  Woodman,  4  Me.  400 . . 

184,  443 

Reed    Bros.    v.    Nicholson,    189 

Mo.  396 160,     160 

Reed  Fertilizer  Co.  v.  Thomas, 

97  Tenn.  478 873 

Reeder  v.  Speake,  4  S.  0.  293.     789 
Reeff  V.  Bumham,  55  Mich.  39. 

680,  840,  858 
Reehling  v.   Byers,  94   Pa.    St. 

316.  : 392,   394,     409 

Reel  V.  Livingston,  34  Fla.  377. 

36,  40,  182,     363 
Reels  V.  Knight,  8  Mart.  N.  S. 

(La.)   267 915 

Rees  V.  Wittrock,  6  Grant  Ch. 

(U.  C.)  418 872 

Reese  v.  Bradford,  13  Ala.  837. 

773,    788 

Reese  v.  Reese,  157  Pa.  St.  200. 

188,  194,  349,     397 

Reese  v.  Shell,  95  Ga.  749 397 

Reese  River   Silver  Mining  Co. 

V.  Atwell,  L.  K  7  Eq.  347 .. .     777 
Reeves  v.   Dougherty,   15   Tenn. 

222 676 

Reeves  v.  Estes,  124  Ala.  303. 

905,  969 
Reeves  v.  John,  95  Tenn.  434 . . 

258,  321,  49S 
Reeves  v.  McNeill,  127  Ala.  175  106 
Reeves  v.  Miller,  121  Mich.  311.  51 
Reeves    v.    Peterman^   109  Ala. 

366 168 

Reeves  v.  Sherwood,  45  Ark.  520 

240,  250,  800 


CCXll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Reeves  v.  Skipper,  94  Ala.  407. 

394,  587,  1000 
Reeves  v.  Slade,  71  Ark.  611.. 

164,    367 
Reg.  V.  Chappie,  17  Cox  C.  C. 

456 1065 

Reg.  V.  Henry,  21  Ont.    (Can.) 

113 199,  1062 

Reg.  V.  Smith.  6  Cox  C.  C.  31..  1062 
R^an  V.  First  Nat.  Bank,  157 

Ind.  623 612 

Regli  V.  McClure,  47  Cal.  612.  630 
Reich  y.  Reich,  26  Minn.  97 . . . 

279,     889 
Reichard    v.    Castator,  5  Binn. 

(Pa.)    109 634,     640 

Reichenback    v.    Winkhaus,    67 

How.  Pr.    (N.  Y.)    512 425 

Reid  V.    Brown,    Wils.     (Ind.) 

312 832 

Reid  T.  Cross,  1  Am.  B.  R.  34.  1230 
Reid  y.  Davis,  33  Mass.  388 . . .  956 
Reid  V.  Kennedy,  21  Grant  Ch. 

(U.  C.)   86   201 

Reid  v.  Loney,  22  Wash.  433..  619 
Reid,  Murdock  &  Co.  v.  Lloyd, 

52   Mo.   App.  278 715 

Re  iff  v.  Mack,  160  Pa.  St.  265.  156 
Reiger  v.  Davis.  67  N.  C.  185 . .  895 
Reigelman   v.    Todd,    77     Iowa, 

696 1003 

Reilly  v.  Barr,  34  W.  Va.  95. . 

245,     314 
Reilly  v.   Sicilian  Asphalt  Pav- 
ing Co.,  170  N.  Y.  40 102 

Rein  v.  Kendall,  55  Neb.  583..  894 
Reinhard      v.       Commonwealth 

Bank,  45  Ky.  252 459 

Reinheimer  v.  Heminway,  35  Pa. 

St.  432 242 

Reitanbach,  1  Rawle  (Pa.),  362  940 
Reithmann     v.     Godsman,     23 

Colo.  202 579,    615 

Remington  v.  Will&rd,  15  Wis. 

646 177 

Remington       Paper       Co.       v. 

O'Dougherty,  99  N.  Y.  673. . .     892 
Renaud    v.    O'Brien,  35    N.    Y. 

99 837 

Renfrew   v.   McDonald,   11   Hun 

(N.  Y.),  254 645 

Renney  v.  Williams,  89  Mo.  139. 

954,  1050 
Rennick  v.  Bank  of  Chillioothe, 

8  Ohio,  530 83,    211 

Renninger  v.  Spatz,  128  Pa.  St 

524 541,  588,     990 

Renshaw  v.  Dowty,  39  La.  Ann. 


PAOV 

608 836 

Re  North  (1896),  2  Q.  B.  264.  1096 
Repauno  Chemical  Co.  v.  Victor 

Hardware  Co.,  101  Fed.  948. 

309,  457,  487,  489,     491 
492,  498,     917 
Re   Pennington,   59   L.   T.   Rep. 

N.  S.  774 324 

Reppy  V.  Reppy,  46  Mo.  571.. 

341,  364,  375 
Respublica  v.  Tryer,  3  Yeates 

(Pa.),  451 1063 

Re    Sweet's    Petition,  20  R.   I. 

667 231,     234 

Reubens  v.  Joel,  13  N.  Y.  488. . 

772,  1041,  1042,  1043 
Revercomb  v.  Duker,  74  Mo. 

App.  570 529,  655 

Revercomb  v.   McCully,  74  Mo. 

App.  575 441 

Rex  V.  Duchess  of  Kingston,  20 

How.  St.  Tr.  544 3 

Rex  V.  Jones,  6  Pa.  Co.  Ct.  401 . 

530,  991 
Rexroad  v.  Johnson,  6  Kan. 

App.  607 228.  305 

Rex  Buggy  Co.  v.  Hearick,  12 

Am.  B.  R.  726  1089 

Reybum    v.    Mitchell,   106  Mo. 

365 797 

Reynolds  v.  Beck,  108  Mo.  App. 

188 529,  530,  990 

Reynolds  v.  Boland,  202  Pa.  St. 

642 651 

Reynolds  v.  Crook,  31  Ala.  634.  418 
Reynolds  v.  Ellis,  103  N.  Y.  115  772 
Reynolds  v.  Faust,  179  Mo.  21. 

216,  863 
Reynolds    v.    Gawthrop,    37    W. 

Va.  3.  .   ..255,  275,  571,  976,     980 
Reynolds   v.    Lansford,    16   Tex. 

286.. 245,  249,  264,  328,  342,     414 

451,  676 
Reynolds  v.  Park,  6  Lans.  (N. 

Y. )    149.  . 722 

Reynolds  v.  VUas,  8  Wis.  47i . 

63,  215,     720 
Reynolds     v.     Weinman     (Tex. 

Civ.  App.),  40  S.  W.  660. . . . 

894,  908,  1001,  1006 
Reynolds  v.  Weinman  (Tex.  Oiv. 

App.),   26   S.   W.   33 893 

Reynolds  v.  Welsh,  47  Ala.  200. 

236,  316 
Reynolds  v.  Wilkins,  14  Me.  104  601 
Rhead    v.    Hounson,    46    Mich. 

243 864 

Rhem  v.  Tull,  35  N.  C.  57 768 


Table  of  Cases. 


CCXlll 


Kheinfeldt     v.      Bahlmaii,      19 

Misc.  Rep.   (N.  Y.)    162 

628,  534, 
Rhines  t.  Phelpe,  8  III.  455 .. . 
RhoadB  v.  Blati,  84  Pcl  St.  31 . . 
Rhode    Island    Gent.    Bank    v. 

Danforth,    14    Oray    (Mafia.), 

123 

Rhodes,  etc.^   Co.  v.  Smith,  43 

ni.  App.  400    579, 

Rhodes  t.  Seaman^  10  La.  363. 
Rboades  r.  61att»    84    Pa.    St. 

31 

Rhodes    ▼.    Ooasins,    6    Rand. 

(Va.)   188 

Rhodes  v.  Gre^,  36  Ind.  7 

610, 
Rhodes  v.  Wood,  93  Tenn  702. . 
Rice  V.  Adler-€roldman  Oommis- 

fiion  C6.,  71  Fed.  151 

471,  474, 
Rice  V.  Allen     (Neb.),    95    N. 

W.  704  

Rioe  V.  Austin,  17  Mass.  197.. 
Rice  V.  Bancroft,  28  Mass.  469. 
Rice  V.  Cunningham,  116  Mass. 

466 435,  438, 

Rice  V.  Eiaeman,  122  Ala.  343. 
Rioe  V.  Jerenson,  54  Wis.  248. 

Rioe  V.  Less,   105  Ala.  298 

56, 
Rioe  ▼.  Morner,  64  Wis.  599.. 

227, 

Rioe  V.  Perry,  61   Me.  145 

Rice  V.  Rice,  31  Ont.  59 

Rice  V.  Sally,  176  Mo.  107 

Rioe  V.  Wood,  61  Ark.  442 

499, 

Rice  V.  Less,   105  Ala.  298 

Rich  v.  Hayes,  99  Me.  51 

639,  650, 
Rich  V.  Levy,  16  Md.  174.  .459, 
Rich  V.  Levy,  16  Md.  74... 774, 

Rich  V.  Reed,  22  Me.  28 

Richards  v.  Allen.  25  Mass.  405 
Richards   v.   Ewing,    30    Tenn. 

327 172,    173,   722, 

Richards  v.  Hunt,  6  Vt.  251 

Richards  v.  Hyde,  21  111.  640.. 
Richards    v.    McMillan,    6    Cal. 

419 48, 

Richards  v.  Orr,  118  Iowa,  724 

160, 
Richards  v.  Schreiber,  98  Iowa, 

422 236,  593, 

Richards  y.  Swan,  7  Gill.  (Md.) 

366 344, 

Richards  v.  Vaccaro,  67  Miss. 


PAGE 


985 
526 
231 


88 

939 

580 

354 

1041 

706 
899 

498 

899 
542 
948 

449 

56 

893 

396 

318 
576 
899 
528 

593 
914 

653 

490 

1041 

986 

82 

739 
197 
813 

49 

165 

605 

387 


PAGB 

616 410,  905,  908 

Richardson  v.  Armitage,  18 

Grant  Ch.    (U.  C.)    512 219 

Richardson    y.    Champion,    143 

Mo.  538    451 

Richardson  v.   Cramer,  28  La. 

Ann.   357    563 

Richardson  v.  Gerli,  54  Atl.  (N. 

J.)   438   726 

Richardson  y.  Gilbert,  21   Fla. 

644 84T 

Richardson   v.   Kimball    (Me.), 

28  N.  £.  463   2» 

Richardson     y.     Marqueze,     59 

Miss.  80   460 

Richardson  v.  Mounce,  19  S.  C. 

477 567,    838 

Richardson  v.  Ralphsnyder,  40 

W.  Va.  15 225,  1036 

Richardson  y.  Rhodus,  14  Rich. 

95   (S.  C.) 

193,  265,  275,  279,  338,     349 
Richardson  v.  Shaw,  16  Am.  B. 

R.  842    1162,  1186 

Richardson  v.   Smellwood,  Jac. 

(Eng.)    552    190 

Richardson   v.    Subers,    82    Ga. 

Ga.    427    898 

Richardson  v.  Welch,  47  Mich. 

309 177 

Richardson     v.     Woodring,     74 

Iowa,    149    635 

Richey    v.    Carpenter,    33    Atl. 

(N.  J.)    472    600 

Richolson  v.  Freeman,  56  Kan. 

463    612,  624,  907,     946 

Richmond  v.  Bloch,  36  Or.  590.     140 

Richmond  Standard  Steel,  etc., 

Co.  v.  Allen,   17   Am.   B.   R. 

683 1096,  1158 

Richter  v.  Nimmo,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

680 1171 

Rickards  v.  Rickards,  98  Md. 

136 585 

Ricker  v.  Ham,  14  Mass.  137..     219 
Bickers  v.   Allmond,   29   Wash. 

238 962 

Ricketts  y.   McCully,   54   Tenn. 

712  .  . .     281 

Ricks  V.  Stancili  119  N.  C.  99. .     903 
Riddell  y.  Munro,  40  Minn.  532. 

671,  610,  705 
Riddell  y.  Shirley,  5  Cal.  488. .  413 
Riddick  y.  Parr,  111  Iowa,  733 

408,  510,  808 
Biddinger    y.    Wiland,    67    Md. 

359 344 


CCXIV 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Riddle  v.  Lewie,  70  Ky.  193.. .  664 
Biddle    v.    Varniim,    37    Mass. 

280 642 

Kidenour-Baker  Grocery  Co.  v. 

Monroe,  142  Mo.  165 339,     387 

Rider  v.  Hulse,  24  N.  Y.  372. .  896 
Rider  v.  Hunt,  6  Tex.  Civ.  App. 

238 230,     695 

Rider  v.  Kidder,  10  Ves.  Jr.  360 

99,     181 
Rider  r.  White,  3  Mackey    (S. 

C),  305    639 

Ridge    y.    Greenwell,    53    Mo. 

App.  479    609,    510 

Ridge  Ave.  Bank  v.  Sundheim, 

16  Am.  B.  Rep.  863 

1152,  1169,  1164,  1167 
Ridgeway     v.     Underwood,     20 

Fed.  Cas.  No.  11,815 190,     352 

Ridout  V.  Williams,  76  Tenn.  69  182 
Riebli  v.  Husler  (Cal.),  69  Pac. 

1061 624 

Riegel  v.  Wooley,  81  Pa.  St.  227 

306,     308 
Rielle  ▼.  Reid,  26  Ont.  App.  64 

68,     214 
Riethmann     v.     Godsman,     23 

Colo.  202    894 

Rife  V.  Geyer,  95  Pa.  St.  393. .  136 
Righter  v.  Riley,  42  W.  Va.  633  514 
Riggan  ▼.  Wolfe,  53  Ark.  637. 

333,  617,     722 
Riggs  V.  Murray,  2  Johns.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)    566 23,  424,     425 

Riggs  V.  Sterling,  60  Mich.  643  160 
Riggs   V.   Whitaker,    130   Mich. 

327 376 

Rigney  v.  Tallmadge,  17  How. 

Pr.  (N.  Y.)  656 260,  442 

Rigor  V.  Simmons,  47  111.  App. 

428 429 

Rike   y.    Ryan    (Ala.),   41    So. 

959 467 

Rilaborrow   v.   Titu8«   15   How. 

Pr.   (N.  Y.)   95 321 

Riley  v.  Carter,  76  Md.  681 .. , 

858,    874 
Riley  v.  Vaughn,   116  Mo.  169 

367,    603 
Rilling    V.    Schultze,    95    Tex. 

352 714,    913 

Rinchey  v.  Stryker,  28  N.  Y.  46 

66,  186,  208,  479,  740,  742,  784 
Rindge  v.  Grow,  99  Mich.  675. .  386 
Rindskopf  v.  Myers,  71  Wis.  639 

939,    948 
Rindskopf  ▼.  Myers,  87  Wis.  80 


PAGE 

613,  615,  999,  1005 
Rindskopf  t.  Vaugliau,  40  Fed. 

394 693 

Rindskoph  v.  Kuder,  145  HI. 

607 895 

Rine  v.  Hall,  187  Pa.  St.  264.. 

366,  951,  974 
Rinehart  v.  Long,  95  Mo.  396. 

38,  217,  207,  364,  824 
829,  861,  863,  870 
Ringgold  V.  Lieth,  73  III.  App. 

656 298,  711 

Ringgold  y.  Waggoner,  14  Ark. 

69     244,  247,     250 

Ringold   V.   Suiter,   36   W.   Va. 

186 686,  1023 

Rinkle  y.  Nichols,  7  Mo.  App. 

591 954 

Rio  Grande  R.  Co.  v.  Vinet,  132 

U.  S.  666   32 

Ripon      Knitting      Works      y. 

Schreiber,  4  Am.  B.  R.  299..    1072 
Ripstein    y.    British    Canadian 

Loan,   etc.,   Co.,   7   Manitoba, 

189 898 

Ripley   v.   Severance,   23   Mass. 

474 303,  698,     746 

Riske    V.    Rotan    Grocery    Co., 

Civ.    App.    (Tex.)    84   S.    W. 

245 180 

Riske    V.    Rotan    Grocery    Co. 

(La.) 239 

Riske  V.  Rotan  Grocery  Co.,  93 

S.  W.   (Tex.)  708 311 

Risley  v.  Parker,  50  N.  J.  Eq. 

284 637 

Rison  V.  Knapp,  20  Fed.   Cas. 

No.    11,861    258,  1163 

Risser    v.    Rathbone,    71    Iowa, 

113 669,  690,     744 

Ritchey  v.  McKay  (Ind.  App.), 

75  N.  E.  161. .  .264,  278,  806,  1090 
Ritterband    v.    Raggett,    42    N. 

Y.  Super.  Ct.  656 117 

Ritzinger     y.     EauClaire     Nat. 

Bank,   103   Wis.  346 697 

Rivera    v.    White,    63    S.    W. 

(Tex.)    126    651 

Rivers  v.  Thayer,  7  Rich.  Eq. 

(S.  C.)  136  322 

Rives  V.  Stephens,  28  S.  W. 

(Tex.)  707  

165,  361,  418,  961,     966 
Rixey  v.  Detrick,  85  Va.  42 . . . 

692,  703,  898,  899,     929 
Rixey's   Adm'r  v.   Deitrick,  85 

Va.  42    331,    361 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccxv 


PAQE 

Bicer    t.    McCarthy,    3    Colo. 

App.   848    711 

IL  M.  Sutton  &  Co.  v.  Christie, 

53  S.  E.  (W.  Va.)  602 682 

Boach  V.  Deering,  9  Sm.  &  M. 

(Miss.)    316 28 

Roach  T.  White,  94  IncL  610. . .     147 

Roan  y.  Winn,  03  Mo.  603 

390,  594,  625,     626 
Roane's     Adm'r     v.     Vidal,     4 

Munf.   (Va.)    187    218 

Roane  v.  Bank  of  Nashville,  38 

Tenn.  526    235,    316 

Roanoke    Nat.    Bank    ▼.    Far- 
mers' Nat.  Bank,  84  Va.  603.   1015 
Roark  v.  Bach,  116  Ky.  457. . .     160 
Robb  V.  Brewer,  60  Iowa,  539 . .     156 
Robb  V.  Robb,  41  S.  W.   (Tex.) 

92 646 

Robbins  v.  Armstrong,  84  Va. 

810 898 

Robbins  v.  Sackett,  23  Kan.  301  197 
Robert  Graves  Co.  v.  McDade, 

108  Ala.  420 73,  974 

Robert  y.  Hodges,  16  N.  J.  Eq. 

299 

356,  763,  782,  793,  794,  844,  1041 
Roberts  y.  Anderson,  2  Johns. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    202 876 

Roberts  y.   Anderson,  3  Johns. 

Ch.   (N.  Y.)  371 219,715,     720 

Roberts  y.  Barnes,  127  Mo.  405    436 
Roberts  y.  Brothers,  119  Iowa, 

309 319,     509 

Roberts  y.  Burr,   135  Cal.   156 

489,  508,  510,  513,     582 
Roberts  y.  Burr  (Cal.),  54  Pac. 

849 536,  914,  917,     985 

Roberts  y.  Farmers',  etc.,  Bank, 

136  Ind.  154    699 

Roberts  y.  Gibson,  6  Harr.  &  J. 

116   (Md.)    195 

Roberts   y.   Guernsey,    3   Grant 

Cas.    (Pa.)    237    893 

Roberts  y.  Hawn,  20  Colo.   77 

35,     525 
Roberts    y.    Jackson,    1    Wend. 

(N.  Y.)    478    1034 

Roberts  y.  Kelly,  2  Pat  &  H. 

(Va.)  396 557 

Roberts  y.  Johnson  (C.  C.  A.), 

18  Am.  B.  R.  132 1127 

Roberts  y.  Lund,  45  Vt.  82 637 

Roberts    y.    Miller     (Tex.    Ciy. 

App.) ,  30  S.  W.  381 928 

Roberts  y.  Press,  97  Iowa,  475 

579,    583 


PAOK 

Roberts    ▼.    Radeliff,    35    Kan. 

502 244,  257,  958,  959,     961 

Roberts  y.  Shepard,  2  Daly  (N. 

Y.),  110    256 

Roberts  y.   Winton,    100  Tenn. 

484 129 

Robertson  &   Co.   y.    (Doluinbus 

Ins.,  etc.,  Co.,  85  Miss.  234. . 

189,    252 
Robertson  y.  Gourley,  84  Tex. 

575 927,  1001 

Robertson  y.  Huffman,  92  Ind. 

247 138 

Robertson  y.  Sayre,  134  N.  Y. 

97 643,  647,     658 

Robinett  y.  Donnelly,  5  Phila. 

(Pa.)    361    733 

Robins    y.    Armstrong,    84    Va. 

810 890 

Robinson  Notion  Co.  y.  Foote, 

42  Neb.  166   461 

Robinson  y.  Bass,  100  Va.  190 

320,     366 
Robinson  y.  Baugh    (Tenn.  Ch. 

App.),  61   S.  W.  98 76,     555 

Robinson  y.  Belt   (Ind.  T.),  51 

S.  W.  976   433 

Robinson    v.    Bliss,    121    Mass. 

428 171,  916,     929 

Robinson  y.  Blood,  64  Kan.  290 

638,  650,     680 
Robinson  y.  Brems,  90  111.  361 

62,  113,     116 
Robinson  y.  Clark,  76  Me.  493 

341,  375,  397 
Robinson  y.  Collier,  60  Ky.  332  473 
Robinson  y.  Davis,  11  N.  J.  Eq. 

302 819 

Robinson    v.    Dryden,    118    Mo. 

634 962 

Robinson   v.    Elliott,    22    Wall. 

(U.  S.)   513   413 

Robinson    v.    Elliott,    22    Wall. 

(U.   S.)    524    566 

Robinson  v.   Frankel,  86   Tenn. 

476 257,  395,     396 

Robinson  v.  Frankville  First  M. 

E.  Church,  5Q  Iowa,  717 

278,  770,     809 
Robinson   v.    Hawley,    46    App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)   287 

474,  499,  601,  780,     958 
Robinson  v.  Holt,  39  N.  H.  657 

13,  14,  688,     590 
Robinson    v.    Huffman,    15    B. 

Mon.    (Ky.)    80 ,.41,     131 

Robinson    v.    Martell,    11    Tex. 


CCXVl 


Table  of  Cases. 


149 220, 

BobfaMon  T.  MeCimey  128  Mo. 

677 440,447, 

Robiiuoii  T.  McDoniieO,  2  B.  ft 

Aid.  134   

Botniiflon  v.  M«Kenn>,  21  R.  I. 

117 103,  104,  449, 

BobinKm  ▼.  Mitchell,  62  N.  H. 

Bo^inton  t.  Monjoy,  7  N.  J.  L. 

173 

Bobinton  ▼.  Moaeley,  93  Ala.  70 

366,  885, 
Bobinaon  v.  Ponyius,  136  Ind. 

641 

Bobiiuon   ▼.    Bobards,    15   Mo. 

459 231,  354, 

Bobiiuoii  y.  Bobinaon,  17  Ohio 

St  480   

Robinson  v.  Bogers,  84  Ind.  539 
Bobinaon  y.  Springfield  Co.,  21 

Fla.  203. . .  .90,  762,  770,  771, 

807,  840,  868, 
Bobinaon  r.  Stevena,  93  Ga.  536 
Bobinaon  v.  Stewart,  10  N.  T. 

189 129,  296,  297,  299, 

636,  688,  690,  692,  772, 
Bobinaon  t.  Stuart,  1  Rich.  (8. 

C.)    3    

Bobinaon  v.  Van  Doleke,  3  Ohio 

S.  ft  C.  PL  Dec.  107 

188,  349, 
Bobinaon    v.    White    (Ind.),    3 

Am.  B.  B.  88 1220, 

Bobinaon  v.  Williams,  22  N.  Y. 

380 

Bobinaon    v.    Woodmanaee,    80 

Ga.  249    914, 

Robinson  v.  Woolstein,  22  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  883 

Robion  v.  Walker,  82  Ky.  60.. 
Robeon  y.  Hamilton,  41  Or.  239 

340,  895,  922, 
Roehelle   y.    Harrison,   8    Port. 

351 645, 

Rochester  y.  Sullivan,  2  Ariz.  75 
Rock  y.  Collins,  99  Wis.  630.. 

251, 
Rock  y.  Collins,  99  Wis.  630.. 
Rockford   Boot,    etc.,   Mfg.    Co. 

y.  Mastin,  75  Iowa,  112 

369,  385,  509, 
Rockford  Watch  Co.  y.  Manifold, 

36  Neb.  801 211, 

Rockford  Watch  Co.  y.  Rumpf. 

12  Wash.  647 

Rock  Island  Nat.  Bank  y.  Pow- 


636 

1008 

638 

673 

638 

632 

897 

1062 

418 

668 
846 

773 

1042 

369 

330 

879 

762 

976 

1222 

302 

944 

403 
155 

923 

647 
892 

443 
443 

597 

856 

1044 


PAOR 

en,  134  Mo.  432 440 

Bock  Island  Plow  Co.  y.  Hill,  32 

S.  W.  (Tex.)  242 595 

Boek  Island  Stoye  Go.  y.  Wal- 

rod,  75  Iowa,  479 193 

Rnckland    Oounty   y.   Summer- 

yUle,  139  Ind.  695 

469,  608,  610,     895 
Bocky  Mountain  Nat.  Bank  y. 

Bliss,  89  N.  T.  338 772 

Boden   y.   EUis,    113   Ala.   652 

578,  711 
Boden  y.  Murphy,  10  Ala.  804.  639 
Boden  y.  N<wton,  128  Ala.  129 

436,  448 
Bodenberg  t.  H.  B.  Claflin  Co., 

104  Ala.  560   28,    259 

Bodgera  y.  Kinsey,  8  Ohio  Dee. 

308 297,     768 

Boe  y.   Moore,   35   N.   J.    £q. 

626 581,     595 

Boeber   y.   Bowe,   26   Hun    (N. 

Bogers,   etc..   Hardware   Co.   y. 

Bandall,  69  Mo.  App.  342. . .     318 
Bogers  y.  Abbott,  128  Mass.  102 

303,  937 
Bogers  y.  Brown,  61  Mo.  187.. 

837,  838 
Bogers  y.  Dare,  Wright  (Ohio), 

136 522 

Bf^rs  y.  Dimon,  106  111.  App. 

201 3,   185,     773 

Bogers  y.  Eyans,  3  Ind.  574 . . .  243 
Bogers  y.  Jones,  1  Neb.  417.  .90,  101 
Bogers  y.  Mayer,  50  Miss.  524  366 
Bc^rs  y.  McCauley,    22  Minn. 

384 168 

Bogers  y.  Michigan,  etc.,  B.  Co., 

28  Barb.   (N.  Y.)  539 1043 

Rogers  y.   Munnerlyn,   36   Fla. 

591 72 

Rogers  y.  Page,  15  Am.  B.  R. 

502 1117,  1130 

Rogers  y.  Palmer,  102  U.  S.  263 

1168,  1169 
Rogers  y.  Rogers,  3  Paige   (N. 

Y.),  379 776,    825 

Rogers   y.   Thurston,    24    Neb. 

326 940 

Rogers  y.  Verlander,  30  W.  Va. 

619 188, 

192,  275,  346,  349,  905,  910,     942 
Rogers  v.  Winsor,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

12,023 1124 

Rohrer  y.  Snyder,  20  Wash.  199 

807,     952. 


Table  of  Cases. 


cczvii 


PAGI 

Rohrer  v.  Tnrrill,  4  Minn.  407 .  667 
Roig  V.  Schults,  42  Ohio  St.  165  162 
Roland  v.  Rom,  120  Mo.  208 . .  230 
Rollet  y.  Heiman,  120  Ind.  611.  861 
Rollins  T.  Henry,  78  N.  C.  342 

46,    47 
Rollins  v.  Moers,  26  Me.  192 . . 

299,  449,  961,    967 
Romans  v.  Maddux,    77   Iowa, 

203 969 

Roman  v.  Mali,  42  Md.  613.. 

644,    660 
Romine  v.  Romine,  59  Ind.  346    287 
Root-Tea-Na-Herb  Co.  v.  Right- 
mire,  48  W.  Va.  222 1029 

Root  V.  Reynolds,  32  Vt.  139..  489 
Roper  V.  McCook,  7  Ala.  318..  796 
Rorrer  y.  Guggenheimer,  87  Va. 

533 1041,  1047 

Rose  V.  Brown,  11  W.  Va.  122 

37,  40,  131,  193,  349,     364 
Rose  T.    Campbell,   26   Ky.   L. 

Rep.  885 348 

Rose  V.   Colter,  76   Ind.  590.. 

78,  520,  567,     910 

Rose  y.  Conle,  61  N.  C.  517 596 

Rose  y.  Dunklee,  12  Colo.  App. 

403 203, 

231,  277,  281,  342,  837,  838,  863 
Rose  y.  Keystone  Shoe  Co.,  2 

Pa.  Cas.  243  1062 

Rose    y.   Sharpless,    33    Gratt. 

(Va.)   163 154,     162 

Rose  y.  Wortham,  96  Tenn.  505 

124,  126,     164 
Roselle  y.  Klein,  42  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  316 779,     843 

Roeenbaum  y.  Bayis  (Tenn.  Ch. 

App.)  48  S.  W.  706.  .110,  141 

296,  332,  366,  379,  408,  511,    691 
Rosenblath  y.  Buttlar,  7  N.  J. 

L.  J.   143   406 

Rosenberg  y.  Smith,  19  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  341 469,    477 

Rosenburgher     y.     Thomas,     3 

Grant  Ch.  635 658 

Rosencranz    y.    Swofford  Bros. 

Dry  Goods  Co.,  175  Mo.  618.     186 
Rosemhiem    y.     Flanders,     114 

Iowa,  291 508,  603,  612,     696 

Rosenheimer  y.  Krenn,  126  Wis. 

617 353,  1062 

Rosenthal  y.  Bishop,  98  Mich. 

627 915,     959 

Rosenthal  y.  Scott,  41  Mich.  632 

162,     163 
Rosenthal   y.    Walker,    111    U. 


PAGK 

S.  186 864 

Roser  y.  Fourth  Nat.  Bank,  66 

Kan.  129 163 

Ross  y.  Ashton,    73    Ma  App. 

264 497,     694 

Ross  y.  Caywood,  16  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)   691 619,     620 

Ross  y.   Cooley,    113   Ga.    1047 

247,  520,  560,  661 
Ross  y.  Crutsinger,  7  Mo.  246 . .  256 
Ross  y.  Draper,  65  Vt.   404.. 

533,     642 
Ross  y.  Duggan,  6   Oolo.  86.. 

261,  318,  442 
Ross  y.  Sedgwick,  69  Cal.  247.  468 
Ross-Mecham    Co.   y.    Southern 

Car  &  F.  Co.,  10  Am.  B.  R. 

624 1220 

Roswald  y.  Hobble,  86  Ala.  73. .     912 
Rothchild  y.  Maunesoyitch,    29 

App.  Diy.  (N.  Y.)  680.. 474,  476 
Rothchild  y.  Rowe,  44  Vt.  389. 

527  529  991 
Rothchild  y.  Trewella,  36  Wash! 

679 186,     774 

Rothell  y.  Grimes,  22  Neb.  526 

272,     461 
Rothgerber  y.  Gough,  52  111.  436 

583      593 
Rothschild  y.  Knight,  184  U.  s! 

334 678 

Rothschild   y.   Swope,   116   Col. 

670 524.     658 

Rounds  y.  Green,  29  Minn.  139 

287,  838,  843,     853 
Roundtree  y.  Lathrop,    69  Ga. 

757 397 

Rountree  y.  Marshall     (Ariz.), 

59  Pac.  109... 737,  861,  976,  979 
Rourke  y.  BuUens,  74  Mass.  549  648 
Rouse  y.  Bowers,  108  N.  C.  182  983 
Rouse  y.  Frank,  84  Ga.  623.977,  1051 
Rousseau   y.    Bleau,    8    N.   Y. 

Supp.  823 672 

Rousseau  y.  Bleau,  60  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  259 938,    941 

Rousseau  y.  Blow,  66  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  639 670 

Roussel  y.  Dukeylus  Syndics,  4 

Mart.    (La.)    240 82 

Rowe  y.  Blake,  99  Cfel.  167 117 

Rowell  y.  EJein,  44  Ind.  291 . .     951 
Rowland  y.  Oleman,  46  Ga.  204 

855,     869 
Rowland  y.  Martin,  3  Pa.  Cas. 

162 (557 

Rowland  y.   Plummer,   60  Ala. 


CCXVlll 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

182 370 

Bownd  ▼.  slate,  152  Ind.  39 . .  608 
Royer   Wheel    Co.   v.    Fielding, 

101  N.  Y.  504 427,  430,    607 

Royer  Wheel  Co.  v.  Fielding,  31 

Hun  (N.  Y.),  274.. 273,  341,  346 
Royer  Wheel  Co.  v.  Fielding,  61 

How.   Pr.    (N.   Y.  437 

293,  793,    802 
Royer  Wheel  Co.    v.    Frost,  13 

Daly   (N.  Y.),  233 428 

Rozell  v.  Vansyckel,  11   Wash. 

79 644 

Rozek  V.  Redzinski,  87  Wis.  525 

161,  167,  917,  763 
Rozier  ▼.  Williams,  92  111.  187  526 
R.  P.  Gustin  Co.  v.    Arm,    107 

Mich.  231 61 

Rankin  v.  Goodwin,  103  Va.  81  898 
Rucker    v.    Abell,    8    B.   Mon. 

(Ky.)  566 36,  285,  345,     346 

Rucker  v.  Abell,  47  Ky.  566..  701 
Ruckman  y.  Conover,  37  N.  J. 

Eq.  583 660 

Rucker  v.  Moss,  84  Va.  634 414 

Ruckman  ▼.  Ruckman,  32  N.  J. 

Eq.  269 632 

Ruckner  v.  Stein,  48  Mo.  407 . .  340 
Rudershausen  v.  Atwood,  19  111. 

App.  58 514,     515 

Ruddle's  Ez'rs  v.  B^,  10  Leigh 

(Va.),  467 290,     291 

Ruddle  V.  Givens,  76  Cal.  457. .  634 
Rudy  V.  Austin,  66  Ark.  73..  347 
Ruse  y.  Bromberg,  88  Ala.  619  337 
Rue  y.  Soott,  21   Atl.    (N.  J.) 

1048 366 

Ruffner   y.   Mairs,   33   W.   Va. 

656 1049 

Rufling  y.  Tilton,  12  Ind.  269. . 

192,  626,  816,  977 
Ruggles  y.  Cannedy   (Cal.),  63 

Pac.  911 775,    804 

Ruggles  y.  Robinson,  22  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  437 897 

Ruhl  V.  Phillips,  48  N.  Y.  125 . . 

244,  256,  272,  476,  477,  578,     618 

Rule  y.  Bolles,  27  Or.  368 950 

Rumbolds  y.  Parr,  61  Mo.  592 

345,  378,     906 
Rumsey  y.  Noyelty,  etc.,  Co.,  3 

Am.  B.  R.  704...  1082,  1089,  1100 
Rundlett  y.  Ladd,  59  N.  H.  16. .  368 
Runkle  y.  Runkle,  98  Va.  663. 

358,  899 
Runnels  y.  Smith,  89  Iowa,  636  672 
Kunyon  y.  Leary,  20  N.  C.  373 


PAGE 

97,     138 
Runyon  y.   Groehon,    12   N.  J. 

Eq.  86 522,     910 

Ruohs  y.  Hooke,  3  Lea  (Tenn.), 

302 163 

Rupe  y.  Alkire,  77  Mo.  641.. 

574,  703 
Rupe  y.  Hadley,  113  Ind.  416. .  1030 
Ruppert  y.  Hurley  (N.  J.  Ch.), 

47  Atl.  280 897,     963 

Ruse  y.  Bromberg,  88  Ala.  619.     203 
Rush  y.  Vought,  68  Pa.  St.  437 

110,  HI,     114 
Rusho    y.    Riiduurdaon    (Neb.), 

109  N.  W.  394 269 

Rusie  y.  Jameson,  62  Iowa,  62 

233,  353 
Russell's  Appeal,  2  Walk.  (Pa.) 

363 462 

Russell  &  Erwin  Mfg.  O.  y.  E. 

C.  Faitoute  Hardware  Co.,  62 

Atl.  (N.J.)  421 587,     628 

Russell  y.  <3ole,  167  Mass.  6 580 

Russell  y.  Dayis,  133  Ala.  647 

76   394 
487,  611,  599,  900,  905,'  953)     969 
Russell  y.  Dyer,  33  N.  H.  186. 

180,  749 
Russell  y.  Fabyan,  34  N.  H.  218  749 
Russell  y.  Fanning,  1  111.  App. 

632 ,.     278 

Russell  y.  Fanning,  2  111.  App. 

632 344,     377 

Russell  y.  Garrett,  75  Ala.  348     870 
Russel  y.  Hammond,  1  Atk.  13 

336,  349 
Russell    y.    haltom    &    Lester 

(Ark.),  89  S.  W.  471... 628,     646 
Russell  y.  Huiskamp,  77  Iowa, 

727 961 

Russie  y.  Jameson,  62  Iowa,  62    315 
Russell  y.  Keefe,  28  La.  Ann. 

928 652,    819 

Russell  y.  Lasher,  4  Barb.   (N. 

Y.),232 826 

Russell  y.  Lau,  1  Neb.  L.  J.  442     468 
Russell  y.  Letton,  66  Mo.  App. 

541 694 

Rush  y.  Mitchell,  71  Iowa,  333.     913 
Russell  y.  Nail,  2  Tex.  Ciy.  App. 

60 660 

Russell   y.    CKBrien,    127    Mass. 

.   349    541 

Russell  y.  Randolph,  26  Gratt 

(Va.),  706 328,     778 

Russell  y.  Russell,  34  Ky.  40..     710 
Russell     y.     Stinson,    3    Bjiwy. 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccxix 


PAGE 

(TeniL)  1 738 

Russell  Y.  StinBoii,  6  Tenn.  1. .  763 
Russell  V.  Stinaon,  4  Tenn.  1..  267 
Russell  V.  Thatcher,  2  Del.  Ch. 

820 343,     686 

RusseU  V.  Winne,  37  N.  Y.  691  664 
Rutherford  y.  Alyea,  N.  J.  Eq. 

411 790,  806,     808 

Rutherford  v.  C&rr   \TeaL  Civ. 

APp.),84S.  W.  659 

68,  733,  738,  761,  833 
Rutherford  v.  Chai»nazi,  69  Ga. 

177 39,  86,  91,     140 

Kutherford  v.  Schattman,    119 

N.  ^.  604 47,    306 

Rutland  County  Nat.   Bank  v. 

Graves,  19  Am.  B.  R.  446 1074 

Rutland,  etc.,  R.  Co.  y.  Powers, 

26  Vt.  16 383 

Rutledge  v.  Evans,  11  Iowa,  287 

739,  743 
Rutledge  v.  Hudson,  80  Ga.  266  1004 
RuUedge  v.  Smith,  1  McCord  Kq. 

(8.  C.)   119 219 

Rutt  V.  Shuler,  49  111.  App.  666 

74,  76,  78 
Ruthv^  V.  Clarke,  109  Iowa,  26  697 
Ryall  V.   Rolle,   1   Atk.    166...       99 

Ryan  v.  Daly,  6  Cal.  238 242 

Ryan  v.  Meyer,  108  Mich.  638.  669 
Ryan  v.  Ryan,  97  111.  38 . .  650,  655 
Ryan  v.  Spieth,  18  Mont.  45..  844 
Ryder  v.  Hunt,  6  Tex.  Civ.  App. 

238 333 

Ryland  v.  Almutt,  11  Grant.  Ch. 

(Can.)  135 323 

Ryland  v.  Callison,  54  Mo.  513 

67,  207,  678,  734,  737 
Rynearson  v.  Turner,  52  Mich.  7  382 
Ryttenberg  v.  Shaefer,  131  Fed. 

313 225 

Ryttenberg  v.  Schefer,  11  Am. 

B.  R.  652 1164 

8 

Saar  v.  Finkin,  79  Iowa,  61 . . .  1062 

Saar  v.  Poller,  71  Iowa,  425...  1001 

Sabin  v.  Anderson,  31  Or.  487.  696 
Babin  v.  Oomp,  3  Am.  B.  R.  578 

1092,  1134,  1152,  1153,  1162 
Sabin  v.  Columbia  Fuel  Co.,  26 

Or.  16 681 

Sabin  v.  Connor,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

12,197 1120 

Sabin  v.  Mitchell,  27  Or.  66 . . .  744 
Sabin  v.  Wilkins,  31  Or.  460.. 

461,  514 


PAQB 

Sack  V.  Hemann^    6   Ohio  Dec. 

1104 461,    490 

Sackett  v.  Andross,  6  HiU    (N. 

Y.),  327 1068 

Sackett  v.  Spencer,  65  Pa.  89..  140 
Sackett  v.  Stone,  116  Ga.  466. 

964,  966 
Sage  V.  Memphis,  etc.,  R.  Co., 

126  U.  8.  361 797 

Sage  V.  Mosher,  28  Barb.    (X. 

Y.)  287 822 

Sage  V.  Wynkoop,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

12,216 1168 

Sale  V.  McLean,  29  Ark.  621 . .  773 
Salemonson    v.    Thompson,   101 

N.  W.    (N.  D.)    320 688,     737 

Salisbury  v.  Burr,  114  Cal.  461.  012 
Sallee  v.  Sallee,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

74 646 

Salmon  v.  Bennett,  1  Conn.  626 

278,  343,  344,  377 
Salmon  v.  Wilson,  41  Cal.  696.  378 
Salomon  v.  Moral,  63  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    342    686,     614 

Salomon  v.  Salomon,  A.  C.  22. .  58 
Salt  Springs  Nat.  Bank  v.  Fan* 

Cher,  92  Hun   (N.  Y.),  327.. 

679,  688 
Salzenstein  v.  Hettrick,  106  111. 

App.  99 6,     626 

Smith-McCord    Dry    Goods    Co. 

V.  Carson,  69  Kan.  295 459 

Sammis  v.  Poole,  89  111.  App. 

118 339 

Sammons    v.    O'Neill,    60    Mo. 

App  530 460.  691,     594 

Sampson  *  v.    Brandon    Grocery 

Co.,   127   Ga.  454    174 

Sampson     v.    Payne,     5    Munf. 

(Va.)    176 768 

Samuel   v.    Kittenger,    6   Wash. 

261 .. .  .28,  138,  251,  443,  463,     583 
Sanborn   v.    Kittredge,    20    Vt. 

632 183,     642 

Sanders    v.     Alexander,  26  Ky. 

301 711 

Sanders  v.   Chandler,   26  Minn. 

273 193 

Sanders     v.     Clark,     6     Houst. 

(Del.)  462 652 

Sanders  v.  Logue,  88  Tenn.  355.  268 
Sanders  v.  Main,  12  Wash.  665.  79 
Sanders  v.  Malsburg,  1  Ont.  178  904 
Sanders  v.  Miller,  79  Ky.  617. 

322,  326 
Sanders  v.  Muegge,  91  Ind.  214.  217 
Sanders  v.  Pepoon,  4  Fla.  465.  520 
Sanders  v.  Wagonseller,   19  Pa. 


ccxz 


Table  of  Ca8Eb« 


PAGB 

St.  248 190,  381,    384 

Sanders  v.  Watson,  14  Ala.  198. 

773,  775,    788 
Sanderson  v.  Snow,  68  111.  App. 

384 182,    274 

Sanderson  v.  Stockdale,  11  Md. 

563 778.  845,  1042 

Sandford  Mfg.   Co.  r.  Wisffin, 

UN.  H.  441   .    ,     750 

Sandlin  v.  Anderson,    82    Ala. 

330 220 

Sandlin  t.  Bobbins,  62  Ala.  477. 

418,  418,  420,  423,  426,    924 
Sandman  y.   Seaman,  84   Hun 

(N.  Y.),  837 366 

Sandorn  v.  Maxwell^    18    App. 

Cas.   (D.  C.)   246   777 

Sands  v.  Codwise^  4  Johns.   (N. 

Y.)    696   14,  246,  331,     395 

587,  689,    605 
Sands   y.   Hildreth,     14    Johns. 

(N.  Y.)  493....  12,  206^  678,  002 
Sands  y.  Marbnrg,  36  Ga.  634.  1042 
Sands  y.  Pierson,  61  Iowa,  702.  610 
Sandwich  Mfg.   Go.   y.   Max«  6 

S.  D.  126    462 

Sanford    y.     Allen,    42    S.    W. 

(Tenn.)   183 366,    975 

Sanford  v.   Atwood^    44    Gonn. 

141 , 322 

Sanford  t.  Bliss,  29  Mass.  116.     746 
Sanford    y.    Lackland,    2    Dill. 

(U.   8.)    6 133,  1188 

Sanford  y.  Reed,  27  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

431 644 

Sanford  v.  Sanford,  68  N.  Y. 

67 1233 

Sanford   y.   Wheeler,    13    Conn. 

166 483,     694 

Sanger  y.  Oolbert,  84  Tex.  668. 

269,  570,  681,  907,    922 
926,  939,  1062 
Sanger  v.  French,  167  N.  Y.  213.    878 
Sanger  y.  Thomasson,  44  S.  W. 

(Tex.)   408 623,  716,    727 

Sanlon   y.   Murphy,    61     Minn. 

636 794 

Sansee  y.  Wilson,  17  Iowa,  582.    644 
Sargent  y.    CSiapman,    12   Colo. 

App.  629 311 

Sargent  y.  Chubbuck,  19  Iowa, 

37 376 

Sargent  y.  Salmond,  27  Me.  639. 

98,  101,  182,    205 

Sarle  y.  Arnold,  7  R.  I.  582 

245.  523,  015.  910,     924 
Sartwell   v.   North,    144    Mass. 
188 42 


PAGB 

Satterthwaite  y.  Emley,  4  N.  J. 

Eq.  489 975 

Satterwhite  y.  Hicks,  44  N.  C. 

106 895,    922 

Sattler  y.  Marino,  30  La.  Ann. 

365 296,     314 

Sauer  y.  Behr,  49  Mo.  App.  86.     560 
Sauers  y.  Beechler,  38  Or.  228.     053 
Sauerwein     y.     Renard     Cham- 
pagne Co.,  68  Mb.  App.  29. . .     560 
Saugerties   Bank    y.    Mack,  34 

App.  Diy.   (N.  Y.)   494 

346,  386,  699,  700,  961 
Saunders  y.  James,  86  Va.  936.  1040 
Saunders  y.  King,  119  Iowa,  291 

196,  220 
Saunders  y.  Lee,  101  N.  C.  3.. 

666,  722,  912 
Saunders  y.  Terrill,  23  N.  C.  97  326 
Saunders  y.  Waggoner,  82  Va. 

316 415 

Saunderson    y.    Broadwell,     82 

Gal.  132 306,  468,  606,    610 

Sauter    y.    Leyeridge,    103    Mo. 

616 667 

Sayage  y.  Dowd,  64  Miss.  728. 

460,  613,  727 
Sayage  y.  Hazard,  11  Neb.  323. 

688,  609,  619 
Sayage  y.  Johnson,  125  Ala.  673  64 
Sayage  y.  Knight,  92  N.  C.  493. 

676,  681 
Savage  y.  Murphy,  3  N.  Y.  508  270 
Savage  y.  Murphy,  8  Bosw.  (N. 

Y.)    76 686 

Savage  v.  Murphy,    34    N.    Y. 

608 189,   194,  351,     663 

Savage  v.  O'Neil,  44  N.  Y.  298.    369 
Savannah     Bank     v.     Planters' 

Bank,  22  Ga.  466   458 

Savits  V.  Speck,  21   Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  608 963 

Sawtelle      v.      Weymouth,     14 

Wash.  21 723,     740 

Sawyer  v.  Almand,  89  Ga.  314.     722 
Sawyer  v.   Bradshaw^    126    111. 

440 238,  318,    960 

Sawyer  v.   Harrison,  43   Minn. 

297 846 

Sawyer  v.  Levy,  162  Mass.  190. 

460,  470 
Sawyer  v.  Linton,  23  Grant  C9i. 

(U.  C.)    43    758,     869 

Sawyer  v.  Moyer,  109  111.  461. 

579,  981 
Sawyer  v.  Nichols,  40  Me.  212. 

521,  990 
Sawyer  v.  Shaw,  9  Me.  47 35 


Table  of  Cases. 


ocxxi 


PAOB 

Sawyer  t.  Tarpin,  91  U.  S.  114. 

1084,  1093,  1158 
Sawyers   y.  Langford,    68    Ky. 

639 827 

Sax  V.  Wilkeraon,  6  Ean.  App. 

203 919 

Saxton  T.  Sebringy  96  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)  570 1126 

Saxton  v.  Seiberling,    48    Ohio 

St.  554 54 

Sayre  ▼.  Flournoy,  3  Gkt.  541 . . 

148,  149 
Sayre  v.  Fredericks,  16  N.  J. 

Eq.  205 6,  337,  627,     879 

Sayers  y.  Texas  Land,  etc.,  Co., 

78  Tex.  244   59 

Scales  V.  Scott,  iz  Cai.  76 ..... .     334 

Scandinayiaii  Syeas  Beney.  Soc. 

y.  Linquist,  133  Mich.  91 ... .     976 
Scanlan  y.    Murphy,    51    Minn. 

636 762,  764,  843,     847 

Scarborough    y.    Hilliard    (Tex. 

Ciy.  App.),  28  S.  W.  231 

462,    495 
Scarf  y.  Soulby,    19    L.    J.  Ch. 

(Eng.)  30 264 

Schaefer  Brewing  Co.  y.  Moebs, 

187  Mass.  671    354 

FchaefTer  y.  Fithian,  17  Ind.  463     356 
Schaferman  y.  O'Brien,  28  Md. 

565 26,  30,  203,  778,     825 

Sohaffer  y.  Boldsmeier,  107  Mo. 

314 166 

Schaffner  y.  Renter,  37  Barb.  44    365 
Schaible  y.  Ardner,  98  Mich.  70. 

201,  586,    913 
Schall  y.  Weil,  103  Ala.  411... 

904,    941 
Sehats    y.    Kirker,     17    Wkly. 

Notes  Cas.    (Pa.)   43 231 

Schanngut    y.    Udell,    93    Ala. 

302 255,  259,  1003 

Schawacker    y.     Ludington,    77 

Mo.  App.  415 ..547,   594,    597 

Scbeel     y.     Lackner^     4     Neb. 

(Unoff.)   221 164,     165 

Schemerhom  y.  DeChambrun,  64 

Fed.  195 649 

Schemerhom  y.  Mferrill,  1  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    611    876 

Schenck  y.   Barnes,    156  N.   Y. 

316 90,  136,  137,  422,     423 

Schenck  y.  Hart,  32  N.  J.  Eq. 

774 212,    632 

Scbettler  y.   Brunette,    7    Wis. 

197 177 

Scheuer   y.   Book,    etc.,    Co.,   7 

Am.  B.  R  384 1071 


PAGE 

Scheuer  v.  Smith,  7  Am.  B.  R. 

384 1086,  1100.  1108 

Schideler   y.    Fisher,     13     Cblo. 

App.  106 468 

Schilling  y.    Curran,   30   Mont. 

370 1127,  1133 

Schlesinger     y.     Kansas     City, 

etc.,  R.  Co.,  39  Fed.  741 342 

Schidlower    y.    McCafferty,     85 

App.  Diy.   (N.  Y.)   493 990 

Schloss  y.  Estey,  114  Mich.  429    979 
Schloss   y.   McGuire,     102    Ala. 

626 457,  471,     511 

Schmelz  y.  Michelson,    8    Ohio 

Dec.  538 213 

Schmick  v.  Connellee,  26  S.  W. 

(Tex.)    738 998 

Schmick  y.  Noel,  72  Tex.  1 

894,  927,  944.  951,  1004 
Schmidt  y.  Opie,  33  N.  J.  Eq. 

138 266,  595,     627 

Schmiloyitz  y.  Bernstein,  47  Atl. 

884 1145 

Sohmitt  y.  Dahl,  88  Minn.  506.     180 
Schmitt  y.  Dahl,  11  Am.  B.  R. 

226 1133 

Schneider  v.  Lee  (Or.),  17  Pac. 

269 755 

Schneider    y.    Patton,   174  Mo. 

684 143,  172,  820,  866,     867 

1017,  1024 
Schofield  y.  Blind,  33  Iowa,  175.  952 
Schofield     y.     McConnell,      119 

Mass.  368 449 

Sohofield  y.  Ute  Coal,  etc.,  Co., 

92  Fed.  269   763,  771,     772 

794,  795,  796,     805 
Scholey  v.  Worcester,    4    Hun, 

302    (N.  Y.) 211 

Schondler  y.  Wace,  1  Oamp.  487 

120,     122 
School  Trustees  y.  Mason,  13  N. 

E.  235 582 

Schoonmaker    y.    Verwalen,     9 

Hun   (N.  Y.)     138 619 

Schoonoyer  v.  Foley,  94  N.  W. 

(Iowa)    492    „ 811 

Schott  y.  Chancellor,  20  Pa.  St. 

195 667 

Schott  y.  Hudson,  109  U.  S.  477  1208 
Schott   y.    Machamer,    54   Neb. 

514 393,  897 

Schram  y.  Taylor,  61  Kan.  547 

314,  459,  471,  487 
491,  580,  601,  604 
Schreck  y.  Hanlon,  66  Neb.  451  279 
Schreeder  y.  Werry,  73  N.  E. 

(Ind.)  832  366,  367 


ocxni 


Table  of  Cases. 


Sehrenkeiaeii  t.  Miller,  21  Fed. 

Cas.  No.  12,480    258 

Sdireyer  ▼.  Soott,  134  U.  S.  405 

78,  138,  189,  100,  352,    862 
SehraTer  ▼.  Pkutt,  134  U.  8.  405 

180,  205,  350 
Sehrider  ▼.  Tiffhe,  38  Neb.  394 .  1053 
Bchroeder  ▼.  Bobbitt,   108  Mo. 

289 228,  460,    473 

Bchroeder  ▼.  Kisselbach,  5  Ohio 

Dee.  3   662 

Sehroeder    ▼.    Mason,    25    Mo. 

App.  190  594,  618 

Sehroeder  ▼.  Pratt,  21  Utah, 

176 640,  667 

Sehroeder    ▼.    Walsh,    120    111. 

403 225,  380,  392,    396 

458,  469,  491,     555 
579,  892,  925,  948,    952 
Schuberth    ▼.    Schillo,    76    HI. 

App.  356 373,  385,     508 

Schultz  ▼.  Brown,  3  Ohio  Cir. 

Ct.  609    436,  670,  721,    728 

Schurtz  y.  Howell,  30  N.  J.  Eq. 

418 789 

Schultz  y.  Reader,  69  HI.  App. 

295 626 

Schultz   V.    Schultz    (Tex.    Civ. 

App.),  66  S.  W.  56 202,  1012 

Schultze  y.  Sehultze   (Tex.  Civ. 

App. ) ,  66  S.  W.  56 . .  172,  436,  686 
Schultz's  Appeal,  1  Pa.  St.  258  1027 
Schumacher    ▼.    Bell,    164    HI. 

181 913 

Schumacher  ▼.  Connolly,  76  Cal. 

282 634 

Schumaker  y.  Bell,  164  HI.  181     395 
Schuman    ▼.    Flickenatein,   Fed. 

Cas.   No.    12,826 1172 

Schuman  v.  Peddicord,  50  Md. 

560 672,     639 

Schuster  A,    Co.  ▼.  Stout,  30 

Kan.  629  201 

Schuster    y.    Bauman    Jewelry 

Co.,  79  Tex.  179 109,     110 

Schuster  v.  Farmers',  etc.,  Nat. 

Bank,  23  Tex.  Civ.  App.  206 

706,  987 
Schuster  v.  Kurtz,  47  Kan.  266  996 
Schwab  V.  Owens,  11  Mont.  473  1010 
Schwab     V.     Woods,     24      Pa. 

Super.   Ct.  433 629,  541,     990 

Schwabacher  v.  Leibrook,  48  La. 

821 716 

Schwalber  v.  Ehman,  62  N.  J. 

Eq.   314    632,     634 

Schwartz   v.    Barley,    142    Ala. 

439 198 


PAoe 
SehwartE  v.  Hazlett^  8  Cal.  118    380 
Schwartz,  Rosenbaum  k  Co.  v. 

Barley,   142  Ala.  439 874 

Schwartz  v.  Saunders,  46  HI.  18     105 
Sooble  V.  Henson,  12  U.  C.  C. 

P.  65   657 

Soofield  V.  Spaulding,  54  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  523   407 

Sooggin  V.  Schloath,  15  Or.  380 

293,  691,    973 
Soott  ▼.  Alford,  53  Tex.  82. . . 

554,    996 
Scott  V.  Aultman  Co.,  211  111. 

612 798,     824 

Scott  V.  Brown,  106  Ala.  604. .  239 
Scott    v.    Bumham,    19    Grant 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   234 819 

Scott  V.  Coleman,  21  Ky.  73..  103& 
Scott  V.  Davis,  117  Ind.  232..  583 
Soott  V.  Devlin,  89  Fed.  970. . .  1236 
Scott  V.  Hartman,  26  N.  J.  Eq. 

89 200,  243,  403,    435 

Scott   V.   Heilager,    14   Pa.   St. 

238 945 

Scott  Hardware  Co.  v.  Riddle, 

84  Mo.  App.  276 

314,  460,     497 
Soott    V.    Indianapolis    Wagon 

Works,  48  Ind.  76 

20,   100,  101,  761,     832 
Scott  V.  Keane,  87  Md.  709. . . 

196,     424 
Scott  V.   MagloughUn,   133  111. 

33 202^ 

Scott  V.  McDaniel,  67  Tex.  316  462 
Scott     V.     McMillen,     1     Litt. 

(Ky.)    302    787 

Scott  V.  Mead  (D.  C),  37  Fed. 

866 275 

Scott  V.  Moore,  4  111.  306 1039 

Scott  V.  Neely,  140  U.  S.  106. . 

773,  779,     846 
Scott    V.    Powers,    25    Ky.    L. 

Rep.    1640    966 

Scott  V.  Purcell,  7  Blackf.  66.. 

631,  721,    723 
Scott  V.  Rowland,  82  Va.  484. . 

39,  703 
Scott  v.  Scott,  85  Ky.  386 . .  67,  734 
Scott  V.  Thomas,  104  Va.  330..  6 
Scott  V.  Thomas    (Va.),  51   S. 

E.  829   1016 

Soott  V.  Wallace,  27  Ky.  654..  79& 
Scott  V.  Winship,  20  Ga.  429 . . 

35,  78,  231,  244,     620 
Scoville    V.    Halladay,    16   Abb. 

N.  C.   (N.  Y.)   43 738,    80& 


Table  of  Cases. 


cczxiu 


PAfflD 

6eragg8  ▼.  Hill,  43  W.  Va.  162.     838 
Screyen  t.   Bostiek,  2  McCord 

Eq.  <a  C.)   410 771 

Scriyenor    ▼.  Scriyenor,    7    B. 

Mon.  (Ky.)  374  252,  560 

Screyenor  y.  Screyenor,  46  Ky. 

374 668 

Seripps  y.  Crawford,  123  Mioh. 

173 69,  460,    476 

Scripps  y.  King,  103  111.  469. . .     804 
Scudder  y.  Atwood,  55  Mo.  App. 

512 650 

Scudder    y.    Morris,    107    Mo. 

App.   634    187 

Scudder     y.    Payton,    65    Mo. 

App.  314 418,  434,     445 

Scudder    y.    Voorhis,    7    N.    Y. 

Super.  Ct.  271    826 

Scully  y.  Albers,  89  Mo.  App. 

118 525,  1008 

Scully  y.  Keams,  14  La.  Ann. 

436 736 

Scully   y.   Kirkpatrick,   79   Pa. 

St.  324   1071 

Seaboard   Steel  Casting  Co.  y. 

Trigg  Co.,  10  Am.  B.  R.  594.   1103 
Seager  y.  Armstrong,  95  Minn. 

414 861,     862 

Seager  y.  Aughe,  97  Ind.  285 . .  861 
Seals  y.  Pheiffer,  77  Ala.  278 . .  702 
Seals  y.  Robinson,  75  Ala.  363. 

190,  347,  862 
Seaman  y.  Bisbee,  163  HI.  91 . .  920 
Seaman  y.  Fleming,  7  Rich.  Eq. 

283 301 

Seaman  y.  Hasbrouck,  35  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    151    306,    308 

Seaman  y.  Nolen,  68  Ala.  463. .  518 
Seaman     y.     Wall,     54     How. 

Prac.  (N.  Y.)  47 328 

Seamana  y.  White,  8  Ala.  656. . 

231,  364 
Searcy  y.  Carter,  36  Tenn.  271 .  707 
Searcy    y.  Gwaltney,    80    Tex. 

Civ.  App.    158 910,    917 

Searing  y.  Berry,  58  Iowa,  20 

203  979  1014 
Searles  y.  Little,  153  Ind. '432.'    856 

Sears  y.  Dayis,  40  Or.  236 406 

Sears  y.  Hanks,  14  Ohio  St.  298 

92,  162 
Sears  y.  Robinson,  61  Iowa,  745  398 
Seasongood  y.   Ware,   104  Ala. 

212 899,     974 

Seavey  y.  Dearborn,   19  N.  H. 

351 960,    961 

Seayey  v.  Walker,  108  Ind.  78 . 


PAGE 

520,  538,  546,  968,  960,    961 
Seaying      y.      Brinkerhoff,      5 

Johns.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)  329.. 48,  638 
Seay  y.  Hesse,  123  Mo.  450. . .  114 
Sebring    y.     Brickley,     7     Pa. 

Super.  Ct.  198 . .  120,  128,  386,  408 
Sebring  y.   Wellington,   6  Am. 

B.  R.  671   1165 

Sechler  Carriage  Co.  y.  Dryden, 

71  111.  App.  583 538,  556 

Second  Nat.  Bank  y.  Brady,  96 

Ind.  498  83 

Second  Nat.  Bank  y.  Farr  (N. 

J.  Ch.),  7  Atl.  892 840 

Second   Nat.    Bank   y.    Gilbert, 

174  111.   485 528,     546 

Second   Nat.    Bank    y.   Merrill, 

81  Wis.  151 114,  286,     582 

Second  Nat.  Bank  y.  CRourke, 

40  N.  J.  Eq.  92 972 

Second  Nat.  Bank  v.  Yeatman, 

53  Md.  443   36,     439 

Secor  y.  Sounder,  95  Ind.  95 . .     356 
Security    Warehousing    Co.    y. 

Hand  (C.  C.  A.),  16  Am.  B. 

R.  49  1124 

Sedgwick  y.  Place,  26  L.  T. 

Rep.  N.  S.  307.  .340,  347,  721,  985 
Sedgwick  v.  Place,  5  Ben.  (U. 

S.)  184  1130,  1138,  1139 

Sedgwick  y.  Stanton,  14  N.  Y. 

296 23 

Sedgwick  y.  Tucker,  90  Ind.  271 

358,  927,  1000,  1001 
Sedgwick  y.  Wormser,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  12,626   1131 

Seed     y.     Jennings,     83     Pac. 

(Ore.)   872   

180,   188,  200,  340,     349 
Seeders  y.  Allen,  98  111.  468.. 

138,  579 
Seeds  y.  Eahler,  76  Pa.  St.  262  898 
Seekel  y.  Winch,  108  Iowa,  102  299 
Seeleman  y.  Hoagland,  19  Colo. 

231 883 

Seger  y.  Thomas,  107  Mo.  635. 

245,  256,  229,  333,  479,  504,    572 
Seller  y.  Walz,  100  Ky.  105 .. . 

332,  510,     973 
Seitz  y.  MitcheU,  94  U.  S.  580 

105,  878,  879,    896 
Seits  y.  Rennig,  Lehigh  Val.  L. 

Rep.    (Pa.)    130    409 

Seiyers    y.    Dickoyer,    101    Ind. 

495 695 

Seixas  y.  King,  39  La.  Ann.  510    823 
Seligman  v.  Wilson,  1  Tex.  Civ. 


-ccxxiv 


Table  of  Casss. 


PAGE 

App.  Cae.,  sec.  896 665 

Seligson  ▼.  Brown,  61  Tex.  180 

604,  1003 
Sell  ▼.  Bailey,  119  Ind.  61 .  .278,    806 

Sell  ▼.  West,  126  Mo.  621 641 

Sellers  y.  Bailey,  29  Mo.  App. 

174 688 

Sellers  ▼.  Bryan,  17  N.  C.  358.  461 
Sellers  y.  Hayes,  163  Ind.  422.  618 
Selz  y.  Belden,  48  Iowa,  461 . .  928 
Selz  y.  Eyans,  6  111.  App.  466. .  429 
Selz  y.  Hocknell,  62  Neb.  101 . .  172 
Selz  y.  Hocknell,  63  Neb.  503.. 

672,  678,  800,    970 
Semmes  y.  Underwood,  64  Ark. 

416 191 

Semmens   y.   Walters,   66   Wis. 

676 898,  899,    908 

Semple  y.  Fletcher,  3  Mart.  N. 

S.   (La.)   382   808 

Sentell  y.  Hewitt,  49  La.  Ann. 

1021 468 

Senter  y.  Williams,  61  Ark.  189  827 
Serfoss   y.    Fisher,    10    Pa.   St. 

184 46,      46 

Seryis  y.  Nelson,  14  N.  J.  £q. 

94 640,  668,     662 

Servos  y.  Tobin,  2  U.  C.  Q.  B. 

630 46,       63 

Sessions  y.  Little,  9  N.  H.  271 .  87 
Sessions  y.  Romadka,  146  U.  S. 

29 1200 

Seyerin  y.  Rueckerlck,  62  Wis. 

1 418,  421,     426 

Seyers  y.  Dodson,  63  N.  J.  Eq. 

633 181,  206,     337 

Seyier   y.    Allen,   80   Mo.   App. 

187 986 

Seward  y.  Jackson,  8  Cow.  406 

263,  264,  290,     296 
336,  337,  377,     382 
Sewall  y.  Russell,  2  Paige   (N. 

Y.),  176   819 

Sewell    y.    Baxter,    2    Md.    Ch. 

447 266,    902 

Sewall  y.  Glidden,  1  Ala.  62.. 

16,   16,  93,     633 
Sexey  y.  Adkinson,  34  Cal.  346 

177,    966 
Sexton    y.    Anderson,    96    Mo. 

373 460,  494,  694,     942 

Sexton  y.  Martin,  37  111.  App. 

637 114 

Sexton   y.   Wheaton,   8    Wheat. 

(U.   S.)    229    

41,  131,  186,  190,  192,     219 
244,  328,  347,     848 


PAOB 

Seymour  y.  Briggs,  11  Wis.  196    382 
Seymour  y.   CFKeefe,  44  Conn. 

128 662 

Seymour   y.    Wilson,    16    Barb. 

294 204 

Seymour  y.  Wilson,    19   N.  Y. 

418 

14,  22,  290,  310,  313,  456,    593 
Seymour  y.   Wilson,   14  N.  Y. 

667 927,     928 

Shackleford  y.  Todhunter,  4  IlL 

App.  271    160,     179 

Shadbume  y.  Amonette,  7  La. 

Ann.   89    892 

Shaeffer   y.    Sheppard,   64   Ala. 

244 106 

Shaferman  y.  O'Brien,  28  Md. 

566 240 

Shaffer  y.  Knox,   7  Kan.  App. 

182 1026 

Shaffer  y.  Martin,  25  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)    601    331 

Shaffer  y.  Mink,  60  Iowa,  764. .     892 
Shaffer  v.  Rhynders,  116  Iowa, 

472  .....     892 

Shaffer  y.  Watkins,  7  Watts  & 

S.    (Pa.)    219    418,     435 

Shainwald  y.  Lewis,  6  Fed.  766 

101,  1042 
Shakely  y.  Guthrie,  2  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  414 299 

Shallcross  v.  Deats,  43  N.  J.  L. 

177 45,  638,     639 

Shand  y.  Hanley,  71  N.  Y.  319. 

6,  85,  189,  347,  700,  1030 
Shannon    v.    Commonwealth,  8 

Serg.  &  R.   (Pa.)   444 424,     431 

Shannon  y.  Hanks,  86  Va.  338 

1047,  1048 
Shapiro  y.  Paketz,  Oh.     App. 

(Tenn.)   69  S.  W.  774 

182,  206,  247,  960,     966 
Sharff  y.  Hayes,  110  N.  W.  24.     368 

Sharon  y.  Shaw,  2  Ney.  289 646 

Sharp  y.  Carroll,  66  Wis.  62 . . 

623,    641 
Sharp    y.    Congregational  Pub. 

Co.,  2  Pa.  Co.  Ct.  620 657 

Sharpe  y.  Dayis,  76  Ind.  17.. 

212,  213,  207,  636 

Sharp  y .  Hicks,  94  Qa.  624 

233,  267,  353,     764 
Sharp    y.    Philadelphia    Ware- 
house Co.,  10  Fed.  379 293 

Sharp  y.  Wickliffe,  13  Ky.  10.     966 
Shattock  v.   Shattock,  L.  R.  2 

Eq.  182 144 


Table  of  Cases. 


GCXXT 


PAOS 

ShAtE  y.  Kirker,  1  Pa.  Cas.  332  353 
i^uer  y.  Alterton,   161  U.  S. 

«07 628,  612,  940,  1003 

Shaol  y.  Harrington,    64    Ark. 

305 636,    667 

Sluiyer  y.  Brainard,    20   Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  26 819 

Shaver  y.  Shaver,  36  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)   1 1,     123 

Shaw  V.  Dwight,  27  N.  Y.  249  793 
Shaw  y.  Jeffery,  3  L.  T.  Rep.  N. 

S.  1 633 

Shaw  y.  Manchester,  84  Iowa, 

246 366,  886,    979 

Shaw  y.  Millaaps,  60  Miss.  380 

177,  634,     734 
Shaw  y.  Shaw,  16  Ky.  u  Rep. 

592 610,     874 

Shaw  y.  Tracy,  83  Mo.  224 727 

Shaw  y.  Wilksiiire,  65  Me.  486  660 
Shawano  County  Bank  y.  Koep- 

pen,  78  Wis.  533 84,     161 

Shay  y.   Wheeler,  69  Mich.  264 

232,     366 
Shea  y.  ^nes,  89  Minn.  423. .     896 

Sheaf e  y.  Sheaf e,  40  N.  H.  616 

784      804 
Shealy  y.  Edwards,  78  Ala.  176* 

610,  906,     960 
Shealy  y.  Edwards,  15  Ala.  411 

224,  261,  393,     467 
Shean  v.   Shay,  42   Ind.  375.. 

200,     239 
Shearman  y.  Bingham,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  12,733 1211 

Shears  v.  Rogers,  3  B.  dt  Ad.  362 

92,     336 
Sheble  v.  Bryden,  114  Pa.  147.     428 

Sbeboygan   Boot,   etc.,    Co.    v. 

Miller,  99  Wis.  627 958 

Shedd  y.   Bank  of  Brattleboro, 

32  Vt.  709 319 

Sheffer  v.  Hines,  149  Ind.  413. .  849 
Sheffield  y.  Parker,  96  Ga.  774.  1048 
Sheldler  v.  Fisher,  13  Colo.  App. 

105 298 

Sheldon  y.  Bodge,  4  Den.    (N. 

Y.  217 983 

Sheldon    v.    Keokuk    Northern 

Line  Packet  Co.,  8  Fed.  769 

833,     836 
Sheldon  v.  Mann,  85  Mich.  265 

76,  78,  460,     492 
Sheldon  v.   Parker,   11  Am.  B. 

R.  162 1183,  1203,  1235 

8heldon  y.  Parker,  66  Neb.  610 

680,  971,  1025 
o 


PAOB 

Sheldon   y.   Warner,   26    Mich. 

403 646 

Shell  y.  Boyd,  32  S.  C.  369 . . .     790 
Shelley    v.     Nolen    (Tez.    Civ. 

App.),  88  8.  W.  624 1133 

Shelley  y.  Boothe,  73  Mo.  74.. 

460,  601,  688,  694 
Shelton  y.  Church,  38  Conn.  416  231 
Shelton  y.  Blake,  116  111.  276. 

959,  960 
Shepard  v.  Ostertag,   106  Wis. 

82 962 

Shepard  v.  Pratt,  32  Iowa,  296  278 
Shepard  y.  Fish,  78  111.  App. 

198 307 

Shepherd  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  10 

Mont.  24 397,     956 

Shepnerd  v.  Reeves,  114  Ala.  281 

969,  968 
Shepherd  y.  Trigg,  7  Mo.  151. .  527 
Shepherd  v.  Woodfolk,  78  Tenn. 

693 696 

iyoeppard  y.  Iverson,  12  Ala.  97 

436,  439,  760,  761 
Sheppard  v.  Sheppard,  10  N.  J. 

L.  250 49,  929 

Sheppard  v.  Thomas,  24  Kan. 

780 195 

Sherazee  y.  Shoastry,  6  Moore 

(Ind.  App.),  27 700 

Sherk  y.  Endress,  3  Watts  &  S. 

(Pa.)   255 632 

Sherman  v.  Barrett,  1  McMul. 

(S.  C.)   147 24 

Sherman  v.  Bingham,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  12,762 1210 

Sherman  v.  Davis,  137  Mass.  132 

67,     737 
Sherman   v.    Hogland,   73    Ind. 

472.. .  .224,  275,  290,  398,  585,     860 
Sherman  v.  Luckhardt,  11  Am. 

B.  R.  26 1126,  1130 

Sherron  y.  Humphreys,  14  N.  J. 

L.  217 522 

SIherwin  v.   Gaghagen,  39  Neb. 

238 235,     316 

bhioler  v.  Hartley,  201  Pa.  St. 

286 44,     571 

Shideler  v.  Fisher,  13  Colo.  App. 

106 699,     625 

Shidlovsky  v.  Gorman,  51  App. 

Div.  253 593 

Shields  v.  Keys,  24  lowa^  298. 

147,  148 
Shields  v.  Lewis,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

842 116 

Shields  v.  Mahoney,  94  Va.  487    698 


OCXZVl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAQB 

Shields  y.  Ord,  Ciy.  App.  (Tex.) 

61  S.  W.  298 177 

Shipo  V.  Kepftss,  28  Gratt.  ( Va.) 

716 162 

Shipman  v.  Aetna  Ins.  Co.,  29 

Conn.  245 203 

Shipman  ▼.  Seymour,  40  Mich. 

274 926 

Shipp  V.  Hibler,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

47 106 

Shirley  v.  Long,  6  Rand.  735.. 

204,    561 
Shirley  v.  Shields,     8     Blackf. 

(Ind.)  273 773,    957 

Shiveley  ▼.  Jones,  45  Ky.  274 

85,  184,     206 
Shober  v.  Wheeler,   113   N.  C. 

370 232,  355,    051 

Shoemaker  ▼.  Cake,  83  Va.  5. .  2 
Shoemake     y.     Finlayson,     22 

Wash.  12 633,    646 

Shoemaker  ▼.  Hastings,  61  How. 

Pr.  (N.  Y.)  79 416,    410 

Shoemaker  ▼.  Katz,  74  Wis.  374  582 
Shoe  Mfg.  Co.  V.  Billings  (Or.), 

80  Pac  422 1133 

Shontz  ▼.  Brown,  27  Pa.  123..  266 
Shonts  ▼.  Brown,  27  Pa.  St.  123  182 
Shores  ▼.  Doherty,  65  Wis.  153  908 
Short  y.  Hepburn,  76  Fed.  113.  1002 
Short  v.  Tinsley,  1  Mete.  397 . .  330 
Short  y.  Tinsley,  58  Ky.  397.. 

459,   520,   564,  691,    692 
Shortel  y.  Toung,  23  Neb.  408 

30,    110 
Shorten  y.  Drake,  38  Ohio  St. 

76 726 

Shorten  y.   Woodrow,   34  Ohio 

St.  645 36 

Shorter  y.  Methoin,  52  Ga.  225  397 
Shotwell  y.  McElhinney,  101  Mo. 

677 964 

Showman  y.  Lee,  86  Mich.  556 

227,  236,  317,  333,    970 
Shreck  y.  Hanlon   (Neb.),   104 

N.  W.  193 787 

Shredc  y.  Hanlon,  66  Neb.  45l  336 
Shreye  y.  Miller,  29  N.  J.  L.  250  622 
Shryock  y.  Latimer,  67  Tex.  674  369 
Shufeldt  y.  Boehm,  96  111.  560 

773,  843,  1045 
Shultz  y.  Hoagland,  85  N.  Y. 

464 91 

Shultz  y.  Morgan,  27  La.  Ann. 

616. .  .232,  365,  688,  703,  706,    707 
Shumaker     y.     Dayidson,     116 

Iowa,  569 


page: 
57,  58,  171,  612,  669   671,    \)o^ 
Shumway  y.   Rutter,  24  Mass. 

56 618,  621,  548,  562,    636 

Shumway    y.     Rutter,    7   Pick. 

(Mass.)  66 633 

Shur  y.  Slater,  2  Ohio  Dec.  70.     688 
Shurmur  v.  Sedgwick,    24    Ch. 

Div.  (Eng.)  697 215 

Shurtleff  v.   Willard,  36  Mass. 

202 621,     550 

Shute  y.  Harder,  9  Tenn.  3.. 752,     763 

Sibley  y.  Hood,  3  Mo.  290 626 

Sible;^    y.    Nason    (Mass.),    81 

N.  E.  87 1179 

Sibley  y.  Stacey,  53  W.  Va.  292  L027 
Sibley  y.   Tutt,   1    McMul.   £q. 

(S.  C)  320 361 

Sibthorp  y.  Moxom,  3  Atk.  580 

60,  10& 
Sickman  y.  Abemathy,  14  Col. 

174 84,211,    70a 

Sickman  y.  Lapsley,  13  Serg.  k 

R.  (Pa.)  224 640 

Sickman  y.  Wilhelm,   130  Ind. 

480 1007 

Sidensparker  y.  Sidensparker, 

52  Me.  481 

299,  382,  434,  449,     832 
Sides  y.  Scharff,  93  Ala.  106.. 

824,  860,    071 
Siedenbach  y.  Riley,  111  N.  Y. 

560 619,  667,     910^ 

Siding  y.  Clark,  18  Misc.  K&p, 

(N.  Y.)  464 673. 

Saeyers  y.  Martin,  26  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

904 274 

Sigler   y.    Knox   County  Bank, 

8  Ohio  St.  511 272 

Sikking  y.  Fromm,  112  Ky.  773     897 
Sliberstein  y.   Stahl,  4  Am.  B. 

R.  626 1163 

SillidE  y.  Mason,  2  Barb.  Gh. 

(N.  Y.)  79 134 

Sillimfln  y.  Haas,  151  Pa.  St. 

52 839,     972 

Silloway  y.  Columbia  Ins.  Co., 

74  Mass.  199 815 

Silyer  y.  Lee,  38  Or.  608 753 

Silyis  y.  Oltmann,  53  Ql.  App. 

392 1004 

Silyers  y.  Potter,  48  N.  J.  Eq. 

639 386,  508,     509 

Silyerman's  Case,   2   Abb.    (U. 

S.)  243 1069,  1072,  1073 

Silyerman  v.  Greaser,  27  W.  Va. 

660 188,  189,  1061 

Silver  Valley  Min.  Co.  v.  North 


Table  of  Oases. 


ccxxvii 


PAGE 

Carolina.    Smeltiiig    Co.,    119 

N.  C.  417 276 

Silvey  ▼.  Tift,  17  Am.  B.  R.  9 

1195,  1196 
Simerson    y.    Branch   Bank,  12 

Ala.  206 667 

Simmons  v.  Biggs,  99  N.  C.  236  123 
Simmons  v.   Goldbacb,  66  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  204 696 

Simmons  y.  Ingram,    60    Miss. 

885  .  . .  .37,  85,  136,  193,  350,    822 
Simmons  y.   Johnson    48   Hun 

(N.  Y.),  131  .. 968 

Simmons  y.   Shelton,    112   Ala. 

284 678,     617 

Simmons  Clothing  Co.  y.  Dayis, 

3  Ind.  T.  374 997 

Simmons  Hardware  Co.  y.  Pfeil, 

36  Mo.  App.  266 990 

Simm»  y.  Lloyd,  68  Md.  477..  864 
Simma  y.  Morse,  2  Fed.  326 . . 

467,  617,  722,  896 
Sinuna  y.  Rickets,  36  Ind.  181.  141 
Bimms  y.  Tidwell,  98  Ga.  686. 

468,    613 
Simon  y.  Ash,  1  Tex.  Ciy.  App. 

202 333,  508,     685 

Simon  y.  Ellison,  22  S.  E.  860.  199 
Simon  y.  Levy,  36  Fla.  438.  .84,  211 
Simon  y.  McDonald,  86  Tex.  237  33 
Simon  y.  Norton,  66  Mo.  App. 

338 ,    291 

Simon  y.  Sabb,  56  S.  C.  38 826 

Simon-Gregory  Dry  Goods  Co.  y. 

Schooley,  66  Mo.  App.  406. . . 

681,     616 
Sim<ni'a  Estate,  20  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  450 640,     668 

Simons  y.  Bushy,  119  Ind.  13. .  1021 
Simons  y.  Daly  (Ida.),  72  Pac. 

607 541,    990 

Simons   y.    Goldbacb,    56    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  204 72,  333,    687 

Simons  y.  Morse,  2  Fed.  326. . .  616 
Simonson  y.  Burr,  121  iJal.  582  168 
Simonton  y.  Dayis,  4  Strob.  £q. 

(S.  C.)   133 64 

%np6on   y.   Grayes,    Riley  Eq. 

(S.  C.)  232 324 

Simpson  y.  Mills,  12  La.  Ann. 

173 187,    736 

Simpson   y.   Mitchell,    8   Yerg. 

(Tenn.)  417 72,  623,    666 

Simpson  y.   Simpson,  26  Tenn. 

275 172,  680,    722 

Simpson  y.  Van  Etten,  6  Am.  B. 

R.204 1142 


972 
151 


10(V 


PAQB 

Simpson  y.  Warren,  56  Me.  18.     203 
Simpson    y.    Westenberger,    28 

Kan.  756 ' 944 

Sims  y.  Albea,  72  Ga.  751 195 

Sims  y.  Gaines,  64  Ala.  397 .. . 

20,  33,  90,  135,  251,     433 
436,  440.     572 

Sims  V.  Gray,  93  Iowa,  38 

834,  836,     837 
Sims  V.  Moore,  74  Iowa,  497.. 
Sims  V.  Phillips,  54  Ark.  193.. 
Sims  y.  Rickets,  35  Ind.  181 .. . 

Sims  y.  Thomas,  9  L.  J.  Q.  B. 
399. •. 

Sims   y.    Walsham^    9    Ry.    L. 

^.ReP.  »12 .^.....     15^ 

Sinclair    y.    Healy,   40  Paw   St. 

*17 721 

Singer  y.  Jacobs,  11  Fed.  569. . 

o..  ..  ^87,    623 

Singer    y.    National     Bedstead 

Mfg.  Co.,  11  Am.  B.  R.  276..  1071 
Singer,  Baer  &  Co.  y.  Jacobs,  11 

Fed.   669 (512 

Singer   Mfg.    Co.    y.    Stephens, 

169  Mo.  1 660,     668 

Smgree  y.  Welch,  32  Ohio  St 

320 ; .  _     353 

Sinnickson    y.    Painter,  32  jpa. 

St   384 747 

K^msheimer  y.  Simonson,  6  Am. 

B.  R.  537    1216 

Sipe  V.  Barman,  26  Grat.  (Va.) 

„.^^3 241,  523,  1031 

Sipley  y.    Wass,   49  N.   J.   Eq. 

«.*®3.  .  .      709 

Sisson  y.  Roath,  30  Conn.  15.. 

679,    618 
Sayier    y.    Allen,    80  Mo.  App. 

187 597 

Skeele  y.  Stanwood,  33  Me.  307.  774 
Skellie  y.  James,  81  Ga.  419..  397 
Skewis  y.  Barthell,   18  Am.  B. 

R.  429. 1206,  1213,  1220 

Skiles  y.  Houston,   110  Pa.  St. 

248 701 

Skiles  y.  Nauman,   2   Lane.   L. 

Rey.   (Pa.)    145   701 

Skillen  y.   Endelman,   39   Misc. 

Rep.  (N.  Y.)  261 1126,  1205 

Skilton  y.  Coddington,  185  N. 

Y.  80 1116,  1119,  1124 

1135,  1221 
Skinner  y.  Jennings,  137  Ala. 

295 151,     157 

Skinner  y.  Judson,  8  Conn.  528.  1039 
Skipper  y.  Reeyes,  93  Ala.  332. 

962,     953 


ccxxviu 


Table  of  Cases. 


PACK 

Skipworth    v.    Oanningham,    8 

Leigh   (Va.)    271    463,    464 

Skowhegan  Bank  y.  Cutler,  49 

Me.  315 4,  27,  872,  1055,  1056 

1059,  1060 

Slack  V.  Oibbe,  14  Vt  367 1059 

Slagel  V.  Hoover,  137  Ind.  314. 

626,  851,     886 
Slater  y.  Dudley,  35  Mass.  373.    382 

Slater  v.  Moore,  86  Va.  26 971 

Slater  y.  Sherman,  68  Ky.  206. 

19,    201 
Slattery  y.  Ste^nurt,  45  Dl.  293. 

599,    619 
Slayden-Kirksey    Wbc^en    Mills 

y.  Anderson,  66  Ark.  419 

969,    966 
Sleeper  v.  Chapman,  121  Mass. 

404 916 

«leeper  v.  Pollard,  28  Vt.  709. .     646 
Slessinger  y.  Topkis,    1    Mary. 

(Del.)  140.... 458,  474,  582,  503 
^lingluff  y.  Hall,  124  N.  C.  397.  970 
Sloane  y.  Hunter,  66  S.  C.  385. 

462,  474,  480,  510,  557,  818,    977 
Sloan  y.  Thomas  Mfg.  Go.,   58 

Neb.  713 986 

Sloan  y.  Torry,  78  Mo.  623... 

711,    712 
Sloan  y.  Whalen,  16  U.  C.  C.  P, 

319 43 

Sloan  y.  Wherry.  61  Neb.  703. .     924 
Slusher  y.  Simpkinson,  101  Ky. 

594 827,    871 

Sly  y.  Bell   (Iowa),  108  N.  W. 

227 459,    506 

Small  y.  Muller,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

448 , 1222 

Smalley    y.    Lawrence,    9    Bob. 

(La.)  210 922 

Smalley  y.  Mass,  72  Iowa,  171. 

411,    797 
Smart  y.  Haring,  14  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  276 - 369 

Smart  y.  Harring,  62  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)   605    376,    586 

Smead    y.    Williams<m,    16    B.- 

Mon.    (Ky.)    492    231,    256 

Smethurst  y.  Thurston,  Brightly 

(Pa.),  127 149 

Smillie  y.  Quinn,  90  N.  Y.  492.     122 
Smiaer  y.   Steyens-Wolford  C6., 

20  Ky.  L.  Rep.  601 818 

Smit  y.  People,  16  Mich.  497 . . 

1062,  1066 
Smith  y.  Acker,  23  Wend.    (N. 

Y.)   663 619 

Smith  y.  A.  J.  Somers  Mfg.  Co., 


PAOB 

69   m.   App.    118 339 

Smith  y.  Allen,  39  Miss.  469 .. .  162 
Smith  y.  Allen,  87  Mass.  464..  326 
Smith  y.  AuGres  Township,   17 

Am.   B.  R.  745 116T 

Smith  y.  Baboock,  3  Sumn.   (U. 

S.)  683 871 

Smith  y.  Belden,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

432 1187 

Smith  y.  Belford,  6  Am.  B.  R. 

291 1215 

Smith    y.    Bigelow,    99    N.    W. 

(Iowa),  590 966 

Smith  y.  Blake,  1  Day  (Conn.), 

268 766,     757 

Smith  y.  Blank,  d  N.  C.  229.. 

418,  651,     668 
Smith  y.  Bouquet,  27  Tex.  607. 

63,  660 
Smith  y.  Bowen,  3  N.  C.  296. . .  177 
Smith  V.  Bowen,  3  N.  C.  483.  .*.  661 
Smith  y.  Bowen,  61  Neb.  246. . 

317,    461 

Smith  y.  Bover,  29  Neb.  76 236 

Smith    y.    Brockett^    69    Conn. 

492 943 

Smith  y.  Brown,  34  Mich.  456.  976 
Smith    y.    Butcher,    28    Graft. 

(Va.)   144 1047 

Smith  y.  Cahmpney,    50    Iowa, 

174 665 

Smith  y.  Chilton,  .84  Va.  840 . .  640 
Smith  y.   Crisman,   91   Pa.   Si. 

428 630,     567 

Smith  y.  Cockrell,  66  Ala.  64. . 

760,     769 
Smitii  y.  C611insy  94  Ala.  394 . . 

276,  392,  611,  892,  914,  919     920 
931,  934,  936,  964,  996,     998 

1002,  1003 
Smith  y.   Conkright,   28   Minn. 

23 418,  434,  440,  606,     711 

716,  1008 
Smith  y.  Cook,  10  App.  Cas.  (D. 

C.)  487 897 

Smith  y.  Cook,  39  Ga.  191 1046 

Smith  y.  Craft,  123  U.  S.  436. . 

430,  431,  433,  457,  466,     466 
481,  602,  603,     527 
Smith  y.  Clnoft,  12  Fed.  866. .. .     699 
Smith   y.   Culbertson,    9    Rich. 

(S.  C.)    106   201,  240,     243 

Smith  y.  Chird,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1060 778,     969 

Smith    y.    Deidridc,    30    Minn. 

60 460,     470 

Smith  y.  Dobbins,  87  Ga.  303. 

63,      55 


Table  of  Casks. 


ccxxi:; 


PAGE 

Smitli-Diinmidc  Lumber  Oo.  t. 

Teagoe,  119  Ala.  385 823 

Smith  T.  Elliott,  1  Pratt.  &  H. 

(Va.)   307 640,     641 

Smith  y.  Ellison,  80  Ark.  447..       97 
Smith  ▼.  EUiBon   (Ark.),  97  S. 

W.  666 770 

Smith  V.   Emerson,  43   Pa.  St 

466 164 

Smith  ▼.  Espy,  9  N.  J.  Eq.  160. 

207  212 
Smith  Y.  Ford,  48  Wis.  116. . . .'  826 
Smith  T.  49-66  Quartz  Min.  Co., 

14  Cal.  242  662 

Smith  T.  Ft.  Soott,  etc.,  R.  Co., 

99  U.  S.  398.  . 773,     846 

Smith  T.  Garland,  2  Meriv.  123.    640 
Smith  V.  Gaylord,  47  Conn.  380. 

187,  194,  195,  347 
Smith     V.     Gibson,     1     Yeates 

(Pa.),  291 636 

Smith  T.  Goodrich,    87    S.    W. 

(Ark.)   125 965,    966 

Smith     y.    Greer,     3     Humph. 

(Temi.)   118 146 

Smith  y.  Grimes,  43  Iowa,  356.    698 
Smith  y.  Hahn,  130  N.  Y.  694.   1051 

Smith  y.  Hall,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1662 M3 

Smith  y.  Hall,  103  Ala.  235 

418,  433,  658,  676 
Smith  y.  Hardy,  36  Wis.  417 . .  486 
Smith    y.   Heineman,    118    Ala. 

195 620,    711 

Smith  y.  Henry,    2    Bailey   (S. 

C),  118 240,     523 

Smith  y.  Henry,  1  Hill  (S.  C), 

16 414,  416,  462,     523 

Smith  y.  Hinson,  51  Tenn.  250. 

70,    758 

Smith  y.  Hubbs,  10  Me.  71 662 

Smith  y.  Hunter,  22  Fed.  Gas. 

No.  13,063 527 

Sbuth     y.     Hurst,      10     Hare 

(Eng.),  30 186 

Smith  y.  Hutchcraft,  2  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  6 65,    649 

Smith  y.  J.  A.   Sonmiers  Mfg. 

Co.,  69  HI.  App.  230 378 

Bmitk  y.  Jennings,  81  Mbas.  69.    306 
Smith  y.  Jensen,  13  Colo.  213. . 

907,  944,     979 
Smith  y.  J<mesy  63  Ark.  232. . . . 

87,  311,  519,    538 
Smitii  y.  Kaufman,  94  Ala.  364    616 

Smith  y.  Kaufman,  100  Ala.  408    994 
Smith  y.  Kehr,  2  Dill.  (U.  S.) 
50 169,  1138 


PAGE 

Smith  y.  Kelly,  56  Me.  64 874 

Smith  y.  Kenny,  1  MJadcey  (D. 

C),  12 445 

Smith  y.  Kinne,  19  Vt  564... 

1000,  1057 
Smith  y.  Lane,  3  Pick.   (Mass.) 

205 140,     144 

Smith  y.  Lasher,  5  Johns.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)  247  875 

Smith  y.  Lee,  79  Mich.  465 973 

Smith  y.  Littlejohn,  2  McCord 

(S.  C),  362   349 

Smith  y.  Logan,  52  Neb.  585..  603 
Smith  y.  Lowell,  6  N.  H.  67 . . .  441 
Smith  y.  Mack,  94  Iowa,  539. . .  305 
Smith  y.  Mason,  81  U.  S.  419. .  1213 
Smith  y.  McDonald,  25  Ga.  677.  563 
Smith  y.  Millett,  12  R.  I.  59. . .  774 
Smith  V.  Missouri  Valley  L.  Ins. 

Co.,   4   Dill.    (U.   S.)    363... 

124,  127 
Smith  y.  Moflfatt,  28  U.  C.  Q. 

B.  486 582,     627 

Smith  y.  Montoya,  3  N.  M.  39. .  1000 
&nith  y.  Muirhead,  34  N.  J.  Eq. 

4 6,  627,     807 

Smith  y.  Munroe,   1   App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)    77    499,    502 

Smith  y.  National  R.,  etc..  Ex- 
position Assoc.,  4S  Mo.  App. 

462 461 

Smith  y.  Neufeld,  61  Neb.  699.  153 
Smith  y.  Newlon,  62  Miss.  230.  751 
Smith  y.  New  York  L.  Ins.  Co., 

57  Fed.  133 28,    236 

Smith  y.  Niel,  8  N.  C.  341 . .  522,  986 
Smith  V.  O'Brien,  57  N.  J.  L. 

365 332 

Smith  y.  Onion,  19  Vt.  427... 

251,  443 
Smith  y.  Parker,  41  Me.  452. . .  413 
Smith  y.  Parry  Mfg.  Co.,  9  Kan. 

App.  877 237,    973 

Smith  y.  Pate,  3  S.  0.  204 

318,  583 
Smith  y.  Patton,  194  111.  638..  102 
Smith  y.  PaUison,  84  Md.  241.  613 
Smith  y.   Ferine,   49  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  605 290,  295,     356 

Smith  y.  Phelan,  40  Neb.  765. .  605 
Smith  y.  Post,  3  Thomps.  &  C. 

(N.  Y.)    647    582 

Smillie  y.  Quinn,  90  N.  Y.  493. 

151,  154 
Smith  y.  Rankin,  45  Kan.  176.  307 
Smith  y.  Reayis,  29  N.  0.  341.. 

188,  269,    279 
Smith  y.  Reid,  11  N.  Y.  Supp. 

739 893 


ccxxx 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

'Smith  V.  Reid,  134  N.  Y.  668.. 

66,  68,  69,  206,  263,  338,     345 
734,  736,  739,  740,     902 

977,  978 
8mith  V.  Riegs,  56  Iowa,  488..  310 
Smith   V.   Ringgold,    Fed.    Caa. 

No.  13,101 627 

Smith  V.  Rogers,  1   Stew.  &  P. 

(Ala.)    317 -. 967 

Smith  V.  Rumsev,  33  Mich.  183. 

206,  816 
Smith  ▼.  Sands,  17  Neb.  498.. 

686,  687 
Smith  y.  Schmitz,  10  Neb.  600. 

340.  344,  686 
Smith  V.  Schwed,  9  Fed.  483 . .  601 
Smith  ▼.  Selz,  114  Ind.  229... 

330,  847 
Smith  V.  Seiberling,  36  Fed.  677  359 
Smith  V.  Sherman,  52  Mich.  637  871 
Smith  V.  Skeary,  47  CJonn.  47..     458 

Small  T.  Small,  66  Kan.  1 254 

Smith  V.  Smith,  11  N.  H.  460. . 

426,  449 
Smith  V.  Smith,  11  N.  H.  469. 

274,  280,     299 

Fmith  V.  Smith,  21  Pa.  367 677 

Smith  V.  Smith,  24  S.  C.  304 . .  376 
Smith    ▼.    Cook,   10   App.  Cas. 

(D.  C.)   487   180 

Smith  ▼.  Spencer,  73  Ala.  299.  306 
Smith   V.   Summerfield,    108   N. 

O.  284 816,  847,    851 

Smith  ▼.  Tarbox,  70  Me.  127..  944 
Smith  V.  Tate,  30  Ind.  App.  367 

489,     850 

Smith  V.  Tonstall,  Carth.  3 756 

Smith  V.  Toeini,  1  S.  D.  632 . . . 

37,  40,  898,  913,  929,  963,  966 
Smith  V.  Utesch,  85  Iowa,  381.  972 
Smith  V.  Van  Olinda,  48  N.  Y. 

169 62,      63 

Smith  y.  Vodges,  92  U.  S.  183. 

189,  351,  569,  1139 
Smith  V.  Vreeland,  16  N.  J.  Eq. 

198 337 

Smith  y.  Waggoner,  60  Wis.  166  535 
Smith  V.  Welch,  10  Wis.  91 . . .  623 
Smith  V.  Wellborn,  76  Ga.  799. 

240,  612,  914,     924 
Smith   V.  Wells  Mfg.   Oo.,    148 

Ind.  333 211,    212 

Smith  y.  Whitfield,  67  Tex.  124 

309,  462,  493,    595 
Smith  y.  Whitman,  88  Mass.  562 

969,  967 
Smith  ▼.   Wood,  42  N.  J.   Eq. 


PAGE 

663 731,  759,  768,     856 

Smith  y.  Wright,  2  N.  Brunsw. 

Eq.  528   611 

Smith     y.     Wright,    6     Blackf. 

(Ind.)   550   766 

Smith  y.  Yell,  8  Ark.  470 

278,  283,  338,  344 
Smitheal  v.  Gray,  20  Tenn.  491  763 
Smitherman  y.  Allen,  59  N.  C. 

17 734,     760 

Smiser  v.  Steyens-Wolford  Co., 

20  Ky.  L.  Rep.  601 691 

Smock  y.  Jones,  11  Atl.  (N.  J.) 

497 361 

Smyth  y.  Carlisle,  17  N.  H.  417 

81,  192,  348,  441,  462,  918,     9^ 
Smyth  y.  Hall,  126  Iowa,  627. . 

908,     954 
Smyth    y.    Reber,    18   Atl.    (N. 

J.)    462    362 

Snapp  y.  Snapp,  87  Ky.  654 . . .  160 
Snapp  y.  Orr,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

365 67,  737 

Snarr  y.  Waddell,  24  U.  C.  Q. 

B.  165   43 

Snayberger  y.  Fahl,  196  Pa.  St. 

336 312,  461,  471,  495 

498,  600,  581,  595,  996,    997 
Snedeker  y.  Sncdeker,   18  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  365    206,    792 

Snell  y.  Harrison,  104  Mo.  158 

958,  960,    964 
Snellgraye    y.    Eyans,    40    So. 

(Ala.)    567    312 

Snoddy   y.   Haskins,    12   Gratt. 

(Va.)    363    676 

Snodgrass  y.  Andrews,  30  Miss. 

472 641,  676,  765,     766 

805,  811,  813,  824 
Snodgrass  y.  Branch  Bank,  25 

Ala.  161  676,  864,  949 

Snodgrass    y.    Decatur    Branch 

Bank,  26  Ala.  161  179,    933 

Snouffer  y.  ELinley,  96  Iowa,  102 

76,    060 
Snow  y.  Paine,  114  Mass.  620. . 

580,    046 
Snowball    y.   Neilson,    16   Can. 

Sup.  Ct  719 964,    967 

Snyder  ▼.   Berger,  3   Pa.  Cas. 

318 994,  096 

Snyder  y.  Bougher,  16  Am.  B. 

R.  792  1190 

Snyder  y.  Christ,  39  Pa.  St  490    352 
Snyder  v.  Christ,  39  Pa.  St  499 

191,    105 


Table  of  Cases. 


ocxxxi 


PAOB 

Snyder  y.  Dangler,  44  Neb.  000 

522,  667,  688,    010 
Snyder  ▼.  Free,  114  Mo.  360. . . 

276,  342,  344,  377,    381 
384,  672,  922,    976 
Snyder  ▼.  Qee,  4  Leigh    (Va,), 

636 653 

Snyder    v.    Grandstaff,    96    Va. 

473 323 

Snyder  ▼.  Afartin,  52  Ind.  434. .  146 
Snyder    v.    Partridge,    138    111. 

173 217 

Snvder  y.    Perger,   3   Pa.   Cas. 

318 947 

Snyder  ▼.  Snyder,  61  Md.  77 . . 

639,    666 
Sobemheimer  ▼.  Wheeler,  46  N. 

J.  £q.  614  768 

Sockman  v.  Sockman,  18  Ohio, 

362 1021 

Soden  ▼.   Soden^  34  N.  J.  Eq. 

116 182 

Solberg  ▼.   Peterson,  27   Minn. 

431 968 

Solinger  y.  Earl,  82  N.  Y.  393 .  649 
Solinsky  y.  Lincoln  Say.  Bank, 

86  Tenn.  368   1024 

Solomons  y.  Chealey,  68  N.  H. 

238 649 

Solomon  y.  C.  M.  Schneider  k 

Co.,  66  Neb.  680 461 

Solomon  y.  Smith,  16  Ck)lo.  293  883 
Solomon  y.  Sparks,  27  Ga.  386  473 
Solomon  y.  Wright   (Tex.  Ciy. 

App.),  28  S.  W.  414 70 

Solomon  y.  Wright,  8  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.  665   919,    922 

Soly  y.  Aaaen,  10  N.  D.  108. . . 

200,    967 
Somera  y.  Pmnphrey,  24   Ind. 

231 719 

Somera    y.    Smyth,    3    Deaana. 

(8.  C.)  214   890 

Sommer  y.  New  York  Eley.  R. 

Co.,  14  N.  Y.  Supp.  619 779 

Sommermeyer  y.   Schwarta,  89 

Wia.   66    232 

Sommerm^er       y.       Sommer- 
meyer, 89  Wis.  66 696,    697 

Sommers  y.  Cottentin,  26  App. 

Diy.   (N.  Y.)  241... 537,  696,    626 
Sommers  y.  Bamberger,  91  Wis. 

107 640 

Sommenrille  y.  Horton,  4  Yerg. 

(Tenn.)   541    72,    556 

Songer    y.    Partridge,    107    HI. 

629 269,  463,  650,    652 


PAGE 

Sonnenschein     y.     Bantels,     41 

Neb.  703    927,  1062 

Sonnentheil  y.  Christian  Moer- 

lein  Brewing  Co.,   172  U.  S. 

401 9,  914,    978 

Sonnentheil     y.     Texas     Guar- 
anty, etc.,  Co.,   10  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.  274. .  .74,  608,  916,  926,  1004 
Sonstiby  y.  Keeley,  11  Fed.  678  305 
Sorrells  v.  Sorrells,  4  Ark.  296  720 
South  Alabama  Oil,  etc.,  Co.  y. 

Garner,  112  Ala.  447 34 

South  Bend  Iron  Works  Co.  y. 

Duddleson,  27  N.   E.    (Ind.) 

312 679,    946 

South    Branch    Lumber    Co.    y. 

Steams,  2  Ind.  App.  7 520 

South    Omaha    Nat.    Bank    y. 

Boyd   (Ark.  1906),  97  N.  W. 

288 298 

South    Omaha    Nat.    Bank    y. 

Chase,  30  Neb.  444   1051 

Southard  v.  Benner,  72  N.  Y. 

424. . .  186,  203,  665,  772,  778,  844 
Southard   y.   Pindmey,   6   Abb. 

N.  C.    (N.  Y.)    184 619,    554 

Southern    Bank    y.    Wood,    14 

La.  Ann.  664 67 

Southern     Dry     Dock     Co.     y. 

Bayou   Sara   Packet   Co.«   24 

La.  Ann.  217    680 

Southern  Flour  Co.  y.  Mclyer, 

109  N.  C.  120 963,  964,    968 

Southern     Home     Bldg.,     etc., 

Assoc,  y.  Riddle,  129  AU.  662    897 
Southern  L.  ft  T.  Co.  y.  Ben- 
bow,  136  N.  C.  303 

992,   1001,  1072,   1078,  1221 
Southern  Lumber,  etc.,  Co.   y. 

Verdier  (Fla.),  40  So.  676..  897 
Southern  Pine  Co.  y.  Sayannah 

Trust  Co.  (C.  C.  A.),  15  Am. 

B.  R.  618  1197 

Southern    White    Lead    Co.    y. 

Haas,  73  Iowa,  390.  .473,  487,  490 
Southern    White    Lead    Co.    y. 

Haaa,   73  Iowa,  899 459 

Southwood  y.  Southwood,  98  8. 

W.   (Ky.)  304   634 

Sowlea  y.  Wittera,  55  Fed.  159 

42,  44,    604 
Spader  y.  Dayis,  6  Johns.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)    280    101,     117 

Spalding  y.  Brown,  36  Or.  160.     617 
Spalding  y.  Heideman,  96  111. 

App.   405    468 

Sparhawk  y.  Cloon,   126  Maaa. 


ccxxxu 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGS 

263 134 

Sparhawk  ▼.  Yerkes,  142  U. 

S.  1  1199 

Sparkes  v.  Ponder^  94  S.  W. 

(Tex.)  428  311 

Sparks  ▼.  Ck>l8oii,  109  Ky.  711.  409 
Sparks  ▼.  Mack,  31  Ark.  666 . . 

413,  415,  433,  437,  467,     960 
Sparrow  v.  Chesley,  19  Me.  79. 

171,    721 
Spaulding  y.  Adams,  63  Iowa, 

437 267,  919,  922,     923 

Spaulding  v.  Austin,  2  Vt.  666 

304,  334,  482,  644 
Spaulding  ▼.  Blythe,  73  Ind.  93  861 
Spaulding  ▼.  Fisher,  67  Me.  411 

100,  101,  757,  1056 
Spaulding  t.  Keyes,  1  Silv.  Sup. 

(N.  Y.)   203   .161,     166 

Spaiilding  v.  Keyes,  126  N.  Y. 

115 90,    944 

Spaulding  v.  Myers,  64  Ind.  264 

679,  866,  869,     861 
Spaulding  v.  Strange,  37  N.  Y. 

136 466,     466 

Spear  v.  Campbell,  6  111.  424..  820 
Spear  ▼.  Rood,  61  Mich.  140..  303 
Spears    v.    Shropshire,    11    La. 

Ann.  569    322 

Spear  v.  Spear   (Me.  1903),  64 

Atl.   1106    8 

Spear  v.  Spear,  97  Me.  498 

299,  342,  339,     585 
Spelman  y.   Freedman,   130  N. 

Y.  421    772,  842,    845 

Spence  y.  Dunlap,  74  Tenn.  467  269 
Spence  ▼.  Repass,  27  S.  £.  (Va.) 

683 366 

Spenoe  y.  Repass,  94  Va.  716.. 

141,  398,     795 
Spence  y.  Smith,  34  W.  Va.  697 

712,    905 

Spencer      ▼.      Armstrong,      59 

Tenn.    707    789 

Spencer  y.  Ayrault>   10  N.  Y. 

202 311,    334 

Spencer  y.  Broughton,  77  0>nn. 

38 526 

Spencer  y.  Duplan  Silk  Co.,  11 

Am.  B.  R.  563   1181,  1209 

Spencer  y.  Godwin,  30  Ala.  355 

337,    711 
Spencer  y.  Mugge  (Fla.),  34 

So.  271   520 

Sperry  y.  Baldwin,  46  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  120    946 

Sperry  y.  Kain,  84  Iowa,  203..   1062 


page: 
Sperry  y .  Haslam,  57  Ga.  412 . . 

146,  149,    361 
Spicer  y.  Ayers,  2  Thomps.  k 

C.    (N.  Y.)    626 789 

Spicer   y.   Ayers,   63   How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    405    

191,   249,   264,   278,     285 
Spicer  v.  Hunter,   14  Abb.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    4    825 

Spicer  y.  Robinson,  73  111.  519  722 
Spiegel    y.    Hays,    6    St.    Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    879    43a 

Spiegel  V.  Hayes,  118  N.  Y.  660 

1000,  1001 

Spielman  v.  Knowles,  50  N.  J. 

Eq.  796 19G 

Spiers   v.    Whitesell,     21     Ind. 

App.  204 299,     585 

Spies  y.   Boyd,   1   £.  D.  Smith 

(N.  Y.),  445 71 

Spies  V.   Boyd,    11   N.   Y.   Leg. 

Obs.  64 439 

Spindler  y.  Atkinson,  3  Md.  409 

67,  648,  734,     738 
Spindle   y.    Shreve,    111    U.    S. 

542 86,     134 

Spinner  y.  Weick,  50  Ind.  213. 

376,     686 
Spirett  V.  Willows,  10  L.  T.  Rep. 

N.  S.  460 349 

Spirett  V.  Willows,  11  Jur.  N. 

S.   (Eng.)   70 280 

Spitz  y.  Kerfoot,  42  Mo.  App. 

77 1044 

Spiyey  y.  Wilson,  31  La.  Ann. 

653 620,     563 

SpUwn  y.  Martin,  17  Ark.  146  683 
Spitford  y.  Weston,  29  Me.  140  221 
Spooner  y.  Hilbish,  92  Va.  333  209 
Spooner  y.  Trayelers'  Ins.  Co., 

76  Minn.  311 96,  771,    799 

Sporer  v.  Dale,  5  Pa.  Co.  Ct.  611  34 
Sporrer  y.  Eifler,  48  Tenn.  633  392 
Spoors   y.   Cowen,  44  Ohio  St. 

497 813 

Spotten  y.  Keeler,  12  St.  Rep. 

385 

274,  340,  382,  412,  418,  528,     572 
Sprague  y.  Benson,    101   Iowa, 

678 64,     513 

Sprague  y.  Gardiner,  6  S.  D.  246  235 
Sprague  y.  Graham,  29  Me.  160  200 
Sprague  y.  Ryan,  11  S.  D.  54. . .  681 
Spratlin  y.  Colson,  80  Miss.  278  621 
Spratt  y.  h&rly,  169  Mo.  357. 

160,     967 
Spricer  v.  Ayers,  53  How.   Pr. 


Table  of  Cases. 


CCXXXlll 


PAfflD 

(N.  Y.)  406 178 

Spring  Lake  Ins.  Go.  t.  Waters, 

60  Mich.  13 680 

Springer  ▼.  Bigford,  160  111.  406 

170,     187 
Springer  ▼.  IhrosclL  32  Ind.  486 

642,    656 
Springer  v.  Kruger,  3  Colo.  App. 

487 049 

Springfield      Grocery     Co.      ▼. 

Thomas,  3  Ind.  T.  330 

701,  797,  1047 
Springfield  Homestead  Assoc,  v. 

R<dl,  137  lU.  206 

631,  650,  653,     658 
Sprogg   V.   Dichman,    28   Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)   409..  117,  818,     824 
Sproul  V.  Atchison  Nat.  Bank, 

22  Jlan.  336 169,    374 

Spruck  V.  Logan,  97  Md.  152 . . 

16,  183,  188,  194,  434,  576,    626 
Spurlock  y.  Mainer,  1  La.  Ann. 

301 371 

Spurrier  y.  Haley,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

364 610 

Squier  y.  Mechanics'  Nat.  Bank, 

35  N.  J.  Eq.  344 42 

Squires  v.  Riggs,  4  N.  C.  253. .     220 
St  Cyr.  V.  Daignault,  4  Am.  B. 

R.  638 1143 

Stacker  y.   Wilson    (Tenn.   Ch. 

App.),  52  S.  W.  709 849 

Stackhouae  y.  Holden,    66  App. 

Diy.  (N.  Y.)  423. . .  .256,  466,     647 
Staqr  y.  Deahaw,   7   Hun    (N. 

Y.),449 95,309,    918 

Stadtler  y.  Wood,  24  Tex.  622 

623,  530,  944 
Stafford  y.  Uck,  7  Cal.  479. . .  560 
Straight  y.  RoberU,    126  Ind. 

383 '. 697 

Stainbrook  y.   Duncan,  45   111. 

App.  344 468 

Staller  y.   Kirkpatrick,  1  Mona. 

(Pft.)  486 193,  349,  569,    990 

Btam  y.  Smith,  183  Mo.  464.. 

91,  97,  152,  160   563,  947,  1051 
SUmlord    Bank   ▼.    Ferrisy    17 

Conn.  269 936 

SUmp  y.  Case,  41  Mich.  267..  553 
Stamy  y.  Laning,  58  Iowa,  662  691 
Standard    Implement     Co.    y. 

Farlin,  etc,  Co.,  51  Kan.  632 

473,    597 
SUndard  Nat.  Bank  y.  Garfield 

Nat.  Bank,  70  App.  Diy.   (N. 

Y.)  46 172,    726 


PAGE 

Standard     Varnish     Works    y. 

Haydock   (C.  C.  A.),  16  Am. 

B.  R.  286 1196 

Stange  y.  Graham,  56  Ala.  614    635 
Stanley     v.     National     Union 

Bank,  116  N.  Y.  122 115 

Stanley  y.  Bobbins,  36  Vt.  422 

272,  383,    529 
Stanley  y.  Schwalby,  162  U.  S. 

aOO    •     .     , ^Ul,      £<o4L 

Stanley  y.  Smith,  15  Or.  505..   1000 
Standard  Paper  Co.  y.  Guenther, 

67  Wis.  101 253 

Stanton  y.  Crane,  25  Ney.  114. . 

138,  295 
Stanton  y.  Embry,  46  Conn.  595  788 
Stanton  v.  Green,  34  Miss.  576 

460,  661,  663,  823,  875,  877,     912 
Stanton  y.  Keyes,  14  Ohio  St. 

Stanton  y.  Kirsch,  6  Wis.  338.     898 
Stanton  y.  Shaw,  62  Tenn.  12. 

83,  143,  653,     668 
Staples    y.    Bradley,    23    Conn. 

167 212,     737 

Staples  y.  Smith,  48  Me.  470. .     925 
Stapleton  y.  Brannan,  102  Wis. 

26 418,     426 

Starin  v.  Kelly,  88  N.  Y.  418 . . 

5,   14,  493,  614,  578,  009,     945 
Starin  v.  Kelly,  36  Super.  Ct. 

(N.  Y.)  366  .  .  .297,  312,  662,     703 
Stark  y.  Grant,  16  N.  Y.  Supp. 

626 519 

Starke  y.  Lamb    (Ind.),  78  N. 

E.  668 809,  877,    890 

Stark  y.  lattiepage,    4    Rand. 

(Va.)  368 633,    646 

Stark  y.  Ward,  3  Pa.  St.  328 

527,  558,     714 
Starks  y.  Batea,   12  How.  Pr. 

(N.   f.)   65 813 

Starkweather  y.  Cleyeland  Ins. 

Co.,  2  Abb.  (U.  S.)  67..  1189,  1191 
Starr  y.  Doj»r,  108  N.  W.  (Neb.) 

1065 310 

Starr  y.  PUnt,  28  Conn.  377 . .     599 
Starr  y.  Rathbone,  1  Barb.  (N. 
Starr  y.  Starr,  l  Ohio,  321.312,    563 
Starr  y.  Strong,  2  Sandf.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)   139 218,    278 

Starr  y.  Tnu^,  2  Root  (Conn.), 

528 66,  741,    742 

SUrr  V.  vVright,  20  Ohio  St  97    678 

State  y.  Aebly,  9  Mo.  55 1001 

State  V.  Bowen,  38  W.  Va.  91 

761,  778,  1022,  1034 


•CCXXZIY 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOK 

State  y.  Bragg,  63  Mo.  App.  22  1062 
State    V.    Burkebolder,    30    W. 

Va.  593 239 

State  V.  Casteel,  51   Mo.  App. 

143 567 

State  y.  Chapman,  68  Me.  477 .  1062 
State  V.  Cryts,  87  Mo.  App.  440  904 
State  y.  Diveling,  66  Mo.  375 . .  162 
State  y.  Durant,  53   Mo.  App. 

493 529,  566,     603 

State  y.  Estel,  6  Mo.  App.  6.. 

221,  575,     615 

State  y.  Evans,  38  Mo.  150 527 

State  y.  Excelsior  Distilling  Co., 

20  Mo.  App.  21 

72,    75,   309,    461,     481 
State  y.  Fife,  2  Bailey   (S,  C.) 

377 302 

State  y.  Flynn,  56  Mo.  App.  236  538 
State  y.  Flynn,  66  Mo.  App.  373  529 
State  y.  Foot,  27  S.  C.  340. .. . 

844,  851,  870 
State  y.  Goetz,  131  Mo.  675.526,  628 
State  y.  Uellman,  20  Mo.  App. 

304 552,  991,  1002 

State  y.  Hope,   102  Mo.  410.. 

230,  332,  333,  581,  594,  907,  1001 
State  y.  Jacobs,  2  Mo.  App.  183.  418 
State  y.  Johnson,  33  N.  U.  441 

1064,  1065 
State  y.  Jones,  83  Mo.  App.  151  376 
SUte  y.  Koch,  47  Mo.  App.  269  153 
State  y.  Laurie,  1  Mo.  App.  371  575 
State  y.  Leslie,  16  N.  U.  93..  1063 
State     y.     Manhattan     Rubber 

Mfg.  Co.,  149  Mo.  181 976 

SUte  y.  Marsh,  36  N.  H.  196. .  1062 
SUte  y.  Martin,  77  Conn.  142 . . 

278,  283,  347,  350,     909 
State  T.  Mason,  112  Mo.  374.. 
231,  232,  354,  355,  494, 
580,  594,  615,  619,  940,  986,     992 
SUte  T.  McBrid^  105  Mo.  265 

92,   129,  131,    450 
SUte  y.  Merritt,  70  Mo.  275 . . 

30, 250,  257,  258,  526,  528,  530,  986 
SUte  y.  Miller,  98  Ind.  70. . .  1063 
SUte  y.  Mueller,  10  Mo.  App. 

87 418,    428 

SUU  y.  Nauert,  2  Mo.  App.  295 

574,  584,  690 
SUte  ex  rel.  O'Bryan  y.  KoonU, 

83  Mo.  323 282 

SUte  y.  O'Neill,  151  Mo.  67.. 

253,    997 
SUte  y.  Osbom,  143  Ind.  671. . 

322,  324,  833,  834,    836 


PA6B 

SUte  y.  Parsons,  147  Ind.  679 

852,  853,  861,  862,    877 
SUte  ex  rel.  Pierce  y.  Merritt, 

70  Mo.  275 272 

SUte  y.  Purcell,   131   Mo.   212 

674,  615 
State  y.  Smith,  31  Mt.  566.. 894,  911 
SUte  y.  SUte  Bank,  6  Gill  &  J. 

(Md.)   205 460 

State  y.  Tomlinson,  16  Ind.  App. 

662 121 

SUte  V.  True,  20  Mo.  App.  176 

408,  409 
SUte  V.  Wallace,  67  Iowa,  77. .  193 
State    V.     William     Barr    Dry 

Goods  Co.,  45  Mo.  App.  96 .   1006 
SUte  y.   Wilson,  66  Mo.  App. 

540 1062,  1064 

SUte  Bank  v.  Backus,  160  Ind. 

682 253,  475,  561,  1007,  1008 

SUte    Bank   y.    Ellis,    30    Ala. 

478 808,     853 

State  Bank  y.  First  Nat.  Bank, 

34  N.  J.  Eq.  450 88 

SUte  Bank  v.  Fr^,  3  Neb.  83.     350 
State  Bank  of  Chase  y.  Chatten, 

69  Kan.  435 195,     9l0 

SUte  Bank  of  Chicago  v.  Cox, 

16  Am.  B.  R.  32 1178,  1184 

SUte  Bank  of  Indiana  y.  Har- 
row, 26  Iowa,  426 411 

SUte  Bank  y.  Whittle,  48  Mich. 

1 386,     510 

SUte  Ins.  Co.  y.  PresUge,  116 

Iowa,  466 

160,  782,  900,  901,  906,     955 
SUte  Grimm  y.  Manhattan  Rub- 
ber Mfg.  Co.,  149  Mo.  181..     607 
SUte,  Kramer  y.  Mason,  96  Mo. 

559 308 

SUte,  Little    y.    Parsons,   147 

Ind.  579 808 

SUte,  Pierce  y.  Merritt,  70  Mo. 

276 616 

SUte  Trust  Co.  y.  Casino  Co., 

19  App.  Diy.   (N.  Y.)   344..     648 
SUton   y.    Pittman,    11    Gratt. 

(Va.)  99 204 

SUuffer  y.  Kennedy,  47  W.  Va. 

714 896,     954 

SUyers  y.  SUyers,  69  N.  H.  158 

435,  452 
St.  Ayid    y.    Weimprender,    9 

Mart.  (La.)  648  ...  .« 392 

Stead  y.  Mahon,  70  Mo.  App. 

400 977 

Steadman  y.  Hayes,  80  Mo.  319     179 


Table  of  Cases. 


ooxxxv 


PAOS 

8teadman  v.  Wilbur,  7  R.  I.  481  369 
Stearns  y.  Gage,  79  N.  Y.   102 

426,  715,     718 
Stebbins  ▼.  Miller,  94  Mass.  591 

916,  939,  1001 
Stedman  ▼.  Bank  of  Monroe,  9 

Am.  B.  R.  4 1122,  1135 

Stedman  v.  Vickerj,  42  Me.  132  307 
Steel  y.  Brown,  1  Taunt,  381  638 
Steele  v.  Benham,  84  N.  ^.  634 

528,  534 
Steele  ▼.  Buel,  5  Am.  B.  R.  165.  1201 
Steele  t.  De  May,  102  Mich.  274  398 
Steele  t.  Farber,  37  Mo.  71..  416 
Steele  y.   Miller    (Pa.),   1  Atl. 

434 527,  534,  538,  543,     544 

Steele  y.  Moore,  54  Ind.  52..501,  637 
Steele  y.  Parsons,  9  Mo.  823..  667 
Steele  y.  Ward,  25  Iowa,  535. .  580 
Steeley  v.  Steeley,  23  Ky.  L.Rei>. 

966 91,  94,     121 

Steelwagon  y.   Jeffries,   44   Pa. 

St.  407 531 

Steere  y.  Bigelow,  39  111.  264. .  436 
Steere  y.  Hoagland,  39  111.  264 

231,  171,  172,  669,  673,  698,    789 
Btehdman  y.  Uuber,  21  Pa.  St. 

260 131,    674 

Stein  Y.  Burnett,  43  Mo.  App. 

477 706 

Stein  Y.  Gibbons,  16  La.  103..  199 
Stein  Y.  Hermann,  23  Wis.  132  318 
Stein  Y.  LeYy,  55  Hun  (N.  T.), 

381 474 

Steinam  y.  Gahwiler,  (Tex.  CIy. 

App.),  30  S.  W.  472.... 392,     395 
Steinberg  y.   Buffum,   61   Neb. 

778 581,  594,  602,     908 

Steiner  y.  Atlanta  Woodmware 

Co.,  127  Ala.  261 953 

Steiner  y.  Berney,  130  Ala.  289  159 
Steiner  y.  Lowery,  98  Ala.  208.  309 
Steiner  y.  Parker,  108  Ala.  357  816 
Steiner  y.  Scholze,  114  Ala.  88  441 
Steiner  Land,  etc.,  Co.  y.  King, 

118  Ala.  546.. 816,  845,  856,    869 
Steininger  y.  Donalson,  94  Ga. 

514 996 

Steinkrans   y.    Korth,   44   Keb. 

777 511,  961,    967 

Steinmeyre  y.    Steinmeyer,    55 

8.  C.  9 338,  646,  904,     973 

Stelling  Y.  G.  W.  Jones  Lum- 
ber Co.,  116  Fed.  261 540,    542 

Stenson  y.  Williams,  35  Ga.  170  98 
Stephens  y.  Adair,  82  Tte.  214 

633,    640 


PAGE 

Stephens  y.  Allen   (CiY.  App.) 

(Tex.),  31  S.  W.  717 250 

Stephens  y.  Beal.  4  Ga.  319..  798 
Stephens  v.  Cady,  14  How.  (U. 

S.)  528 118 

Stephens  y.  Gifford,  137  Pa.  St. 

219 527,     646 

Stephens  y.  Hallstead,   58    Cal. 

193 1007 

Stephens  y.  Harrow,  26    Iowa, 

468 631,  634,     650 

Stephens  y.  McArthur,  19  Can. 

Sup.  Ct.  446 468 

Stephens   y.   OliYe,   2   Bro.   Ch. 

(Eng.)   90 291,     328 

Stephens    y.    Oppenheimer,    46 

Ark.    492    907 

Stephens  y.  Parvin   (Colo.),  78 

Pac.   688    799,     875 

Stephens  y.  Perrine,  143  N.  Y. 

476 454,  1136 

Stephens  y.  Reginstein,  89  Ala. 

561 430,  448,     471 

Stephens  y.   Sherman,  22   Fed. 

Cas.  No.   13,369a    31 

Stephens  y.  Whitehead,  75  Ga. 

294 819,  868,     869 

Stephenson  y.  Clark,  20  Vt.  624 

533,  544,  990 
Stephenson  y.  Cook«  64  Iowa, 

265 898 

Stephenson  y.  Donahue,  40  Ohio 

St.   184    184 

Stephenson  y.  Felton,  106  N.  C. 

114 879,  963,    966 

Steppacher  y.  Saunders,  74  Mo. 

App.   475    634 

Sterling  y.  Baldwin,  42  Vt.  306    642 
Sterling   y.    Ripley,    3    Chandl. 

(Wis.)  166  ...  .392,  684,  523,    696 
Sterling  y.  Wagner,  3  Wyo.  6. 

969,  1032 
Stem  Y.  Butler,  123  Ala.  606. .  66 
Stem  Y.  LouisYille  Trust  Co.,  7 

Am.  B.  R.  305....  1077,  1161,  1167 
Stem  Y.  Mayer,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

763 1161 

Stem  Y.   Mayer,    19   Mo.  App. 

611 49 

Stem  Y.  Sedden,  7  Ky.  178 711 

Stern     Auction,     etc.,     O).     y. 

Mason,  16  Mo.  App.  473.  .231,    992 
Sterrett  y.  Buffalo  Third  Nat. 

Bank,   10  St.   Rep.    (N.  Y.) 

818 742 

Sterry  y.  Arden,  1   Johns.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)  261   219,  322,    325 


CCXXXVl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Stetson  ▼.  MiUer,  36  Ala.  642. 

472,    499 
Stetson  ▼.  (VSullivan,  90  Mass. 

321 141,     146 

Steuben    County    Wine    Co.    ▼. 

Lee,   127  Mich.  698   314 

Stevens  v.  Bank,  101  Mass.  109  1179 

Stevens  v.  Bell,  6  Mass.  339 

303,  472,  482,    487 
Stevens  v.  Breen,  75^Wis.  595. 

393,  463,  474,  491,  1001 
Stevens  v.  Carson,  30  Neb.  544. 

897,  910,    968 
Stevens  v.  Cunningham,  181  N. 

Y.  454    106,     108 

Stevens    v.    Curran,    28    Mont. 

366 216,    791 

Stevens  v.  Dillman,  86  111.  233 

231,  344,     387 
Stevens  v.  Fisher,  19  Wend.  (N. 

Y.)     181     524,  1010 

Stevens    v.    Hauser,    39    N.    Y. 

392 1236 

Stevens  v.  Hinckley,  43  Me.  440 

251,  306,  307,  443,  580 
Stevens  v.  Irwin,  15  Cal.  503 . .  536 
Stevens  v.  Kirk,  37  Vt.  204 . . .  746 
Stevens  v.  Merrill,  41  N.  H.  315  20 
Stevens  v.  Meyers,   104  N.  W. 

(N.  D.)    529 571,  986,  1063 

Stevens  v.  Morse,  47  N.  H.  532  220 
Stevens  v.  Newman,  68  III.  App. 

549 756 

Stevens  v.  Pierce,  147  Mass.  510 

258,  989 
Stevens  v.  Robinson,  72  Me. 

381 272,  339,  341,  569 

Stevens  v.  Songer,  14  Ind.  342.  663 
Stevens  v.  Works,  81  Ind.  445. 

67,    737 
Stevens  Lumber  Co.  v.  Kansas 

City  Planing  Mill  Co.,  59  Mo. 

App.   373    584 

Stevenson  v.  Agry,  7  Ohio,  247  461 
Stevenson  v.  Craig,  12  Neb.  464  402 
Stevenson     v.    Milliken-Tomlin- 

son,  13  Am.  B.  R.  201 1165 

Stevenson  v.  Nichols,  13  Grant 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   480 43 

Stevenson  v.  Stevenson,  34  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  157    20,      90 

Stevenson    v.    White,    5    Allen 

(Mass.),   148    154,     167 

Stewart    v.    Cabanne,    16    Mo. 

App.  517    627 

Stewart    ▼.    Cockrell,    2     Lea 

(Tenn.),  369  623 


PAQC 

Stewart  ▼.  Coder,  11  Pa.  St.  90 

67,  738 
Stewart  v.  Dailey,  16  Ky.  212  635 
Stewart  v.  Dunham,  115  U.  S. 

61 74,  77,  80,  457,    487 

Stewart  v.  English,  6  Ind.  176 

99,  459,  464,  579,  622,  892,     986 
Stewart  v.  Pagan,  2  Woods  (U. 

S.),  215    77J 

Stewart  v.  Fenner,  81   Pa.  St. 

177 934 

Stewart   v.   Hargrove,   23   Ala. 

429 1189 

Stewart  v.  Hopkins,  30  Ohio  St. 

502 253^ 

Stewart  v.   Iglehart,   7   Gill   k 

J.    (Md.)    132 217,  632,     644 

Stewart   v.   Kearney,   6   Watts 

(Pa.),   463 209,     660 

Stewart  v.  Lapsley,  7  La.  Ann. 

456 829 

Stewart    v.    Mannington    Exch. 

Bank,  55  N.  J.  Eq.  795 80 

Stewart  v.   Mills   County  Nat. 

Bank,  76  Iowa,  571   264 

Stewart  v.  Nelson,  79  Mo.  552.- 

550,    551 
Stewart  v.  Outhwaite,  141  Mo. 

562 588 

Stewart  v.  Petree,  55  N.  Y.  621  334 
Stewart  v.  Piatt,  101  U.  S.  731 

90,  145,  171,  638,  1112,  1118,  1158 
Stewart  v.  Rogers,  25  Iowa,  395 

278,     339 
Stewart    v.    Stewart,    65    Mo. 

App.  663 157,     164 

Stewart  v.  Stout,  38  W.  Va.  478  108 
Stewart  v.  Thomas,  35  Mo.  202  563 
Stewart  v.  Thompson,  32   Cal. 

260 835 

Stewart  v.  Town,  4   Cow.    (N. 

Y.)   599   295 

Stewart  v.  Union  Bank,  2  Md. 

Ch.  58    460,     976 

Stewart  v.  Wilson,  42  Pa.  St. 

460 1051 

Stewart  v.  Wooley,  2  Ohio  Dec 

341 161 

Stickney  v.  Borman,  2  Pa.  St. 

67 376,     710 

Stigler  V.  Stigler,  77  Va.  163.. 

123,     124 
Stileman    v.    Ashdown,    2    Atk. 

(Eng.)    481    336 

Stileman    v.    Ashdown,    Ambl. 

(Eng.)     13    188,     190 

Stiles  v.  Hill,  62  Tex.  429 42a 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccxxxvii 


PAGE 

StUes  ▼.  Lightfoot,  26  Ala.  443 

347,  906 
Stiles  ▼.  Shumway,  16  Yt*  435  549 
Still  ▼.  Buzsell,  60  Vt.  478 ... .  655 
StiUman  ▼.  Stillman,  21  N.  J. 

Eq.  126 75,  76,      78 

Stillings  ▼.  Turner,   153  Mass. 

534 69,  632,     661 

Stillwell   ▼.   Savannah  Grocery 

Co.,  88  Ga.  100^.1044,   1048,  1049 
StillweU  ▼.  Stillwell,  47  N.  J. 

Eq.  275 404,  636,  643,  1029 

Stimson  ▼.  White,  20  Wis.  562     898 
Stimson  v.  Wrigley,  86  N.  Y. 

332 198,  487,  543,     568 

Stinde  ▼.  Behrens,  81  Mo.  254     164 
Stinaon     v.     Clark,     6     Allen 

(Mass.),  340 533,    541 

Stinson  ▼.  Hawkins,  16  Fed.  850 

226,  229,     606 
Stinson  ▼.  Racer,  13  Ohio  Dec. 

421 610 

Stirling  ▼.  Wagner,  4  Wyo.  5 

234,  247,  294,  356,     965 
Stitch  ▼.   Herman,   15  Am.   B. 

R.   466    1130 

Stivers  V.  Home,  62  Mo.  473..     717 
Stivens   V.    Summers,   68    Ohio 

St.  421    833,  836,    837 

Stix  V.  Chaytor,  55  Ark.  116.. 

36,  179,  187,  363,  520,    683 
715,  716,  739,  753,  1035 
St.   Francis  Mill  Co.  v.   Sugg, 

169   Mo.    130    97,    834 

St.    Georges'    Church    Soc.    v. 

Branch,  120  Mo.  226   341 

Si.  Germain  v.  Landry,  28  La. 

Ann.  652  833 

St.  John  V.  Camp,  17  Conn.  222  446 
St.  John  V.  Benedict,  6  Johns. 

Ch.  (N.  Y.)  Ill  650 

St.   John   Woodworking   Co.   v. 

Smith,  82  App.  Div.   (N.  Y.) 

348 711,    712 

St.  John  Wood- Working  Co.  v. 

&nith,  178  N.  Y.  629 

224.  243,  250,  252,  247,    272 
780,  800,  1047,  1048 
Si.  Joseph  Times  Printing,  etc., 

Co.,  79  Mo.  App.  504 986 

St.    Louis    Brewing    Assoc,    v. 

Steimke,  68  Mo.  App.  52 

223,  232,  255,  259,    685 
St  Louis  Coffin  Co.  v.  Rubel- 

man,  15  Mo.  App.  280   605 

St.  Louis  Mut.  L.  Ins.  Co.  v. 

Cravens,  69  Mo.  72 75,      77 


PAQK 

St.  Louis  Nat.  Bank  v.  Field, 

154  Mo.  368  973 

St.  Michael's  College  v.  Merrick, 

26  Grant  Ch.   (U.  C.)    216..     775 
Stockbridge     v.     Crockett,     15 

Tex.  Civ.  App.  69 672 

Stockbridge   v.    Fahnestock,   87 

Md.  127   937,  938,  941,  1001 

Stockbridge  v.   Franklin  Bank, 

86  Md.    189    429,    459 

Stockdale  v.  Harris,  23  W.  Va. 

499 898 

Stockett  V.  Holliday,  9  Md.  480 

374,    972 
Stock-Growers*    Bank    v.    New- 
ton,  13  Colo.  245 252,    771 

Stockley   v.    Horsey,    4    Houst. 

(Del.)    603   458,  487,     489 

Stockslager  v.  Mechanics'  Loan, 

etc.,  Inst.,  87   Md.  232 

367,  B99,    972 
Stockton    V.    Craddick,    4    La. 

Ann.  282    726 

Stockton   V.   Lippincott,   37   N. 

J.  Eq.   443    842,     845 

Stockwell  V.  National  Bank  of 

Malone,  36  Hun  (N.  Y.),  583     154 
Stockwell     V.     Silloway,      113 

Mass.   384    924 

Stockwell   V.    Stockwell,   72   N. 

H.  69  7,  241,     651 

Stoddard  v.   Butler,   20  Wend. 

(N.  Y.)  507. . .  .224,  225,  231,    239 

353,  433,  500,     518 
Stoddard  v.  Rowe,  74  Iowa,  670 

39,    972 
Stokes  V.  Amerman,  121  N.  Y. 

337 126,    776 

Stokes    V.    Amerman,    55    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  605    38,     363 

Stokes  V.  Bumes,  132  Mo.  214 

594,    980 
Stokes  V.  Coffee,  71  Ky.  633.. 

346,    509 
Stokes  V.  Coffee,  8  Bush  (Ky.), 

533 119,  122,     128 

Stokoe  V.  Cowan,  29  Beav.  637 

20,  99,  101,  120,  122,    332 
Stokes  V.  Jones,  21  Ala.  731 . . 

98,    382 
Stokes  V.  Jones,  18  Ala.  734.. 

78,  215,  325,  413,  426 
Stokes  V.  Oliver,  76  Va.  72 . . . .  378 
Stoltz    V.    Vanatta,    32    Wkly. 

Lan.  But.   (Ohio)    100... 293,    942 
Stone  V.  Anderson,  26  N.  H.  506 

760,   782,    813 


CCXXXVUl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Stone  ▼.  Bartlett,  46  Me.  438 . .  750 
Stone  y.  Brown,  116  Ind.  78.. 

402,    834 
Stone    y.    Griebham,    2    Bulst. 

217 79 

Stone  y.  Kidder,  6  La.  Ann.  552 

698,  1016 
Stone  y.  Knickerbocker  L.  Ins. 

Co.,  62  Ala.  589 123,     127 

Stone  y.  Manning,  3  111.  530. . .  770 
Stone    y.    Marshall,    62    N.    C. 

300 333 

Stone  y.  Morris,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

568 1199 

Stone  y.  Myers,  9  Minn.  303 . . 

38,    180,     182 
Stone  y.  Newell,  64  N.  J.  Eq. 

690 1051 

Stone  y.  Peacock,  35  Me.  385..  567 
Stone  y.  Spencer,  77  Mo.  356..  588 
Stone  y.  Van  Heythuysen,  18 

Jur.    344    37 

Stone  y.  Waggoner,  8  Ark.  204.  537 
Stone  y.  Wescott*  18  R.  I.  517  776 
Stonebraker   y.   Hicks,   94   Va. 

618 898,  1015 

Stonebridge  y.  Perkins,  141  N. 

Y.    1    738 

Stoneford  y.  Scannell,  8  Gal.  80  546 
Stoner    y.    Commonwealth,    16 

Pa.  St.  387    632 

Stores  y.  Snow,  1  Root  (Conn.), 

181 631 

Storey   y.   Agnew,   2   111.   App. 

353 458,     464 

Storm  y.  Waddell,  2  Sandf.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)    494   1013 

Storrs  y.  City  of  Utica,  17  N. 

Y.    104    1169 

Story  y.  Black,  5  Mont.  26 279 

Story  y.  Windsor,  2  Atk.  630. .  609 
btotesbury  y.  Kirtland,  36  Mo. 

App.   148   152,     157 

Stout   y.    Phillippi    Mfg.,    etc., 

Co.,  41  W.  Va.  339 688,  711 

Stout  y.  Price,  24  Ind.  App. 

360 418,  436,  437,  449,  1008 

Stout  y.  Rappelhagen,  51  How. 

Pr.    (N.  Y.)    75.... 519,  534,    528 
Stoutenbourgh  y.  Konkle,  15  N. 

J.  Eq.  33   957 

Stoutz  y.  Huger,  107  Ala.  248 

36,  363,  833,  834,    909 
Stoyall  y.  Farmers',  etc.,  Bank 

8  Sm.  &  M.  (Miss.)   305.. 53,       55 
Stoyall  y.  Farmers',  etc..  Bank, 

16  Miss.  305    450,     696 


PAGE 

Stoye  y.  Marshall,  52  N.  C.  300      72 
Stover  y.  Herrington,  7  Ala.  142 

226,  237,  317,  457,    579 
Stow  y.  Miller,  16  Iowa,  460. .     402 

Stowe  y .  Taf t,  58  N.  H.  446 644 

Stowell  v.  Haslett,  6  Lans.  (N. 

Y.)    168    578,     763 

Stout  V.  Stout,  77  Ind.  537... 

183,  210,  631,  678,  824,  851,     933 
Strahorn-Hutton-Evans        Com- 
mission Co.  V.  Quigg,  97  Fed. 

735 544 

Straight   y.   Roberts,    126    Ind. 

383 579 

Stramann  y.  Scheeren,  7   Colo. 

App.  1 613 

Strang  y.  Bradner,   114   U.   S. 

555 1081 

Strange    y.    Langley,    3    Barb. 

Ch.   (N.  Y.)   650 771,    847 

Stratton  y.  Dialogue,  16  N.  J. 

Eq.  70   90 

Stratton  y.  Edwards,  171  Mass. 

374 434 

Stratton  y.  Edwards,  174  Mass. 

374   282,  284,  339,     632 

Stratton  y.  Hemon,   164  Mass. 

310 759,  762,  1018 

Stratton    y.    Morris,    89    Tenn. 

497 469 

Stratton  y.  Putney,   63  N.  H. 

577 251,  434,     441 

Straus  y.  Head,  14  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

740 364 

Strauss  y.  Abrahams,   32  Fed. 

310 457,    576 

Strauss  y.  Kranert,  56  111.  264 

237,  953 
Strauss   y.  ParshaU,   91   Mich. 

476 366,    613 

Strayer  y.  Long,  86  Va.  557 . . 

358,  972 
Streams  y.  Gage,  79  N.  Y.  102.  614 
Streeper   y.   Eckart,    2    Whart. 

302 240,  242,     527 

Street    y.    Tuggle,    13    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  639    541,     542 

Strike  y.  McDonald,  2  Har.  ft 

G.  (Md.)   191.. 688,  700,  701,    827 
Strike's  Case,  1  Bland.    (Md.) 

57 688,864,  1026 

Stroff    y.    Swafford,    81    Iowa, 

695   436,  459,  609,     679 

Strohm  v.  Hayes,  70  111.  41 . . .     603 
Strong  v.   Burdidk,    1    Penntp. 

(Pa.)   498 226 

Strong  y.  Orrier,  17  Conn.  319    431 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccxxxix 


PAOB 

strong  y.  Hines,  35  Mim.  201..  389 
Strong   y.    Lawrence^    58    Iowa, 

55 299,  330,  382,  809,  832,    902 

Strong  y.  Skinner,  4  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)  546. . . .  146,  3^,  429,  479,    507 
Strong  y.  Strong,  18  Beay.  408. 

19,  177,  201,  232,     355 
Strong  y.  Taylor  School  Tp.,  79 

Ind.  208 815,     851 

Stroud  y.  McDaniel,  5  Am.   B. 

R.  695 1136 

Strop   y.    Hughes    (Mo.   App.), 

101  S.  W.  146   260 

Strouse  v.  Buker,  38  Pa.  St.  190  164 
Stmt  y.  McClerkin,  77  Ala.  580  666 
Stnitton   y.   Young,   16   Ky.   L. 

Rep.  657 ". 840 

Stuart  y.  Neeley,  50  W.  Va. 

608 382 

Stuart  y.  Smith,  21  S.  W.  1026.  604 
Stubblefield  y.  Gadd,  112  Iowa, 

681 162,  838,  898,  1018 

Stubendorf  y.  Hoffman,  23  Neb. 

360 162,     832 

Stuckwisch  y.  Holmes,  29  Ind. 

App.  612 853 

Stucky  y.  Mason  Say.  Bank,  15 

Am.  B.  R.  966    .  .>, 1168 

Studabaker  y.  Langard,  79  Ind. 

420 722,    727 

Stodebaker   Brod.   Mfg.   Co.   y. 

Key,  99  Ga.  144 275,  1000 

Stodebaker    Bros.    Mfg.    Co.    y. 

Zollars,  12  6.  D.  296 408,    509 

Stuem  y.  Chalfant,  38  W.  Va. 

248 378 

Stombaugh     y.     Anderson,     46 

Kan.  541 109,    380 

Stomph  y.  Bruner,  89  Ind.  656. 

192,  348,     863 
Stump  y.  Frary,   13  Ohio  Ciy. 

Ct.  619 156 

Sturges     y.     Crowninshield,     4 

Wheat.   (U.  S.)    122....  1069,  1070 
Sturm   y.   Oalfant,   38   W.   Va. 

248 320 

Sturdiyant  y.  Dayis«  31  N.  C. 

365 414,    418 

Stnrteyant  y.  Ballard,  9  Johns. 

(N.  y.)   342   3,  12,       13 

Sturges  y.  Vanderbilt,  73  N.  Y. 

384 772 

Sturteyant  y.  Ballard,  9  Johns. 

(N.  Y.)    337    412,     518 

Stutson  y.  Brown,  7   Cow.   (N. 

Y.)  732 305 

Suber  y.  Chandler,  18  S.  0.  526.  838 
Sub«»r  V.  Chandler,  36  S.  C.  344. 


PAGir. 
148,  361,  675,     932 
Succession  of  Baum,    11    Rob. 

(La.)   314 751,     834 

Succession  of  Coyle,  32  La.  Ann. 

79 91,  575,     806 

Succession   of   Dickson,   37    La. 

Ann.  795 954 

Succession  of   Schultz,^    39    La. 

Ann.  505 1025 

Suffel  y.  McCartney  Nat.  Bank, 

16  Am.  B.  R.  259 1165 

Suiter  y.  Turner,  10  Iowa,  517. 

520,    563 
Sukeforth  y.  Lord,  87  Cal.  399. 

236,  313,  446,     572 
Sulliyan  y.  Ball,  55  S.  C.  343 . . 

292,    932 
Sulliyan  y.  Bonesteel,  79  N.  Y. 

631 667 

Sulliyan  y.  Iron  ft  Silyer  Min. 

Co.,  109  U.  S,  550 866 

Sullivan   y.   Miller,    106   N.   Y. 

635 772,     844 

Sulliyan  y.  Parkinson,  128  Mich. 

527 360 

Sulliyan  y.  Thurmond,  45  S.  W. 

(Tex.)   393 608 

Summers  y.  Akers,  85  Mo.  213.    973 
Summers  y.  Clark,  32  La.  Ann. 

670 965 

Bummers  y.  Hoover,  42  Ind.  153 

140,    374 
Summers  y.   Howland,  2   Baxt. 

(Tenn.)  407 76 

Summers  y.  Roos,  42  Miss.  749. 

187,  351,  460,  473,  521,     567 
Summers  y.  Taylor,  80  Ky.  429. 

390,  622,    626 
Summers   y.   Taylor,   4  Ky.   L. 

Rep.  290    590,    615 

Sumner  y.  Dalton,  58  N.  H.  295. 

522,     530 
Sumner  y.  Hicks,  2  Black   (U. 

S.),  532 12,  13,  17,       81 

Sumner  y.  Murphy,  2  Hill    (S. 

C),  488 633 

Sumner  y.   Sawtelle,    8    Minn. 

309 37,  136,     168 

Sumpter  y.  Arkansas  Nat.  Bank, 

69  Ark.  224  273,  560,    561 

Sunberg  y.  Baboock,  66  Iowa, 

615 1005 

Sunday  Creek  Coal  Co.  y.  Bum- 
ham,  52  Neb.  364    594,     601 

Sundheim     y.     Ridge     Avenue 

Bank,  15  Am.  B.  R.  132 

612,  1165 
Super  y.  Chandler,  36  S.  C.  344  142 


ccxl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Surget  V.  Boyd,  57  Miss.  485 . .     241 
Siirget   V.   Byers,   24   Fed.   Ctts. 

No.  13,62». 232,     354 

Surlott  V.  Beddow,  19  Ky.  109.     663 
Susong   V.    Williams,    48   Tenn. 

625 668 

Sutherland    v.    Davis,    42    Ind. 

26 1234 

Sutherland      v.      Danaher.      35 

Mich.  422 438 

Sutherlin  v.  March^  75  Va.  223. 

233,  353,  678 
Sutton  V.  Ballon,  64  lowa^  617.  534 
Sutton  V.  Bailou,  46  Iowa,  517.  551 
Sutton    V.    Chapman,    68    Wis. 

556 744,     748 

Sutton  V.  Dana,  15  Colo.  98 

272,     468 
Sutton    V.    Gregory    (Tex.   Civ. 

App.),  46  S.  W.  932 428 

Sutton  V.  Guthrie,  188  Pa.  St. 

359 397,  512 

Sutton  V.  Hasey,  58  Wis.  566. . 

204,     685 
Sutton  V.   Pettus,   4  Rioh.    {&, 

C),  163 216 

Sutton  V.  Shearer,  1  Grant  Gas. 

(Pa.)  207 635 

Sutton  V.  Simon,  91  Tex.  638..     607 
Swanscott  Mach.  Co.  v.  Perry, 

119  Mass.  123 760,    761 

Swan  v.  Dent,  2  Md.  Ch.  111. . . 

274,  806,  821 
Swan  Land,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Frank, 

148  U.  S.  603  796 

Swayze  v.  McCroesin,  21  Miss. 

317 344 

Swayne  v.  Ruttan,  6  U.  C.  C.  P. 

399 46,      48 

Swayze  v.  Swayze,  9  N.  J.  Eq. 

273 781,    839 

Swanzy  v.  Hunt,  2  Nott.  ft  M. 

(S.  C.)  211.70,  177,  208,  748,    784 
Swarts  v.  Bank,   8  Am.  B.   R. 

673 1077,  1161,  1163 

Swartz  V.  Siegel,  8  Am.  B.  R. 

220 1161,  1163 

Swartsburg    v.    Dickerson,     12 

Okla.  666 629 

Swartz  v.  Hazlett,  8  Cal.  118. . 

273,  274,  278,  341,    346 
687,  692,    669 
Swartz  y.  McClelland,  31  Keb. 

646 405 

Sweatman  ▼.  Spears,  6  Ky,  L. 

Rep.  516 384 

Sweeney  v.  Coe,  12  Colo.  486. . .  625 


PAGE 

Sweeney  v.  Cohen,  23  App.  Div. 

„  (N.  Y.)   94 *.'. 914 

Sweeney  v.  Conley,  71  Tex.  543. 

306,    927 
Sweeney  v.  Damron,  47  111.  450. 

^  ^  141,  146.     327 

Sweeny  v.  Grape  Sugar  Cb.,  30 

W.  Va.   443    1035 

Sweet  v.  Converse,  88  Mich.  1 . .     203 
Sweet  V.  Dean,  43  111.  App.  650 

c       *        o  ^    .              1^7'  348,     956 
Sweet  V.  Scherber,  42  111.  App. 
237 4gg 

Sweet  V.  Tinslar,  52  Barb.    (N. 

^  Y.)  271 350 

Sweet  V.  Wright,  57  Iowa,  510. 

688,  918,  949,     986 
Si^'eeting  v.    Sweeting,    172   Pa. 

St.  161 *, . ,    ,  975 

Sweet's  Petition,  20  R.  1.657.! 

Sweetser  v.  Bates,  117  Mass.  466 

916,  920,  935,     945 
Sweetser    v.    Smith,    5    N.    Y. 

Supp.  378 456,     881 

Sweetzer  v.  Buchanan,  94  Ala. 

„  574 1039 

Sweetzer  v.  Mead,  5  Mich.  107.  938 
Sweetzer  v.  Silber,  87  Wis.  102.     761 

Swift  v.  Arents,  4  Cal,  390 758 

Swift  v.  Goldridge.  10  Ohio,  230  143 
Swift  V.  Hart»  36  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

„128 ....;;    466 

Swift  V.  Hart»  35  Hun  (N.  Y.). 

120 ;    297 

Swift  V.  Holdridge,  10  Ohio,  230  681 
Swift  V.  Thompson,  9  Conn.  63.  35 
Swigert  v.  Bank  of  Kentucky, 

56  Ky.  268 693 

Swindersine  v.  Miscally,  1  Bai- 
ley Eq.   (S.  C.)   304 423 

Swinford  v.  Rogers,  23  Cal.  233. 

626,  680,     696 
Swinford  y.  Teegarden,  169  Mo. 

636 953 

Switz  V.  Bruce,  16  Neb.  463 

29,  72,  75,  695,     603 

Swlz  V.  Mayer,  151  Ind.  422 1008 

Swofford  V.   Cornucopia  Mines, 

15  Am.  B.  R.  564 1209 

Swofford  Bros.   Dry  Goods   Co. 
V.   Smith-McCord   Dry  Goods 

Co.,  86  Fed.  417 - .     994 

Swofford  Bros.   Dry  Goods   Co. 
V.    Smith-McCord   Dry  Goods 

Co.,   1  Ind,   T.  314 924,  1005 

Sykes  v.  City    Sav.    Bank,  115 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccxli 


PAOS 

Mich.  321 368 

ISymns    Grocer    Co.    v.    Lee,    9 

Kan.  App.  574    318 

Symns  Grocer  Co.  v.  Smith,  6 

Kan.  App.  258    310 

Svracuse   Chilled   Plow    Co.    v. 
*Wing,  85  N.  Y.  421 . .  140,  142,    085 


Taoffe  V.  Josephine,  7  Cal.  352. 

72,    319 
Tabb  T.  Hughes  (Va.),  3  S.  E. 

148 822 

Tabor  v.  Armstrong  (Ky.),  99 

8.  W.  957  526 

Tacka  berry  v.  Gilmore,  57  Neb. 

450 235,  236,  316,     461 

Taegue  v.  Lindsey,  106  Ala.  266  964 
Taggart  v.  Phillips,  6  Del.  Ch. 

237 44,  172,    671 

Talbott  V.  Gillespie,  21  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  1065 406 

Talbott  V.  Hooser,  75  Ky.  408..  233 
Talbott  V.  Leatherbury,  92  Md. 

166 818 

Talbott  V.  Randall,  3  N.  M.  226  774 
Taloott  V.  Arnold,  54  N.  J.  Eq. 

670 113,  115,     514 

Taloott    V.    Crippen,    52    Mich. 

633 660 

Taloott   V.   Harder,    119   N.   Y. 

536 456,  500,     920 

Talbott    ▼.    Hooser,    12    Bush. 

(Ky.),  408 358 

lyoott  y.  Leyy,  29  Abb.  N.  C. 

(N.  Y.)  3 680 

Taloott  V.  Leyy,  20  N.  Y.  Siipp. 

440 252,  285,    876 

T«lcott     y.     Rose     (Tex.     Civ. 

App.) ,  64  S.  W.  1009 909 

TUoott  y.    Thomas,    21    N.    Y. 

Snpp.  1064 363 

TaUdmrton  y.  Parish,    89    Ind. 

202 Wl 

Tallmadge  y.  Sill,  21  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)  34 144 

Talman  y.  Smith,  39  Barb.   (N. 

Y.)   390 892,    911 

Talton  y.  LiddeU,  17  Q.  B.  390.  219 
Tarns  y.  Bullitt,  35  Pa.  St.  308.  203 
Tannenbaum  y.  Rosswog,  6  N. 

Y.  Supp.  579 1046 

Tanner  y.   Eckhart,    107    App. 

Diy.  (N.  Y.)  79  . . .  .310,  357,    400 
Tantum  y.  Green,  21  N.  J.  Eq. 

364 100,  101,  581,     613 

Tantom  y.  MiUer,  11  N.  J.  Eq. 

551 635,     640 

P 


PAGE 

Tapp  V.  Todd,  16  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

382 361 

Tappan  v.  Butler,  20  N.  Y.  Su- 
per. Ct.  480 363 

Tappan  v.  Butler,  7  Bosw.   (N. 

Y.)  480 38 

Tappan  v.  Evans,  11  N.  H.  311 

99, 
760,  782,  796,  799,  845,  873,  874 
Tappan  v.  Harbison,  43  Ark.  84  724 
Tarback  v.  Marbury,  2  Vern. 

Ch.  510 423,  424 

Tarbell  v.  Griggs,  3  Paige   (N. 

Y.),  207 780,     781 

Tarsney  y.  Ihimer,  48  Fed.  818.  370 
Tate  y.  Clement,  176  Pa.  St.  650  221 
Tate  V.  Liggat,  2  Leigh     (Va.), 

84 186,  217,  774,  1041 

Tate  V.  McCormick,  23  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  218 519 

Tatham  v.   Crawford,   2   Wkly. 

Notes  Cas.   ( Pa. )  365 349,     375 

Tatum  V.  Hunter,  14  Ala.  557 

71,  73,  331,     599 
Tatum  y.  Roberts,  59  Minn.  52 

818  822 
Tatum  V.  Tatum,  101  Va.  77 . .'  645 
Tatum  V.  Tatum,  36  N.  C.   113 

182,  206 
Taub  y.  Swofford     Bros.     Dry 

Goods  Co.,  8  Colo.  App.  214 

413,  433 
Taylor's  Appeal,  45  Pa.  St.  71 

45,  294,     718 
Taylor  Commission  Co.  v.  Bell, 

62  Ark.  26 949 

Taylor  y.  Barnscombe,  74  Iowa, 

534 588,  739,  782,  787,    820 

Taylor  y.  Bowker,  111  U.  S.  110  777 
Taylor  y.  Branch  Bank,  21  Ala. 

581 703 

Taylor  y.  Coeman,   1   Ch.  IHv. 

636 120,    341 

Taylor  y.  Commercial  Bank,  4 

U.  C.  C.  P.  447 634 

Taylor  y.  Cooley,  20  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

1365 513 

Taylor  y.  Dawes,   13   Atl.    (N. 

J.)  593 361,  378,    973 

Taylor  y.  Deusterberg,  109  Ind. 

166 140,  150,     160 

Taylor  y.  Dwyer,  131  Ala.  91 . . 

311,  764    842,     856 
Taylor   y.   Eatma(n,    92  N.    C. 

601 279,    346 

Taylor  y.  Eckford,  11  Sm.  &  M. 
(Miss.)  21 232 


ccxlii 


Tabl£  of  Cases. 


PAOS 

Taylor  ▼.  Ferguson,  87  Tex.  1 . .     lod 
Taylor  v.  GUlean,  23  Tex.  508 

99,     771 
Taylor  y.  Heriot,  4  Desauss.  £q. 

(S.C.)  227 36,37,     370 

Taylor  v.  Johnson,  113  Ind.  164 

286,  1050 
Taylor  v.  Jones,  2  Atk.  600.. 

99,   102,     190 

Taylor  y.  Knox,  2  La.  16 490 

Taylor  y.  Lander,  61  Kan.  588 

760,     838 
Taylor   y.   Mallory,  96   Va.    18 

903,    952 
Taylor  y.  McMillan,  123  N.  G. 

390 652 

Taylor  v.  Miles,  19  Or.  550...     279 
Taylor  y.  Mills,  2  Edw.  Ch.  (N. 

Y.)  318 558 

Taylor  v.  Missouri  Glass  Ck>.,  6 

Tex.  Ciy.  App.  337 1101 

Taylor  v.  Moore,  2  Rand.  (Va.) 

663 358,     359 

Taylor  y.  Paul,    6    Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  496 893 

Taylor   y.    Robinson,   89   Mass. 

253 760 

Taylor   y.   Robinson,   84   Mass. 

662 926 

Taylor  y.  Smith,  68  111.  App.  109    458 
Taylor  y.  Taylor,  3  Am.  B.  R. 

211 1146 

Taylor  y.  Thurber,  68  111.  App. 

114 542 

Taylor    y.     Walkina,     13     So. 

(Miss.)  811 316 

Taylor  y.  Wands,  65  N.  J.  Bq. 

491 114 

Taylor    y.     Watkins,     13     So. 

(Mist.)  811 285,    973 

Taylor  y.  Webb,  64  Miss.  36.. 

820,  821,  822,  832 
Taylor  y.  Weld,  5  Mass.  109..  654 
Taylor  y.   Wendling,   66   Iowa, 

562 226,     317 

Taylor  y.  Whittemore,    2    Rob. 

(La.)   99 569 

Taylor  v.  Wood  (N.  J.  Ch.),  6 

Atl.  818 229 

Taylor  y.  Wood,  5  Atl.  (N.  J.) 

818 606 

Teabout  y.  Jaffray,  74  Iowa,  28.  1029 
Teague  y    Bass,   131  Ala.  422 

248,  619,  667,  678,  910 
Teague  y.  Downs,  69  N.  C.  280  147 
Teague  y.  Lindsey,  106  Ala.  266 

394,    407 


PAQB 

Teasdale  v.   Atkinson,   2   Brey. 

(S.  C.)  48 14,  15,       16 

Tsasdale     Commission    Co.    y. 

Van  Hardenberg,  55  Mo.  App. 

326 40 

Teaadale   y.    Reaborne,    2    Bay 

(B.C.),  546 328 

Tebbs  y.  Lee,  76  Va.  744 

231,  354,  376 
Tedrowe  y.  Esher,  56  Ind.  443  663 
Teed  v.  Valentine,  65  N.  Y.  471     93a 

Tefl't  y.  Stern,  73  Fed.  591 

73,  608,  1037 
Teitig  y.  Hoesman,  12  Mont.  404 

461,  503,  9C3 
Telford  y.    Adams,     6      Watts 

(Pa.),  429 632,     650 

Teller  y.  Bishop,  8  Minn.  226..  398 
Telley  y.  Curtom,  64  Fed.  43..  787 
Temple  Grocer  Co.  y.  Clabaugh, 

18  Tex.  Civ.  App.  656 416 

Temper  v.  Barton,  18  Ohio,  418  632 
Tempel  v.  Dodge,   11  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.  42 582 

Temple  v.  Smith,  13  Neb.  513. .  619 
Templeton  y.  Mason,  107  Tenn. 

626 760 

Templeton  y.  Twilty,  88  Tenn. 

695 863 

Ten  Eyck  v.  Craig,  62  N.  Y.  420  689 
Ten  Eyck  y.  Whitbeck,  136  N. 

Y.  40 292 

Tennant  y.  Gallow,  25  Ont.  66. .     681 
Tennant,  etc..  Shoe  Co.  y.  Part- 
ridge, 82  Tex.  329 467,  1606 

Ten  Broeck  v.   Sloo,   13  How. 

Pr.  (N.  Y.)  28 102 

Tenbrook  v.  Jessup,   60  N.   J. 

Eq.  234 100,     149 

Tennant  y.  Battey,  18  Kan.  324 

773,    783 
Tennent-Stribling  Shoe  Co.     y. 

Davie,  75  Miss.  447 580 

Tennent-Stribling  Shoe  Co.     v. 

Ruty,  63  Mo.  App.  196.. 611,     990 
Tennessee  Producer  Marble  Co. 

y.  Grant   14  Am.  B.  R.  288. .   1227 
Tennis  v.  Barnes,  11  Colo  App. 

196 30ft 

Terhune  y.   Sibbald,   66   N.  J. 

Eq.  236 823 

Terhune  v.  Skinner,  46  N.  J.  Eq. 

344 67 

Terrell  v.  Green,  11  Ala.  207. 

223,    261 
Terrell   v.   Imboden,    10   Leigh 

(Va.),  321 638,    709 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccxliii 


Terrill  T.  Jennings,  58  Ky.  460    879 
'JTeny  y.  Belcher,  1  Bailey   (6, 

C),  668 623 

Terry  t.  Fountaine,  83  Va.  461 

963  964 
Terry  v.  (XNeal,  71  Tex.  692./  282 
Terry  v.  Wilson,  63  Mo.  493..     149 

Tevis  y.  Doe,  3  Ind.  129 70,    763 

Texarkana  Nat.   Bank  y.   Hall 

(Tex.  Civ.  App.),  30  S.  W.  73 

70,     177 
Texas   Drug  Co.  y.   Baker,   20 

Tex.  Civ.  App.  684 496 

Texas  &  Pae.  K.  R.  Co.  v.  John- 
son, 161  U.  S.  81  1224 

Thacher  v.  Jones,  31  Me.  628 

267,  1067,  1068 
Thacher  v.  Phinney,  89  Mass. 

146 249,  265,  927,  988,  993 

Thatcher   v.   Rockwell,    105   U. 

8.  467 1234 

rhacker  y.  Saunders,  45  N.  C. 

145 270 

Thames  v.  Kembert,  63  Ala.  561 

224,  721,  724,     929 
Thayer   v.    Willet,      18    N.    Y. 

Super.  Ct.  344 208 

The  Distilled  Spirits,  11  Wall. 

(U.  8.)  356 1169 

The  Holloway  Case,  27  Fed.  830    979 
ihe  Minneapolis  Threshing  Ma- 
chine Co.  v.  Jones,  89  Minn. 

184 828 

Theriot  y.  Michel,  28  La.  Ann. 

107 212 

Theriot  v.  Michel,  12  La.  Ann. 

107 83 

Thigpen   v.   Pitt,   54  N.   C.   49 

207,     214 
Third  Nat.  Bank  v.  Comes,  5 

N.  Y.  Supp.  799 703 

Third  Nat.  Bank  v.  Cornes,  102 

Y.  737 1052 

Third  Nat.  Bank  v.  Cramer,  78 

Mo.  App.  476 514,     893 

Third  Nat.  Bank  v.  Divine  Gro- 
cery Co.,  97  Tenn.  603 469 

Third  Nat.  Bank  v.  Keeffe,  30 

Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)  400.. 57,  225 
Thigpen  y.  Pitt,  54  N.  C.  49. . .  769 
Thomas  v.  Adelman,  14  Am.  B. 

Rep.  510 1166,  1167 

Thomas  v.  Beals,  154  Mass.  61  691 
Tikomas  v.  Beck,  39  Conn.  241  924 
Thomas    v.     Decaff enreid,    17 

Ala.  602 347,     985 

Thomas  v.  Fletcher,  18  Am.  B. 


FAQB 

R,  623 1127 

Thomas  y.  Goodwin,    12   Mass. 

140  ..  .270,  453,  460,  663,  681,    746 
Thomas  v.  Uillhouse,  17  Iowa, 

67 644 

Thomas    v.    Jenks,     6    Rawle 

(Pa.),  221 72 

Thomas  v.  Jeter,  1  HiU  (S.  C.) 

380 688 

Thomas  y.  Johnson,  137  Ind.  244 

459,  471,    479 
lliomas  y.  Lye;,  37  111.  App.  482 

183,     195 
Tliomas  v.  Mackey,  3  Colo.  390 

346,    852 
Thomas  y.  Mason,  8  Gill  (Md.), 

1 755 

Thomas  v.  McCormack,  39  Ky. 

108    654 

Thomas   v.   McBwen,    11    Paige 

(N.  Y.),  131 874 

Thomas  v.  McDonald,  102  Iowa, 

564 961,     966 

Thomas  v.  Mead,  8  Mart.  N.  S. 

(La.)  341 721 

Thomas  v.  Mueller,  106  111.  36.     366 
Thomason  v.   Neeley,   50  Miss. 

310 67,     734 

Thomas  v.  People,  19  Wend.  (N. 

Y.)   480 1063,  1065 

Thomas  v.  Soper,  5  Munf.  (Va.) 

28 518,     635 

Thomas  v.  State,  92  Ala.  49  .  .   1061 
Thomas    v.    Sullivan,     13    Nev. 

242 1000 

Thomas  v.  Thomas,  107  Mo.  459     641 
Thomas    v.    lorrance,     1     Ch. 

Chamb.   (U.  C.)   46 818 

Thomas  v.  Van  Meter,  164  III. 

304 619 

Thomas  v.  Walker,  25  Tenn.  93     753 
Thomas  v.  Whitaker,  7  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  43 954 

Thompson    Mfg.   Co.   v.   Smith, 

67  N.  H.  409 547 

Thompson    Nat.    Bank   v.    d^r- 

wine,   89   Fed.   774 179,    252 

Thompson    Nat.    Bank    v.    Cor- 

wine,  95  Fed.  54 716,    718 

Thompson  v.  Adams,  93  Pa.  St. 

55 117 

Thompson  v.  Allen,  103  Pa.  St. 

44 328 

Thompson  v.  Baker,  141  U.  S. 

648 66,  732,  740,     742 

Thompson    v.    Baltimore,    etc., 

R.  Co.,  28  Md.  396 642 


ccxliv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Thompson  ▼.   Benner,  33   Neb. 

193 997 

Thompson      v.      Bickford,      19 

Minn.  17.. 436,  443,  691,  696,    697 
Thompson   v.   Blanchard,   4  N. 

Y.    303    519 

Thompson    v.    Caton,    3    Wash. 

Ter.  31   776,     804 

Thompson      ▼.      Chretien,      12 

Mart.  (La.)  260 621 

Thompson    y.    Cohen,    127    Mo. 

216 212,  657,  893,    980 

Thompson    v.    Crane,    73    Fed. 

327 205,  266,  343,  672,     963 

Thompson   v.    Cundiff,    74    Ky. 

567 120,    122,   124,   125,     126 

Thompson   v.   Dodd,    26   Grant 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   381   818 

Thompson  v.  Doyle,  16  Can.  L. 

T.   (Occ.  Notes)    903 

Thompson  v.  Drake,  3  B.  Mon. 

(Ky.)    566    603 

Thompson  v.  Esty,  69  N.  H.  66 

522,     539 
Thompson  v.  Fairbanks,  196  U. 

S.  516 1114,  1116,  1123,  1180 

Thompson   v.    Fuller,    8   N.   Y. 

Supp.  62    498,     499 

Thompson  v.  Furr,  57  Miss.  478 

6,  415,  434,  437,     440 
602,  604,     714 
Thompson    v.    Gordon,    12    La. 

260 580 

Thompson  v.  Hammond,  1  Edw. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    497 295,     648 

Thompson    v.     Hervey,   2    Tex. 

App.   Civ.  Cas.,  sec.  606 ....     462 
Thompson  v.   Hester,  65  Mass. 

656 183 

Thompson  v.  Hlntgen,   11  Wis. 

112 49 

Thompson  v.  Johnson,  65  Minn. 

515 74,  608,  613,  1024 

Thompson   t.   Lee,   3   Watts  & 

S.  479   681 

Thompson   v.   Loenig,    13    Neb. 

386 972 

Thompson    v.    McConnell,    107 

Fed.  33   164,  166,    907 

Thompson  v.  McKean,  1  Ashm. 

(Pa.)    129    722 

Thompson  v.  Moore,  36  Me.  47 

69,     177 
Thompson  y.  Mills,  39  Ind.  528 

370,     400 
Thompson   y.   Neely,   60   Mass. 

310 739 


PAOK 

Thompson  v.  Newland   (Mich.), 

108  N.  W.  93    440 

Thompson  y.  Parker,  83  Ind.  96    429 
Thompson   y.   Pennell,    67    Me. 

159 443 

Thompson  v.  Perry,  2  Hill.'Eq. 

(S.  C.)   204   665 

Thompson  v.   Richardson  Drug 

Co.,  33  Neb.  714   237,    316 

Thompson  v.  Eobinson,  89  Me. 

46 201,    240 

Thompson  y.  Rosenstein,  67  S. 

W.    (Tex.)   439   316 

Thompson   y.   Sanders,   29   Ky. 

94 892 

Thompson  y.  Thompson,  19  Me. 

244 182 

Thompson   v.   Tower   Mfg.   Co., 

87  Ala.  733   1049 

Thompson  y.   Tower  Mfg.   Co., 

104  Ala.   140    896,     973 

Thompson  v.  Van  Vechten,  27 

N.  Y.  568    772,    778 

Thompson    y.    Van    Vechten,    5 

Abb.  Pr.   (N.  Y.)   458 48 

Thompson  v.  Walker,  5  Fed.  419       33 
Thompson  y.  Webster,  28  L.  J. 

Ch.   700    8,     954 

Thompson    y.    Wilhite,    81    III. 

356 565 

Thompson  y.  Williams,  100  Md. 

195 222,  224,  227,   469,     471 

510,  563,     904 
Thompson  y.  Williamson,  67  N. 

J.  Eq.  212   461,     714 

Thompson   v.    Wilson,    24   Tex. 

Civ.  App.  666    514 

Thompson         v.         Zuckmayer 

(Iowa),  94  N.  W.  476 

393,  396,  459,  579,  593,     892 
Thomas     v.     Butler,     16     Pa. 

Super.  Ct.  268    195 

Thomson  y.  Crane,  73  Fed.  327 

169,  180,  182,     831 
Thomson     y.      Dougherty,      12 

Serg.   4    (Pa.)    448 ..  190,220,    340 

362,  635,  1031 
Thomson  y.  Shackleford,  6  Tex. 

Civ.  App.  121    689 

Thomberry  y.  Baxter,  24  Ark. 

76 817,    825 

Thomburg  y.  Bowen,  37  W.  Va. 

638 633,     721 

Thomburgh  y.  Hand,  7  Cal.  554    843 
Thornbum    y.    Thompson,    192 

Pa.  St.  298 415,  436,     600 

Thomdike  v.   Bath,    114   Mass. 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccxlv 


PAGE 

166 641 

Thornhill  y.  Bank  of  Louisiana, 

Fed.  Cas.  No.  13,992 1104 

Thorn  y.  Morgan,  4  Mart.  N.  S. 

(La.)    292    969 

Thorne    v.    Crawford,     17    111. 

App.   395    29 

Thome  y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  37 

Ohio  St.  254    622 

Thornton  y.  Cook,  97  Ala.  630 

77,  654 
Thornton  y.  Dayenport,  2  111. 

296 242,  626 

Thornton  y.  Gaar,  87  Va.  315. . 

825,  941,  1060 
Thornton  y.  Hook,  36  Cal.  223 

346,  912 
Thornton  y.  Lane,  11  6a.  469. .  271 
Thornton  y.  Tandy,  39  Tex.  544 

462,  491,  623 

Thorp  y.  Jarrell,  66  Ind.  52 28 

Thorpe   y.  Leibrecht,  56  N.  J. 

Eq.  499  200,  240,  770 

Thorpe  y.  Thorpe,  12  S.  C.  154 

462,  466,  491,  610,  926 
Thrasher  y.  Bentley,  1  Abb.  N. 

C.  (N.  Y.)  39  1071 

Threlkel     y.     Scott,     34     Pao. 

(Cal.)    861    

346,  365,  376,  586,  858,  859 
Thrissel  y.  Page,  77  Mass.  394  883 
Throckmorton  y.   Clhapman,   66 

Conn.   441    397 

Throckmorton  y.  Rider,  42  Iowa, 

84 913,    980 

Thnrber   y.    Blanck,   60   N.    Y. 

80 739,  742,     786 

Thurber  y.  LeRoqne,  106  N.  C. 

301 683 

Thurman  y.  Jenkins,  68  Tenn. 

426 301 

Thurman  y.  Jenkins,  61  Tenn. 

(2  Baxt.)  426  227 

Thurmond  y.  Reese,  3  Ga.  449 

731,  761,  797,    843 
Thweatt  ▼.  McCollough,  84  Ala. 

617 636 

Thyson  ▼.  Foley,   1  App.   Cas. 

(D.  C.)    182   36,    363 

Tibbals  ▼.  Jacobs,  31  Conn.  428 

426,  663,  922,    944 
Tiekner  ▼.  Wailes,  39  So.  (Ala.) 

306  ... 663 

Tiekner  y.  Wiswall,  9  Ala.  306      71 
Ticknor  ▼.  McClelland,  84  111. 

471 642,  643,  666,    666 

Ticonic    Bank    y.    Haryey,    16 


PAOB 

Iowa,  141    843 

Tidball     y.     Shenandoah     Nat. 

Bank,   100  Va.  741    872 

Tiemay  y.  Claflin,  15  R.  I.  220 

215,  703 
Tierney  y.   Corbett,  2  Mackey, 

264    (D.   C.)     209 

Tiffany      v.      Boatmen's      Say. 

Bank,   18  Wall.    (U.  S.)    376 

1168,  1199 
Tiffany  y.  Lucas,  15  Wall.   (U. 

S.)    410    1082,  1131 

Tifft  V.  Barton,  4  Den.  (N.  Y.) 

171 618,     941 

Tifft  y.  Walker,  10  N.  H.  160. .  441 
Tilford    y.    Burnham,    37    Ky. 

109 1032,  1036 

Tillinghast  y.   Champlin^   4   R. 

L  173   267,     623 

Tilman  y.  Heller   (Tex.),  14  S.  ' 

W.  271  . .  .266,  271,  297,  681,     706 

706,  905,  907,    909 
Tillou  y.  Britton,  9  N.  J.  L.  120 

461,  463 
Tilton  y.  Sanborn,  59  N.  H.  290  154 
Tilson  y.  Terwilliger,  66  N.  Y. 

273    519,  634,  635,    999 

Timms   y.   Timms,    64    W.    Va. 

414 564,  582,  696 

Tinker  y.  Cobb,  39  Vt.  483 ... .  997 
Tinsley  y.  Corbett,  27  Tex.  Ciy. 

App.  633  960,  966 

Tinsley  y.  Tinsley,  7  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  295   641 

Tipton  y.  Adair,  172  Mo.  156..  114 
Tisch  y.  Utz,  142  Pa.  St.  186..  883 
Tisdale    y.    Rider,    104    N.    Y. 

Supp.    77    292 

Tissier  y.  Wales   (Ala.),  39  So. 

924 415,663,  815,     871 

Titus  y.  Johnson,  60  Tex.  224. .  940 
Tobey  y.  Leonard,  2  Wall.   (U. 

S.)    423    878 

Toffey  y.   Williams,   6   Thomp. 

AC.   (N.  Y.)   294 508,     610 

Tobie,    etc.,    Mfg.    Ck).   y.   Wal- 

dron,  76  Me.  472 200,    243 

Tobin  y.  Allen,  53  Miss.  663..       32 

Toby  y.  Reed,.  9  Conn.  216 526 

Todd  y.  Hartly,  69  Ky.  206...  346 
Todd   y.    Larkin,    38    La.   Ann. 

762 963 

Todd   y.   Monell^    19   Hun    (N. 

Y.),  362   137,  299,     426 

Todd  y.  Nelson,  109  N.  Y.  316 

189,  352,    909 
Tognini  y.  Kyle,  15  Ney.  464.. 


ccxlvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PACK 
954,  959,  1000,  1005 
Tognini  v.  Kyle,  17  Nev.  209. . 

525,  550,    998 
Tolbert    ▼.    Horton,    31    Minn. 

518 754,    774 

Tolerton,  etc.,  Co.  v.  First  Nat. 

Bank,  63  Neb.  674 915 

Tolles  V.  Wood,  99  N.  Y.  616. .     134 
Tolman  ▼.  Ward,  86  Me.  305.. 

322,    580 
Tomlinaon  ▼.  Matthews,  98  III. 

178 513 

Tomlinson  v.  Roberts,  25  Conn. 

477 34 

Tompkins  t.  Catawba  Mills,  82 

Fed.  782   773 

Tompkins  v.  Hunter,  149  N.  Y. 

117 456,    488 

Tompkins  v.  Levy,  87  Ala.  263 

125,  126,  821,     824 
Tompkins   v.   Nichols,   53   Ala. 

197 393,  562,  890,  891,     957 

Tompkins   y.    Parcell,    12    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  662   781 

Tompkins  v.  Sprout,  55  Cal.  36 

24,     712 
Tompkins  v.   Wheeler,    16   Pet. 

(U.  8.)    106    457,    489 

Toney  v.  Goodley,  57  Mo.  App. 

235 552 

Toney  ▼.  McGehee,  38  Ark.  419. 

191,  194,  350 
Tong  y.  Marvin,  15  Mich.  60. . .  858 
Tonkin  v.    Ennis,    1    Eq.    Oas. 

Abr.    (Eng.)    334    336 

Toof  V.   Martin,    13   Wall.    (U. 

8.)   40 1084,  1091,  1142 

Toole  V.  Darden,  41  N.  C.  394.  192 
Tootle  V.  Cadwell,  30  Kan.  125.  339 
Tootle  V.  Coldwell,  30  Kan.  125    459 

Tootle  V.  Dunn^  6  Neb.  93 688 

Toop  V.  Smith,  181  N.  Y.  283 . .  672 
Topp  V.  Todd,   16  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

382 148 

Topping  V.  Lynch,  2  Rob.    (N. 

Y.)  484 528,  534,  997 

Toronto  Bank  v.  Irwin,  28  Grant 

Ch.  (U.  C.)  397 232,  355 

Toronto  Bank  v.  McDougall,  15 

U.  C.  C.  P.  475 468 

Torrance  v.  Winfleld  Nat.  Bank, 

11  Am.  B.  R.  185 1163 

Torrey  v.  Oameron,  73  Tex.  583 

314,  372v    514 
Torrey    Cedar    Co.    v.    Eul,    95 

Wis.   615    300 

Torrey  v.  Dickinson,    111    111. 


PAOE 

App.  524 140 

Torrey    v.    Dickinson,    213    HI. 
36 405 

Torrey    v.    Dickinson,    213    111. 

36 906 

Torreyson    v.    Tumbaugh,     105 

Mo.  App.  439   211,    213 

Totten  V.  Brady,  54  Md.  170.. 

469,  904,    907 
Totten  V.  Douglass,    15    Grant 

Ch.   (Oan.)   126  332 

Toulmin  v.  Buchanan^   1   Stew. 

(Ala.)  67 322 

Tounstine  v.  Ware,  39  La.  Ann. 

»39. 823 

Towar  v.  Harrington,  Brightley 

N.  P.   (Pa.)  263 581 

Tower  Mfg.   Co.   v.    Thompson, 

90  Ala.  129 816 

Towle  V.  Davenport,  16  N.  B.  R. 

478 1234 

Towle  V.  Hoit,  14  N.  H.  61 . . . 

23,    434 
Towle  V.  Janvrin,  61  N.  H.  606. 

760.     855 
Town  of  Lyndon  v.  Belden,  14 

Vt.  423 299,  536,     537 

Towne  v.  Rice,  59  N.  H.  412 .. . 

522,     535 
Towns  V.  Smith,  115  Ind.  480.. 

797,  806,  936,     969 
Townsend  v.  Bumpus,  29  App. 

Div.    (N.  Y.)    122 426 

Townsend  v.   Little,    109   U.   S. 

504 732 

Townsend'  v.   Maynard,   45   Pa. 

St.  198 87.     343 

Townsend  v.  Miller,  7  La.  Aim. 

632 1035 

Townsend    v.    Tuttle,  28  N.  J. 

Eq.  449 198 

Townsend  v.  Westootl^  2  Brev. 

340 340 

Townsend  v.   Wilson,    114    Ky. 

504 280,     347 

Townshend  v.  Windham,  2  Ves. 

(Eng.)  1 ..217,  337,  360 

Trabue  v.  Henderson,  180  Mo. 

616 91 

Tracy  v.  Cover,  28  Ohio  St  61 .     153 
Tracy   v.    Ginsberg,    189    Mass. 

260 1190 

Tracy  v.  Kelley,  52  Ind.  535 .. .       39 
Traders'  Bank  v.  Campbell,   14 

Wall.    (U.   S.)    87 

1090,  1171,  1172,  1223,  1233 
Traders'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Chipman, 


Tabub  of  Cases. 


ooxlvii 


PAOB 

id 276 

Traders'  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  aare,  76 

Tex.  47 305,  306,    618 

Traders'  Nat  Bank  v.  Deny,  7 

Tex.  Civ.  App.  560 1003 

Traders'  Nat  Bank  t.  Daj,  87 

Tex.  101 523 

Traders'  Nat.  Bank  y.  Fry,  14 

Tex.  Oiy.  App.  403 1006 

Traders'   Nat   Bank  ▼.    Steere, 

165  Haas.  387 460,    507 

Trager   v.    Feibleman^    95    Ala. 

60 , 242 

Traip  v.  Gould,  15  Me.  82 758 

Train  v.  Kendall,  137  Mass.  366  460 
Trapnell  v.  Oonkljn,  37  W.  Va. 

242 108,  111,  112,     114 

Trask  ▼.  Bowerq.  4  N.  H.  300. . 

414,  434,    530 
Trask  ▼.  Green,  9  Mich.  358. . . 

67,  70,  734,  753,  758,    804 
Tracers  y.  Ramsey,  24  Fed.  Oas. 

No.  24,152 531 

Traverse  v.  Tste,  82  Oal.  170..  951 
Traylor    v.    Townsend,  61  Tex. 

144 613 

Treaoey  v.  Liggett,  9  Can.  Sup. 

Ct.  441 275 

Tread  way  v.  Turner,  10  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  949. . .  .39,  171,  797,  803,    897 
Treadwell   v.  Brown,  44  N.  H. 

551 866,  1040 

Treadwell  v.  McEwen,   123  111. 

253 979,  1051 

Tredwell  v.  Graham,   88  N.  C. 

208 410,  581,  895,     908 

Treat  v.  Barber,  7  Conn.  275. .  673 
Treat  v.  Curtis,  124  Mass.  348.  937 
Treat  v.  Wooden,  14  Am.  B.  R. 

736 1209 

Trefethen  v.  Lynam,  90  Me.  376. 

36,  104,  130,  397,    900 
Tregaskie     v.     Judge     Detroit 

Super.  Ct.,  47  Mich.  509 1047 

Trego  V.  Skinner,  42  Md.  426 . . 

36,  136,  811,  824,     870 
Tremaine  v.  Mortimer,   128  N. 

Y.  1 454,    772 

Tremper    v.    Barton,    18    Ohio, 

418 634 

Trent  v.  Edmonds,  32  Ind.  App. 

432 ...585,   741,   742,    849 

TrenUnan  v.  Swartzell,  85  Ind. 

443 579 

Tresch  v.   Wirtz,   34  N.  J.   Eq. 

124 106,  111,     114 

Treseder    v.    Burgor,    130    Wis. 

201 1128 


PAOB 

Trester  ▼.  Pike,  43  Neb.  779. . .  279 
Treusch  v.  CHtenburg,   54  Fed. 

867 744,  919,  923,  943,  1003 

Tresevant  v.   Terrill,   96   T^nn. 

528 184,  192,    349 

Trice  v.  Rose,  79  Ga.  75. ..... . 

225,  261,  914,  1010 
Trieber  y.  Andrews,  31  Ark.  163 

583,  593 
Trim  v.  Wagner,  Fed.  Oaa.  No. 

14,174 1122 

Trimble  v.  Ratcliff,  48  Ky.  511.  378 
Trimble  v.  Turner,  21  Miss.  348  1027 
Triplett    v.    Graham,    58  Iowa, 

135 ....339,    975 

Triplett  v.  Witherspoon,  70  N. 

O.  589 220 

Tripp  v.  Childs,   14  Barb.    (N. 

Y.)  85 103 

Trippe  v.  Ward,  2  Ga.  304. .. .  766 
Trompen  v.  Yates,  66  Neb.  525.  318 
Trott  V.  Warren,  11  Me.  227..  721 
Trotter  v.  Howard,  8  N.  C.  320.  522 
Trotter  v.  Watson,  25  Tenn.  509  588 
Trough's  Estate,  8  Phila.   (Pa.) 

214 128 

Trounstine  v.  Irving,  91  G*.  92 

561,  999 
Troustine     v.     Lask,     4    Baxt. 

(Tenn.)   162 73,  605.    608 

Trowbridge      v.      Bullard,      81 

Mich.  451 750,     774 

Trowbridge  v.   Sickler,  54  Wis. 

306 987 

Trowell     v.     Shenton,     L.     R. 

(Eng.)   8 327 

Troxall  v.   Applegarth,  24  Md. 

163 580 

Troy  Fertilizer  Co.  v.  Norman, 

107  Ala.  667    227,  537,     918 

Troy  v.  Bickford,  24  Wash.  159.  953 
Troy  V.  Morse,  22  Wash.  280. . 

59,  417,    476 

Troy  y.  Smith,  33  Ala.  469 394 

True  V.  Cangdon,  44  N.  H.  48.  627 
Truesdale  v.  Bourke,  145  N.  Y. 

612 962,  980,     996 

Truesdale  v.  Bourke,    20    App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)   95    585 

Truesdale  v.  Sarles,   104  N.  Y. 

164 329,  569,  1018 

Truitt  V.  Caldwell,  3  Minn.  364. 

419,  428 
Truitt  v.  Crook,  129  Ala.  377 . .  309 
Truitt  v.  Curd,  13  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

118 39 

Truitt  v.  Truitt,  37  Ind.  514...  1010 
Trumbull   v.   Hewitt,   62   Conn. 


ccxlviii 


Table  of  Cases. 


44S. 290,  341,    363 

Tmmlmll   t.  Hewitt^   65   Caan. 

^' 624^  1W8,     945 

Tnmick  t.   Smitli,   63    Pa.   St. 

^18 529 

Trustees      of       Wadswortheine 

Poor  School  V.  Pirson,  34  S. 

C.401 ; 328 

Tryon  v.  Flournoy,  80  Ala.  221.  440 
Tnbb  ▼.  WilliajDii,  26  Tenn.  355. 

^^    .„  ^     173,  739,  770,  1024 

Turbenlle  v.   Gibson,  52  Tenn. 

^^ 301,  691 

Tuck  ▼.  Olds,  29  Fed.  738 32 

Tucker  v.  Andrews^  13  Me.  124.  585 

Tncker  v.  Cllabj,  29  Massi  22. .  746 
Tucker  t.  Benico,  26  R.  I.  560. 

^    .  738,  741,    769 

Tucker     v.     Drake,     11     AUen 

(Mass.),  145 159,  168 

Tucker  v.  Pennington   (Civ. 

App.),  45  8.  W.  (Tex.)  313..  189 
Tucker  v.  Tucker,  29  Mo.  350..  811 
Tucker  y.  Young,  Manitoba  T. 

Wood,  186 582 

Tuckey  ▼.  LoreU,  8  Ida.  731. . .  116 
Tuckwood  V.  Hanthom,  67  Wis. 

326 ggO 

Tudor  ▼.  DeLong,  18  Mont.  499.  304 
Tuealey  y.  Robinson,  103  Mass. 

658 162 

Tufts  V.  Bunker,  56  Me.  178..  918 
Tufts  V.  DuBignon,  61  Ga.  322. 

631,    642 
Tully  y.  Harloe,  35  QU.  302. . . 

301,  317,  985,  993 
Tumlin  y.  Grawford,  61  Ga.  128  9 
Tunison  y.  Chamblin,  88  111.  378 

187,  348,    901 
Tunnell    v.    Jefferson,    5    Har. 

(Del.)  206 303,    482 

Tunnell  y.  Larson,  39  Minn.  268 

534,    918 
Tunno  y.  Trezeyent,  2  Desauss. 

(S.  C.)    264    322 

Tupper  y.  Thompson,  26  Minn. 

385 884 

Turgeon  y.  Shannon,  20  Quebec 

Super.  Ot.  C.  S.  (Can.)   13B..     323 
Turner    Hardware    Co.  v.  Rey- 
nolds, 47  S.  W.   (I.  T.)   307..     698 
Turner-Looker    Co.    y.    Garyey, 

19  Ky.  L.  Rep.   1205 

36,  131,    753 
Turner  y.  Adams,  46  Mo.  95 . . . 

774,  783,  797,  844 
Turner   y.    Campbell,    3    Gratt. 

(Va.)    77 640 


Turner  y.   Coolidge,    43    Mass. 

350 539 

Turner  y.  Fisher,  13  Am.  B.  R. 

243 1166^ 

Turner    y.    Gottwals,    15    App. 

Cms.   (D.  C.)   43 403,  897,  1053* 

Turner  y.    Iowa  Nat.   Bank,   2 

Wash.  192 463,  474,     488 

Turner  y.  McFee,  61  Ala.  468. . 

311,  457 
Turner  y.  Mills,  11  U.  C.  C.  P. 

366 534 

Turner  y.  Short  (Ky.),  4  8.  W. 

347 773- 

Turner  y.  Smith,  26  GraU  Ch. 

(U.  C.)    198  816* 

Turner  y.  Vaugfaan,  33  Ark.  454  1021 
Turner  y.   Younker,    76    Iowa, 

258 954 

Tumipseed  y.  Kentucky  Wagon 

Co.,  97  Ga.  258 1048,  1049 

Tumley  y.  Hooper,  3  Smale  & 

G.  349. 142 

Tuteur  y.  Chase,  66  Miss.  476. 

615,  617,    980 
Tuthill  y.  Goss,  89  Hun  (N.  Y.), 

609 121,  126,     809^ 

Tuthill  y.  Myrus,  57  App.  Diy. 

(N.  Y.)  37 1017 

Tuthill  y.  Skidmore,  124  N.  Y. 

148 969 

Tuttle    y.    Hayes,    107    N.    Y. 

Supp.  22 524 

Tuttle  y.  Merchants'  Nat.  Bank, 

19  Mont.  11 54r 

TuUle  y.  Robinson,  78  111.  332.     635 
Tuttle  y.  Turner^  28  Tex.  759. . 

588,  627 
Tuxworth,  y.  Moore,    26    Massw 

347 544 

Twyne's  Case,    1    Smith  Lead. 

Cas.  1 14,  16,  19,      67 

Twyne's  Case,  supra   246 

Twyne's  Case,  3  Rep.  80 

223,  240,  245,  246,  247,     248 

414,  435,  600,     627 

lyberandt  y.  Raucke,  96  111.  71     966 

l^ler  y.  Budd,  96  lowa^  29 367 

Tyier  y.  Carlton,  7  Me.  175...     383 
Tyler  y.  Dayis   (Ind.  App.),  75 

N.  E.  3  886 

T^ler  y.  Hamblin,  68  Tenn.  152. 

197  819 
Tyler  y.  Peatt,  30  Mich.  63 . . . .'  774 
T^rler  y.  Tyler,  126  111.  526 ... . 

202,  435,  436,  439,  453,     650 
Tyler  y.  Wilkerson,  20  Ind.  473.     813- 
I^rner     v.     Someryille,     Smith 


i 


Table  of  Cases, 


ccxlix 


FAGS 

(Ind,),  149 382 

TVner  ▼.  Somerville,  1  Ind.  176. 

410,    687 
U 
Uhl  V.   Beatty   (N.  J.  Oh.),  3 

Atl.  624 461,    490 

Uhl  V.  DUlon,  10  Md.  60O 774 

Uhler  T.  Maulfair,  23  Pa.   St. 

481. .  .462,  464,  471,  477,  490,  492 
Uhlfelder  v.  Levy,  9  Cal.  607..  811 
Uhre  V.   Melum,    17    111.    App. 

182 339,    848 

Uhrig   V.    HJorstman,    8     Bush 

(Ky.),172     105 

UHman  v.  CrenBhaw,  16  8.  W. 

1012  ...   613 

Ullman  ▼.  Duncan,  78  Wis.  213     776 

Ulmer  v.  Hills,  8  Me.  326 

251,  443,    521 
Ullman   v.   Lockhart,     41     So. 

(Fla.)  452 335 

Ullman  v.  Myrick,  93  Ala.  532 

519,  537 
Ullman  ▼.  Thomas,  126  Mich.  61  366 
UUrich  V.  Ullrich,  68  Conn.  580  848 
Ulrich   T.   Duson,   36  La.   Ann. 

989 768 

Unangst  ▼.  Gk)odyear  India  Rub- 

ber  Glove  Mfg.  Ck).,   141   Pa. 

St.  127 596 

Underwood  v.   Sutcliffe,   77   N. 

Y.  58 752.    793 

Unger  v.  Price,  9  Md.  562 358 

Union    Bank   v.    Kansas     City 

Bank,    136   U.   8.   223... 472,     488 
Union  Bank  v.  Toomer,  2  Hill. 

Eq.   (8.  C.)  27 584 

Union  Canal  Co.   v.   Woodside, 

11  Pa.  bt.  176 1235 

Union  Cen.  L.  Ins.  Co.  v.  Eck- 

ert,  5  Ohio  Dec.  528 125,     177 

Union  Nat.  Bank  v.  Lane,  177 

HL  171 669 

Union  Nat.  Bank  v.  Warner,  12 

Hun    (N.   Y.),   306 

587,  620,  695,  1013 
Union  Pac.  R.  Co.  v.   I^ersh, 

22  Neb.  751 156 

Union  Nat.  Bank  v.  State  Nat. 

Bank,  168  111.  256 473 

Union  Square  Nat.  Bank  y.  Sim- 
mons, 42  Atl.   (N.  J.)  489. . .     958 
Lnion  Irust  Co.  v.  Fisher,  25 

Fed.  178 105,    362 

Union  Trust  Co.  ▼.  Wilson,  198 

U.  S.  530 1124 

United  States  v.  American  Bell 


PAGK 

Teleph.  Co.,  128  U.  S.  315..     868 
United   States   v.   Anistad,    15 

Pet.    (U.  8.)   594 3 

United    States    v.    Church    of 

Jesus  Christ,  etc.,  5  Utah,  538  824 
United  States  v.  Coffin,  33  Fed. 

337 311 

United  States  v.  Eisenbeis,  88 

Fed.  4 740 

United    States    v.    Griswold,    8 

Fed.  496 32,  317,  328,     690 

United   States    v.    Griswold,   8 

Fed.  556 983 

United  States  v.  Hooe,  3  Cranch 

(U.S.),  73 5 

United  States  v.  Ingate,  48  Fed. 

251 185,  775,    846 

United  States  Bank  v.  Lee,  13 

Pet.  (U.  8.)   107 359 

United  States  v.  Lotridge,  1  Mc- 
Lean (U.  S.),  246 801 

United  States  v.  Stiner,  28  Fed. 

Cas.  No.  16,404 350 

United  States  v.  United   States 

Bank,  8  Rob.    (La.)    262 

4,  12,  459,     575 
United'  States  Bank  v.  House- 
man, 6  Paige   (N.  Y.),  526. 

262,    909 
United  States  Bank  v.  Huth,  43 

Ky.  423 78,  199,     562 

U.  S.  Mortgage  Co.  v.  Marquam, 

41  Or.  391 637,     640 

U.  8.  Nat.  Bank  v.  Westervelt, 

55  Neb.  424 312 

United  States  Trust  Co.  v.  Sedg- 
wick,  97   U.    8.   304 

284,  680,  689,  1024 
Unitype  Ca  v.  Long  (C.  C.  A.), 

16  Am.  B.  R.  282 1193 

Unmack  v.  Douglass,  75  Conn. 

633 579,  1126,  1131 

Updegraff  v.   Rowland,   52   Pa. 

St.  317 340 

Updegraff  v.  Theaker,    57    Mo. 

App.  45 178,     279 

Updike  v.  Titus,   13  N.  J.  Eq. 

161 386 

Upper  Canada  Bank  v.  Beatty, 

9  Grant  Ch.  (Can.)  321 258 

Upper  Canada  Bank  v.   Shick- 

luna,  10  Grant  Ch.    (U.  C.) 

157 60,  100,  101,     102 

Upson  V.  Mt.  Morris  Bank,  14 

Am.  B.  R.  (N.  Y.)  8.... 618,  1166 
Upson  V.  Raiford,  29  Ala.  188. .  619 
Upton  V.  Craig,  57  111.  257.. 238,     637 


ccl 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Upton  V.  Dennis,  133  Mich.  238  840 
Urdangen  &  Greenberg  Bros.  y. 

Doner    122   Iowa,   533 

8,231,354,579,600,612,617,  620 
Uflher  Y.  Hazeltine,  5  Me.  471 . .     284 


Vaocaro  y.  Bank,  4  Am.  B.  R. 

474 1074,  1100 

Vail  V.  Craig,  13  St.  Rep.   (N. 

Y.)  448 984,  1007 

Vail  y.  Hammond,  60  Conn.  374 

118,    845 
Valentine  v.  Hurd,  21  Fed.  749 

31,     159 
Valentine  y.   Richardt^    126  N. 

Y.  272 866 

Vallance  y.  Miners  L.  Ins.  Co., 

42  Pa.  St.  441 429,    986 

Valley  Distillug  Co.  y.  Atkins, 

50  Ark.  289  ...  .520,  905,  941,     962 
Van  Beck  y.  Shuman,  13  How. 

Pr.   (N.  Y.)  472 49 

Van  Bibber  y.  Mathis,  52  Tex. 

406 340,  341,  344,     987 

Van  Blarcom  y.  Isaac,  92  Wis. 

541 1023 

Van     Brimt    v.    Pike*   4    Gill 

(Md.),  270 642 

Van  Buskirk  y.  Warren,  4  Abb. 

Dec.  (M.  Y.)  457 519 

Van  Campen  y.  Ingram  (N.  J. 

Ch.),  12  Atl.  537 67 

Vance  y.  Boynton,  8  Cal.  554..     650 
Vance   y.   Campbell,   3   Ky.    L. 

Rep.  448 18,    796 

Vance  y.    Phillips,   6  Hill    (N. 

Y.),  433 297,     391 

Vanoe  y.  Smith,  49  Tenn.  343. 

239,    269 
Vance  Shoe  Co.  y.  Haughty  41 

W.    Va.    275 

679,  686,  724,  856,  858,  861,  1023 
Vandall   y.   Vandall,    13    Iowa, 

247 957 

Vandercook  y.  Gere,    69    Iowa, 

467 »^3 

VanderYcere  y.  Gaston,  25  N.  J. 

L.  615 47 

Vanderveer  y.  Strykcr,  8  N.  J. 

Eq.  176 874 

VanderYort  y.  Fouse,  62  W.  Va. 

214 131,  952,  954,  976,  977 

VandeYenter   v*   Goss,    116  Mo. 

App.  316 

266,  279,  340,  361,  889,     894 
Vandever  v.  Freeman,    20   Tex. 


PAOB 

333 814 

Van  Dewater  y.  Gear,  21  App. 

DiY.  (N.  Y.)  201 772,    883 

Vandine  y.   Eherman,    26    La, 

Ann.  388 818 

Van  Dusen  y.  Hinz,   108  Wis. 

178 661 

Van  Duzen  y.  Peaoock,  11  Keb. 

246 374 

Van  Epps  y.  Van  Eppe^  9  Paige, 

237 689 

Vanfleet   y.   Phillips,    11    Iowa, 

658 49 

Van  Heusen  y.  Radcliff,  17  N. 

Y.  680 68,    733 

Van   Hoesen    y.    Teachout,   88 

Iowa,  459 363 

Van  Hook  y.  Walton,    28    Tex. 

69 448,  523,     664 

Van  Kirk  y.  Slate  Co.,  15  Am. 

B.  R.  239 1191 

Vanmeter  y.  Estill,  78  Ky.  456 

526,  559 
Vann  y.  Hargett,  22  N.  C.  31..  870 
Van  Ness  y.  McLeod,  3  Ida.  439 

744,  747 
Van  Norman  y.  Jackson  Circuit 

Judge,  46  Mich.  204 742 

Van   Patten   y.    lliompson,   73 

Iowa,  103 317 

Van  Patten  &  Marks  y.  Leon- 
ard, 66  Iowa,  629 176 

Van  Pelt  y.  Littler,  10  Cal.  394    636 
Van  Raalte  y.  Harrington,  101 

Mo.  602 616,  967,     994 

Van   Rensselaer   y.   Van   Rens- 
selaer, 113  N.  Y.  207 1024 

Van  Riswick  y.  Spalding,  117  U. 

S.  370 51 

Vansickle   y.    Shenk,    160    Ind. 

413 760,  762,  862,  919,    937 

Vansickle  y.  Wells,  Fargo  ^  Co., 

106   Fed.    16.. 248,   319,   320,   369, 

381,  499,   508,  512,  515,  678,     930 
Van    Slyck    y.    Woodruff,    118 

App.  DiY.    (N.  Y.)   47  .   .   ..     977 
Vanston  y.   DaYidson,    41     111. 

App.  646 384 

Van  Vliet  y.  Halsey,    37    Kan. 

116 669,  860,     867 

Van  Weel  y.  Winston,  116  U.  S. 

228 844 

Van  Winkle  y.  McKee,  7  Mo.  435 

632,  747 
Van  Wy  y.  Clark,  60  Ind.  259 .  637 
Van  Wyck  y.  Baker,  16  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  168. .  .330,  578,  690, 703,    80& 


Tablb  ov  Cases. 


ocli 


PAas 
Van  Wyck  v.  Seward,  18  Wend. 

(N.   Y.)    376   

182,  197,  266,  1084,  1138 
Van  Wyck  v.  Seward,  6  Paige, 

62 249,  264,  268,  278,     338 

Van  Wyle  v.  Baker,  10  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  39 1013 

Van  Vleet  v.  Stratton,  91  Tenn. 

473 104 

Vansant  v.  Davies,  6  Ohio  St. 
52 37      192 

Vamum  v.  IBehn,  176  N.  y!  622 

1017,  1023 
Varniim  v.  Bolton  Shoe  Co.,  84 

N.  Y.  Sum).  967 690 

Varwig  v.   Glereland,    etc.,    R. 

Co.,  64  Ohio  St.  465 218 

Vashon  y.  Barrett,  99  Va.  344 

833  837 
Vaeon  y.  Bell,  53  Ga.  416. .. . .'  322 
Vasser  y.  Henderson,  40  Miss. 

519 

627,  739    761,  774,  794,  796,    845 
Vattier  y.  Hinde,  32  U.  S.  252 

411,  510 
Vaughan  y.  Thompson,  17  111.  78  161 
Vaughn  y.  Owens,  21  111.  App. 

249 666 

Veazie  y.  Holines,  40  Me.  69. . .  536 
Veazie  y.  Somerby,  86  Mass.  280  548 
Venable  y.   Bank  of  U.  S.,  27 

U.  S.  107 818,961,    965 

Vennard  y.  McConnell,  93  Mass. 

656 276 

Verdier  y.  Foster,  2  Rich.  Eq. 

(S.  C.)    227    1040. 

Vermont  Say.  Bank  y.  Elliott, 

53  Mich.  256   160 

Vemer  y.  Downs,  13  S.  C.  449. .  796 
Vemer  y.  Vemer,  64  Miss.  184 

396,  891,    907 
Vernon  y.  Morton,  38  Ky.  247. 

620,  653 
Verplank  y.    Sterry,   12  Johns. 

(N.  Y.)    636    322,  325,    350 

Versailles    Bank    y.     Guthrey, 

127  Mo.   189    152 

Verselius      y.       Verselius,      9 

BUtchf.    (U.  S.)    189.... 820,  1039 
Vertner     y.     Humpnreys,     22 

Miss.  180 328,  274,  328,    360 

Vestal  y.  Allen,  94  Ind.  268.. 

821,  833 
Vial  y.  Mathewson,  34  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  70   383 

Viek  y.  Flowers,  6  S.  C.  321 . . 

447,  661 


PAGE 

Vick  y.  Kegs,  3  N.  C.  287 622 

Vickers  y.  Block,  31  La.  Ann. 

672 67 

Vickers    y.    Buck    Stoye,    etc., 

Co.,  60  Kan.  698 618 

Vickers  y.  Woodruff,  78  Iowa, 

400 996 

Vicksburg,  etc.,  R.  Co.  y.  Phil- 
lips, 64  Miss.  108 769,    761 

Victor  y.  Gloyer,  17  Wash.  37. . 

463,     471 
Victor  y.  Leyy,  148  N.  Y.  739 . . 

466,  487,  699,     686 
Victor  y.  Lewis,   1  Am.  B.  R. 

667 1230 

Victor  y.  Swisky,  200  111.  267. 

367,  397,  608,  612,    614 
Victoria    Paper    Mills    y.    New 

York,  etc.,  Co.,  28  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)    123   718,    719 

Victor    Sewing    Maoh.    Co.    y. 

Jacobs,  46  Mich.  494   138 

Viers  y.  Detroit  Paper  Package 

Co.,  119  Mich.  192 672 

Vilas  Nat.  Bank  y.  Newton,  25 

App.  Diy.  62. .  .418,  699,  614,  927 
Vincent  y.  State,  74  Ala.  274 . .  370 
Vincent  y.  Suoqualmie  Mill  Co., 

7   Wash.   666    32,      33 

Vlning  y.  Gilbreth,  39  Me.  496  643 
Vinton  y.  Felts,  71  111.  App.  630  161 
Violett  y.  Violett,  32  Ky.  323 .  580 
Viquesney  y.  Allen,  131  Fed.  21 

185,  776,   1212,  1219 
Virden  y.  Dwyer,  78  Miss.  763 

898,     966 
Virginia  Bd.  of  Public  Works 

y.  Columbia  College,  17  Wall. 

(U.  S.)    521    773,    776 

Visher  y.  Webster,  13  Cal.  68. .  549 
Vitoneno  y.  Corea,  92  Cal.  69. .  662 
Vodrie    y.    Tynan     (Tex.    Ciy. 

App.),  57  S.  W.  680 836,  838 

Vogedes  y.  Beakes,  38  App.  Diy. 

380 986 

Vogle  y.  Lathrop,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 

16,985 1169 

Vogler  y.  Montgomery,  54  Mo. 

577 92,     162 

Vogt  y.  Ticknor,  48  N.  H.  242 . 

832,    941 
Vollkommer  y.  Cody,  177  N.  Y. 

124 864,  1009 

Volusia   County   Bank   y.    Ber- 

tol8^  44  Fla.  734 620 

Volusia  County  Bank  y.  Bige* 

low  (Fla.),  33  So.  704.. 914,    916 


cclii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAQB 

Yoorhees   t.   BUnton,    83    Fed. 

234 146,  191,  232,    334 

457,  698,    n701 
Yoorhees  t.  Bonesteel,  16  Wall. 

(U.  8.)    16.... Ill,  113,  115,    878 
VoorheeB  t.  Carpenter,  127  Ind. 

300 197 

Yoorhees  t.   Howard,   4  Keyes 

(N.  Y.),  371    772 

Yoorhees  t.   Reford,    14  N.  J. 

£q.  155   731 

Yoorhees  t.  Seymonr,  26  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  569  832 

Yoorheis   t.    Blanton,    89    Fed. 

885 140,     177 

Yoorheis  t.   Waller    (Tex.  Ciy. 

App.),  35  8.  W.  807 893,    938 

Yoorhis  y.  Michaelis,  45   Kan. 

255   187,  348,    459 

Yose  y.  Stiekney,  19  Minn.  367 

419,  448,  460,  521,  538,  984,  1053 
Yoss   y.    8mith,    87   App.   Diy. 

(N.  Y.)    395    996 

Yote  y.  Karrick,  13  Colo.  App. 

388 966 

Yowinkle    y.    Johnston,    9    Pa. 

Cas.  85   113 

Yreeland  y.  Kew  Jersey  8tone 

Co.,  29  N.  J.  £q.  190 3 

Yreeland  y.  Rogers,  61  Atl.  (N. 

J.)    486    378,     380 

Yyn  y.  Keppel,  108  Mich.  244. .     918 

W 
Wachonia    Loan,    etc.,    Co.    y. 

Forbes,  120  N.  C.  355 

233,  355,    907 
Wachtel  y.  Ewing,  82  Mo.  App. 

594 514,     581 

Waddams  y.  Humphrey,  22  111. 

661 262 

Waddell   y.   WilUanis,   37  Tex. 

351 823,    870 

Waddle  y.  McGinty,   15  Grant 

Ch.  (U.  C.)  261   247 

Waddington  y.   Loker,   55   Mo. 

132 955 

Wade  y.  Colyert,  2  Mill  (8.  C.) 

26 274,    245 

Wade  y.  Odle  (Tex.  Ciy.  App.), 

46  8.  W.  887   916,    929 

Wade  y.  Odle,  21  Tex.  Ciy.  App. 

656 496,  582,    607 

Wade  y.  8aunders,  70  N.  C.  270 

711,    908 
Wadleigh  t.  Wadleigh,  111  App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)  367... 264,  277,     890 
Wadsworth  y.  Hayens,  3  Wend. 


PAGE 

(N.  Y.)  411    186,     215 

Wadsworth  y.  Marsh,  9  Conn. 

481 214,     918 

Wadsworth  y.  8elus8elbatter,  32 

Minn.   84    

772,  793,  794,  844,  845,    853 
Wadsworth    y.    Williams,     100 

Mass.    126    588 

Waeber   y.  Rosenstein,   6   App. 

Diy.    (N.  Y.)   447 1047,  1048 

Wafer  y.  Haryey  County  Bank, 

46  Kan.  597   252,     706 

Wagener  y.  Mars,  27  8.  C.  97. . 

1021,  1033,  1052 
Waggoner  y.  Cooley,  17  111.  339  711 
Wagner  y.  HaU,  16  Wall.    (U. 

8.)   584 1084,  1142,  1152 

Wagner  y.  Houston,  4  Am.  B. 

R.  596   1229 

Wagner  y.  Koch,  46  111.  App. 

501 124,  125,     848 

Wagner  y.   Law,  3   Wash.   500 

13,  214,  769,  851 
Wagner  y.  Smith,  81  Tenn.  569  6 
Wagner  y.  8mith,  81  Tenn.  560 

91,    577 
Wahl    y.    Murphy,    10    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  388   1053 

Wahlheimer    y.    Truslow,     106 

App.  Diy.    (N.  Y.)    73 415 

Wait  y.  Day,  4  Den.    (N.  Y.) 

439 24,  293,     752 

Waite   y.   Matthews,   50    Mich. 

392 521 

Wake  y.  Griffin,  9  Neb.  47... 

348,    368 
Wakeman   y.   Groyer,   4    Paige 

(N.  Y.),  23    71 

Wakler   y.    Houghteling,    120 

Fed.  928   967 

Walbrun   y.   Babbitt,    16  Wall. 

(U.  8.)  577. . .  .257,  i:58,  622,  1165 
Walcott    y.    Brander,    10    Tex. 

419 588 

Wolcott  y.  Hamilton,  61  Yt.  79     153 
Walcott  y.  Keith,  22  N.  H.  196 

522,     949 
Waldron   y.   Murdock,   23   Cal. 

540 458,  501,  640,     542 

Waldie  y.  Doll,  29  Cal.  555.. 

536,     550 
Wales  y.  Lawrence,  36  N.  J.  £q. 

207 808 

Walker  y.  Adair,   1   Bond    (U. 

S.),  168   457,     466 

Walker  y.  Bacon,  32  Mo.  144.     676 
Walker     y.     Bank     of     Man- 


Table  of  Cases. 


ccliii 


Chester,  26  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1950    672 
Walker   ▼.    Bollman,    22    S.    C. 

512 349 

Walker  v.  Cady,  106  Mich.  21 

300,  343,  691,  717,    970 
Walker  v.  Collins,  60  Fed.  737 

612,  704,    939 
Walker  ▼.  Harold,  44   Or.  205 

897,  969,    066 
Walker  v.  Hill,   22  N.   J.  Bq. 

613 660 

Walker     v.     Houghteling,     120 

Fed.  928   508 

Walker    v.    Kynett,    36    Iowa, 

694 967 

Walker    v.    Loring,    Civ.    App. 

(Tex.)    34  S.  W.  406 178,    279 

Walker  y.  Loring,  89  Tex.  668 

282,    283 
Walker  v.  Lovell,  28  N.  H.  138 

208,     749 
Walker   v.   Marine  Nat.   Bank, 

98  Pa.  St.  674 462,    474 

Walker  ▼.  Matthews,  68  111.  196 

693,    701 
Walker  ▼.  McConnico,  18  Tenn. 

228 663 

Walker   v.   Powers,    104   U.    S. 

246 197,822,    868 

Walker    v.    Shannon,    53    Miss. 

600 870 

Walker    v.    Siegel,    Fed.    Cas. 

17,085 1187 

Walker    ▼.    Smith,    6    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  457  954 

Walker    v.    Snediker,    1    Hoff. 

Ch.  (N.  Y.)   145 519 

Walker  v.  Todd,  33  Ky.  503..     378 
Walker    ▼.    Towner,    Fed.    Cas. 

17,089 1235 

Walden   v.    Walden,    33    Oratt. 

(Va.)    88    328 

Walker   v.   Walker,    175   Mass. 

349 633 

Walker  v.  Walker,  6  Ohio  8.  ft 

C.  PI.  Dec.  365 492,  595,    602 

Walker  ▼.  White,  36  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)    592    1022,  1027 

Walkow  v.  Kingsley,  45  Minn. 

233 997 

Wall  T.  Beedy,  161  Mo.  625... 

228,  263,  306,     460 
539,  562,  839,    908 
Wall  ▼.  Cox,  181  U.  S.  244. . . . 

1170,  1204,  1211 
WaU  T.  Fairley,  73  N.  C.  464 . . 

411,    822 


PAGE 

Wallace    ▼.    Berheim,    63    Ark. 

108 579,  1002 

Wallace  v.  Berry,  51  Vt.  602..  226 
Wallace    ▼.    Butts     (Tex.    Civ. 

App.),  31   S.  W.  687.... 245,    689 
Wallace  v.  Eaton,  6  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    99    819 

Wallace  ▼.  Mason,  100  Ky.  560 

107,     156 
Wallace    v.    Nodine,    67    Hun 

(N.  Y.),  239 519,  962,     979 

Wallace  v.  Penfield,  106  U.  S. 

260 191,     192 

Wallace   v.   Treakle,    27   Gratt. 

(Va.)    479    1035 

Wallace  ▼.  White,  12  111.  App. 

177 711 

Wallach  v.  Wylie,  28  Kan.  138 

71,  333,    924 
Wallen  v.  Montague,   121   Ala. 

287 1007 

Waller    v.    Cralle,    8    B.    Mon. 

(Ky.)    11    219,  626,     631 

Waller  v.  Johnson,  82  Va.  966  965 
Waller    v.    Shannon,    63    Miss. 

500 824 

Waller  v.  Todd,  33  Ky.  603 .. .  776 
Walling     ▼.      Christian,      etc.. 

Grocery  Co.,  41  Fla.  479 603 

Wallis  T.  Adone,  76  Tex.  118. . 

229,    606 
Wallis    V.    Schneider,    79    Tex. 

479 462,  1001,  1006 

Wain  ▼.  Hance,  35  N.  J.  Eq. 

660 977 

Walp  ▼.  Mooar,  76  Conn.  516. .  711 
Walp  y.  Mooar,  76  Conn.  16. . .  727 
Walradt  v.  Brown,  6  111.  397.. 

19,  198,  200,  201 
Walsh  ▼.  Bums,  39  Minn.  527.  848 
Walsh  V.  Byrnes,  39  Minn.  527  874 
Walsh   ▼.   Byrnes    (Minn.),   40 

N.  W.  831    266 

Walsh  V.  Carrene,  36  La.  Ann. 

199 736 

Walsh  V.  Kelly,  42  Barb.    (N. 

N.)   98 618 

Walsh  ▼.  Ketchum,  12  Mo.  App. 

580 284 

Walsh    v.    Ketchum,     84    Mo. 

Ao'7  279      342 

Walsh  V!  6'N'eiil,  192  111.  202 . .'  693 
Walters  t.   Brown    (Tenn.   Ch. 

App.),  46  S.  W.  777 

37,  40,  900,    963 
Walters  t.  Cantrell,  66  S.  W. 

790 387,  1020 


ccliv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGB 

Walter  v.  6eniuit»   13  Pft.  St. 

616 657 

Walter  ▼.  Hartman,  67  8.  W. 

(Tenn.) 120,  340,  387,    4T6 

Walter   ▼.   Jones,    148   Pa.    St. 

689 400 

Walter  v.  Lane,   1  MacArthur, 

276 360,    361 

•V  alters  v.  Merrit  Pants  Co.,  88 

S.   W.    (Ark.)    879 310,     367 

Walters    v.    Ratcliff,    10    Okla. 

262 627,  987,    990 

Walter  v.  Riehl,  38  Md.  211 .. .     824 
Walters  v.  Walters,  28  111.  App. 

633 832 

Walthall  V.  Rives,  34  Ala.  91 . .     846 
Walthall's   Ex'rs   v.    Rives,    34 

Ala.  91    33 

Walton  V.  Birch,   10  La.  Ann. 

100 391 

Walton  V.  Bonham,  24  Ala.  613    216 
Walton  V.  First  Nat.  Bank,  13 

Colo.  206 960,  964,  966,    969 

Walton  V.  Parish,  96  N.  C.  269 

327,    366 
Walton  V.  Tusten,  49  Miss.  669 

144,  632,  639,     646 
Walton    V.    Westwood,    73    111. 

126 857 

Walworth  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Burton, 

82  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  637...  976 
Wambold  v.  Vick,  60  Wis.  466  111 
Wanamaker  v.  Biowes,  36  Md. 

42 186 

Wandling  v.  Thompson,  41  N.  J. 

L.  309  42,  46,     766 

Wang  V.  Finnerty,  32  La.  Ann. 

94    443,  444,  694,     886 

Warfield  v.  Ljnd,  67  Iowa,  722.    316 
Ward  V.  Connecticut  Pipe  Mfg. 

Co.,  71   (jonn.  346 86 

Ward  V.  Crotly,  61  Ky.  69 369 

Ward  V.  Enders,  29  111.  619... 

67,    631 
Ward  V.  Hollina,  14  Md.  168. . 

187,  348 
Ward  V.  Krumm,  64  How.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    96    406 

Ward  V.  Lamberth,  31  Ga.  150.     446 
Ward  V.  Parker,  128  Iowa,  124 

315,  561 
Ward  V.  Parlin,  30  Neb.  376. . .  614 
Ward  V.  Sanders,  28  N.  C.  382.  923 
Ward  V.  Shirley,  131  Ala.  668.  962 
Ward  V.  Sumner,  22  Mass.  69. .  621 
Ward  V.  Thomaa,  81  Ky.  452.. 

343,  346,    837 


PAQK 

Ward  V.  Totter,  19  Ky.  1 

240,  241,  272,  293,  497,     591^ 
Ward  V.  Van  Bokkelin,  1  Paige 

(N.  Y.),  100   876 

Ward  V.  Van  Bokkelen,  2  Paige 

(N.  Y.),  289 821 

Ward  V.  Wehman,  27  Iowa,  279.     260 
Ward    V.    Wofford,    26    S.    W. 

(Tex.)  321 582,     944 

Warden   v.    Browning.    12   Hun 

(N.  Y.)    497    ....1027,   1028,  1032 
Warden  v.  Field,  5  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

865 639 

Warden  v.  Fulkerson,  22  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  184 964 

Warden  v.  Jones,  4  Jur.  N.  S. 

269 100,     101 

Warden  v.  Jones,  2  De  6.  &  J. 

(Eng.)   360 327 

Warden  v.  Marshall,     99  Mass. 

306 560 

Wfljre  ▼.  Gardner,  L.  R.   7  Eq. 

317 ??*      414 

Ware  v.  Hamilton  Brown  Shoe 

Co.,  92  Ala.  145 810 

Ware    v.     Purdy,     60    N.     W. 

(Iowa),  626 274 

Ware    v.    Seasongood,    92    Ala. 

152 130. 

Warmouth  v.  Dryden,  126  Ind. 

366 801 

Warner   v.    Blakeman,    4    Abb. 

Dec.    (N.   Y.)    636 

7,  9,  680,  686,     688 
Warner  v.   Blackman,  4  Keyes 

(N.  Y.),  487 722 

Warner  v.  Carlt(»,  22  Ul.  415.    638 
Warner  v.  Dove,  33  Md,  679 . . . 

279     339 
Warner  v.  Jaffray,  96  N.  Y.  248 

86,      87 
Warner  v.  Lake,  14  N.  Y.  Supp. 

10 674 

Warner  v.  Littlefield,  89  Mich. 

329 236,  316,  460,  473,  992 

Warner  v.  Moran,  60  Me.  227.  1066 
Warner  v.  Norton,  20  How.  (U. 

S.)  448  254,  527,  671,  985 

Warner  v.  Percy,  22  Vt.  155 .. . 

935,    956 

Warner  v.  Rice,  66  Md.  436 423 

Warner  Glove  Co.  v.  Jennings, 

68  Conn.  74   458 

Warren  v.  Brown,  26  Miss.  66. 

339,     375 
Warren  v.  Carpenter,  99  Mich. 
287 669,  1005^ 


f 


Table  of  Cases. 


cclv 


PACE 

Warren  v.  Hall,  36  Ky.  450. . . 

177,    641 
Warren   v.   Hinson    (Tenn.   Ch. 

App.),  52  S.  W.  462,  498. ...     904 
Warren    v.    His    Creditors,    3 

Wash.  St.  48   302 

Warren  v.  Hunt,  114  Ala.  500. 

474,  489,  498,  855,    859 
Warren  v.  Jones,  68  Ala.  449 . . 

78,  79,  366,  457 
Warren  v.  Makely,  85  N.  C.  12.  937 
Warren  v.  Ranney,  50  Vt.  653..  361 
Warren  v.  Taylor,  8  Can.  L.  J. 

0.  S.  243   (U.  C.) 200 

Warren  ▼.  Union  Bank,  157  N. 

Y.  259 7 

Warren  v.  Warren  Thread  Co., 

134  Mass.  247 118 

Warren  v.  Wilder.  12  St.  Rep. 

(N.  Y.)  757... 296,  307,  341,  690 
Warren  ▼.  Williams,  52  Me.  343  203 
Wartel  v.  Darbein,  8  La.  Ann. 

506 520 

Warwick  Iron  Co.  v.  First  Nat. 

Bank,  10  Pa.  Cas.  14 558 

Wash  V.  Medley,  1  Dana  (Ky.), 

269 626 

Washband     v.     Washhand,     27 

Conn.  424.  .233,  290,  330,  335,    353 
Waahbom  ▼.  Goodheart»  88  111. 

229 151 

Washburn    ▼.    Hammond,     151 

Mass.    132 576 

Washburn  v.  Gates,  14  Okla.  5.     527 
Washington    v.    Norwood,     128 

Ala.  338....  182,  205,  20B,  833,    864 
Waahington     Brewing     Co.     ▼. 

G^ny,  24  Atl.  (Md.)  161 ... .     809 
Washington  Cent.  Nat.  Bank  v. 

Hume,  128  U.  S.  195 95,    342 

WsMerman   v.   McDonnell,    190 

Mass.  326 175,    669 

Wasson    T.    Millaap^    77    Iowa, 

762 966 

Waterbuiy    v.    Sturtevanl^     18 

Wend.  (N.  Y.)  363 228,    466 

497,  499,  500,    589 
Wateibu^  v.  Westervelt,  9  N. 

Y.  598 1026 

Waterbury  Lumber,  etc.,  Co.  ▼. 

Hinddey,  75  Conn.   187 908 

Waterhouse  ▼.  Benton,    5    Day 

(Conn.),  136 218 

Waterhouse  v.  Waterhouse,  206 

Pa.  St.  433  225 

Waterman  t.   Cochran,   12   Vt. 

699. 37,     136 

Waterman  v.  Donaldson,  43  III. 


PAGB 

29 395 

Waters  v.  DashleU,  1  Md.  455. 

203,  821 
Waters  v.  Merrit  Pdnts  Co.,  88 

S.  W.    (Ark.)    879.. 968 

Waters  v.  Riggin,  19  Md.  536.. 

580,  938,  949 
Waterson  v.  Wilson,    1    Grant 

Cas.   (Pa.)    74   351 

Watkins  v.  Arms,  64  N.  H.  99. 

251,  441 
Watkins  ▼.  Birch,  4  Taunt.  823.  518 
Watkins   v.    Dorsett,    1    Bland. 

(Md.),  530 99 

Watkins  v.  Jones,  78  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  496 644 

Watkins  y.  Petefish,  49  111.  App. 

80 546 

Watkins  v.   Wallace,    19  Mich. 

57 1002 

Watkins  v.  Wilhoit    (Cal.),  35 

Pac.  646 838 

Watkins    v.    Wortman,    19    W. 

Va.  78 857 

Watschke  ▼.  Thompson,  7  Am. 

B.  R.  604  1146 

Watson  V.  Bonflls,  116  Fed.  157. 

5,  27,  50,  54,  133,  135,  578,    976 
Watson  V.  Cummins,  40  N.  J. 

Eq.  483 373 

Watson  V.  Dealy,  26  Misc.  R^. 

20 958 

Watson  V.  Dickens,  20  Miss.  608 

709 
Watson  v.  Harmon,  85  Mo.  43.  652 
Watson  y.  Hindiman,  42  Mich. 

27 1062 

Watson  y.  Holden,  58  Kan.  657.      86 
Watson  y.  Kennedy,    3    Strob. 

Eq.   1    (B.   C.) 240,    686 

Watson  y.  McCarthy,  10  Grant 

Ch.    (U.  C.)   416 51,    871 

Watson  y.  Mead,  98  Mich.  330.     206 
Watson  y.  Riskamire,  45  Iowa, 

231 375,    586 

Watson  y.  Rodgers,  53  Cal.  401. 

524,  525,  553 
Watson  y.  Tool,  36  Ala.  308...  938 
Watt  y.  Parsons,  73  Ala.  202. .  560 
Watt  y.  Morrow,  103  N.  W.  ( S. 

D.)  45 364,  397,  838,    965 

Watts  y.  Burgess,  131  Ala.  333. 

403,  818,  876,    897 
Watts    V.    Dubois     (Tex.    Ciy. 

App.),  68  S.  W.  698.230,  294,  595 
Watts  y.  Kilbum,  7  Ga.  356. . .  587 
Watte  y.  Vansant,  99  Md.  577.  639 
Watts  y.  Warren,  108  N.  C.  614.    93a 


cclvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


Watts    T.    WiUxs,     13    N.    Y. 

Sapp.  492 

Wattaon  t.  Campbell,  38  X.  T. 

153 

Waa«er  r.  Lucas,  44  Neb.  759. 
Waxelbamn  y.  Ball,  91  Ala.  331 
Way  T.   BragBW,   16  X.  J.   Eq. 

213 815,  824, 

Way  ▼.  Lyon,  3  Blackf.   (Ind.) 

76 

W.  B.  Parham  &  Co.  ▼.  Potts- 

ThompMm  Ldqaor  Co.,  127  Ga. 

303 173, 

Weadock  v.    Kennedy,   80   Wis. 

449 883, 

Wearie  v.  Peirce.  41  Mass.  141 . 
Weatherbee  ▼.  Coekrell,  44  Kan. 

380 632,  650, 

Weaver  v.  Barden,  49  N.  Y.  286 
Weaver  v.  Haviland,  142  N.  Y. 

634... 772,  836,  837,  838,  840, 

Weaver  v.  Nugent,  72  Tex.  272. 

291,  297,  996,  998, 

Wearer  v.  Owens,  16  Oreg.  304. 

223, 
Weaver  v.  R.  L.  Neal  &  Co.,  55 

S.  E.   (W.  Va.)  909 

Weaver  v.  Toogood,  1  Barb.  (N. 

Y.)   238 

Weaver  v.  White,  64  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  636 

Weaver  v.  Wright,  13  Rich.  (S. 

C.)   9 408, 

Webb  City  Lumber  Co.  v.  Vic- 
tor Min.  Co.,  id.  230 

Webb  V.    Atkinson,    124   N.   C. 

447 137,  308,  378,  669. 

Webb   V.   Atkinson,    122   N.    C. 

683 209, 

Webb  V.  Brown,  3  Ohio  St.  246. 

68,  714, 
Webb  T.  Ingham,  29  W.  Va.  389 

312   372 
Webb  V.  Long,  17  Vt.  587! . . . .' 
Webb  V.  Boff,  9  Ohio  8t.  430. . 

386, 
Webb  ▼.   Sachs,    29    Fed.    Cas. 

No.   17,326 258, 

Webb  V.  Staves,    1    App.    Div. 

(N.  Y.)    146    .., 

Webb's    Trustee    v.    Lynchberg 

Shoe  Co.  (Va.),  66  S.  E.  681. 
Webber  v.  Hayes,  117  Mich.  256 
Webber    v.    Jackson,    79    Mich. 

176 961, 

Webber  v.  Mackey,  31  111.  App. 

369 682,  583, 

Webber  v.  Webber,  109  Mich. 


816 

87 
398 
939 

870 

218 

176 

915 
657 

709 
884 

865 

1001 

986 

304 

197 

305 

409 

332 

935 

766 

733 

696 
1056 

910 

1165 

768 

1128 
746 

966 

593 


147 492,  509 

Weber  v.  Aschbacker,  205  Pa. 

St.  558 994 

Weber  v.  Mick,  131   Ul.  520... 

473,  626,  1002 
Weber  v.   Paxton,  48  Ohio  St. 

266 124,  125,     128 

Weber  v.   Rothschild,    15   Oreg. 

385 203,  876,     905 

Weber  v.  Weber,  90  Wis.  467.. 

775,  787,     804 
Webster  v.  Anderson,  42  Mich. 

554 52t 

Webster  v.  Bailey,  40  Mich.  641. 

518,     521 
Webster  v.  Qark,  25  Me.  313. . 

777,  796,  842 
Webster  v.  Folsom,  58  Me.  230. 

736,     752 
Webster  v.  Hildreth,  33  Vt.  457 

112,  114,  131 
Webster   v.   Lawrence,  47   Hun 

(N.  Y.),  565    772,     784 

Webster  v.  Peck,  31   Conn.  496 

526,     534 
Webster  ▼.    Sherman    (Mont.), 

84  Pac.  878 632 

Webster  v.  Withey,  25  Me.  326  299 
Weckerly  v.  Taylor  (Neb.),  103 

N.  W.  1065 

90,  103,  187,  190,  856,     891 
Wederstrandt  v.  Marsh,  11  Rob. 

(La.)  533 178,    669 

Wedgewood  v.  Withers,  36  Neb. 

583 113,  963,    967 

Wedgeworth  v.  Wedgeworth,  84 

Ala.  274 397,897,    974 

Weed  V.  Davis,  25  Ga,  684 

178,  278,  339 
Weed  V.  Harris,  54  Iowa,  747.  972 
Weed  V.  Pierce,  9  Cow.  (N.  Y.) 

723 20,     101 

Weeden  v.  Hawes,  10  Conn.  50.  1053 
Weeks  v.  Flower,  9  La.  379. . .  736 
Weeks  v.  Hm.  88  Me.  111.... 

670,   685,     997 
Weeks  v.  Prescott,  63  Vt.  67. 

527,  529,  630,  649 
Weeks  v.  Spooner,  142  N.  C.  479  1169 
Weeks  v.  Wead,  2  Aik.    (Vt.) 

64 627 

Weightman  v.  Hatch,  17  111.  281 

791,  794,  796,  843,  966 
Weigley  v.  Matson,  126  111.64.  47 
Weil  V.  Lankins,  3  Neb.  384. . 

774,    783 
Weil   V.   Levenson,   8  St.   Rep. 


Table  of  Cases. 


cdvii 


FAGB 

(N.  Y.)  834 856 

Weil  V.  BeiBS,  167  Mo.  126 609 

Weiland  v.  Potter,  8  Ck>lo.  App. 

79 644 

Weingarten  v.  MarcuB,  121  Ala. 

187 44,  171,294,     762 

Weingea  v.  Cash,  15  S.  C.  44 . . 

474,  500,  581 
Weinland  v.  Cochran,  9  Neb.  480  774 
Weir  V.  Day,  67  Iowa,  87..  19,  239 
Weir  V.  Dustin,  28  111.  App.  605  458 
Weis     V.     Farley,    110    N.    W. 

(Neb.)  656 369 

Weia  V.  Qoetter,  72  Ala.  269.. 

1046    1049 
Weis  V.  Quinan  (Tex.),  7  S.  w! 

804 447 

Weia  ▼.  Tieman,  91  111.  27 795 

Weise  v.  Wardle,  L.  R.  19  £q. 

171 820 

Weiaer  v.  Kling,  38  App.  Diy. 

266 695 

Weiser  v.  Weisel,  53  N.  T.  Supp. 

678 699 

Weisiger  v.  Chisholm,  28  Tex. 

780 571,  688,  907,     976 

Welby  V.  Armstrong,  21  Ind.  489 

631,  637,  656 
Welch  v.  Bradley,  46  Minn.  540 

225,  246,     874 

Welcn  v.  Mann,  193  Mo.  304 

187,  266,  266, 

274,  277,  284,  348,  350,  737,     761 
Welch  ▼.  Tobias,  7  St  Rep.  (N. 

Y.)  297 1038 

Welcker  v.  Price,  70  Tenn.  66 

875,  891 
Welcker  v.  Staples,  88  Tenn.  49  676 
Weleome  ▼.  Batchelder,  23  Me. 

85 274,  306,    449 

Welcome  v.  Mitchell,    81    Wis. 

666 884 

Weld  V.  BeiUy,  48  N.  Y.  Super. 

Ct.  631 191 

Welde  ▼.  Scotten,  69  Md.  72. . . 

16,  198,    200 
Weller  v.  Hartgraves,  14  U.  C. 

C.  P.  (Can.)  360 218 

Weller  y.  Meeder,  2  Pa.  Super. 

Ct.  488 527 

WeUer  ▼.   Wayland,   17  Johns. 

(N.  Y.)   102 78,  482,    500 

Welles  V.  Cole,  6  Gratt.    (Va.) 

646 323 

WeUington  v.  Fuller,  38  Me.  61 

312,  444 
Wellington  v.  Ueermans,  110  111. 

q 


PAGE 

664 520 

Wellington     v.     Terry     (Colo., 

1907),  88  Pac.  467.. 33,  311,    413 
Wellmaker   v.    Wellmaker,    113 

Ga.  1156 278 

Wells  V.  Dalrymple,  Fed.  Cas. 

No.  17,392 804 

Wells,     etc.,     Grocery     Co.     v. 

Clark,  79  Mo.  App.  401.  .744,     761 
Wells  V.  Gieseke,  27  Minn.  478.       49 

Wells  V.  Stout,  9  Cal.  479 

192,  347,     376 
Wells  V.   Schoonover,  66  Tenn. 

806 667 

Wells     V.     Schuster-Hax     Nat. 

Bank,  23  Colo.  634 346,    685 

Wells  V.  Thomas,  10  Mo.  237. . 

234,     365 
Wells  V.  White,  142  Mass.  618 

687,    694 
Welsch  V.  Werschem,  92  111.  116 

458,    940 
Welsh  ▼.  Bekey,   1  Pen.  &  W. 

(Pa.)  67 666 

Welsh  y.  Cooper,  3  Am.  L.  J.  N. 

O.    (  It  a. )    o  V  •    ■    •    ••    ..*«..«.       v4o 

Welsh  y.  Solenberger,  76  Va.  441  89» 
Welton  y.  Baltezare,  25  Neb.  190  892 
Wenman    y.     Lyon,      1    Q.    B. 

(Eng.)  634 324 

Wenster  y.  Cleik,  25  Me.  313..  774 
Werts  y.   Spearman,   22   S.   C. 

200 523 

Werner  y.  Zurfuss,  162  Pa.  St 

360 238, 

316,  461,  474,  489,  490,  491,     492 

495,  498,  581,     600 
Wescott  y.   McDonald,   22   Me. 

407 341 

Wesselhoeft  y.  Cudahy  Packing 

Co.,  44  111.  App.  128 974 

Wessels   y.    Beeman,    87    Mich. 

481 671,  916,  925,     948 

Wessels  y.  Beenam,  66  Mich.  343  989 
Wessels   y.   McCann,   85   Iowa, 

424 990 

West  y.  Bank  of  Lahoma,    16 

Am.  B.  R.  733 1167,  1169 

West  y.  Dubberly,  4  N.  C.  478.  67 
West  y.  Russell,  48  Mich.  74..  940 
West  y.  Snodgrass,  17  Ala.  649 

23,  424,     426 
West  Co.  y.  Lea,  174  U.  S.  590 

1072, 

1086,  1086,   1099,  1105,  1139,  1184 
West  Coast  Grocery  Co.  y.  Stin- 

son,  13  Wash.  255 


cclviii 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

463,  464,  486,  490,  848,    856 
Westerfield  v.  Kimmer,  82  Ind. 

365 148 

Westerly  Say.  Bank  v.  Stillmaa 

Mfg.  Co.,  16  R.  1.  497 312 

Western  lie  &  Timber  Co.    v. 

Brown  (C.  C.  A.),  12  Am.  B. 

R.  Ill 1164 

Weeterman    v.    Westerman,  25 

Ohio  St.  500 806,    853 

Westervelt    v.    Baker,    1    Neb. 

(Unoflf.)  635 741 

Weetervelt   v.   Haggs,   61   Neb. 

647 794 

Weptfall    V.    Jonee,    23     Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  9 424,    436 

Westheimer    v.    Goodkind,     24 

Mont.  90 846 

Westmoreland  Guarantee  Bldg., 

etc.,   Assoc,   y.   Thomas,    207 

Pa  St.  613 188 

Westmoreland  v.  Powell,  59  Ga. 

256  .  ...  12,  17,  201,  282,  335,     585 
West  Point  Min.,   etc.,  Co.    v. 

Allen   (Ala.),  39  8o.  351 812 

West  Troy  Nat.  Bank  v.  Levy, 

127  N.  y.  549 766 

Wetherill  v.  Canney,  62  Minn. 

341 278,  418,  419,     420 

Wetherly  v.  Strauss,  93  Cal.  283 

159,  163,  855,     859 
Wetmore  ▼.  Wetmore,    149    N. 

Y.  629 134,    872 

Wetmore  v.  Wisner,  2  Luz.  Leg. 

Obs.  (Pa.)  204 474 

Wetstein  ▼.  Francisoo,  13  Am. 

B.  R.  326 1166 

W.  F.  Johnson  &  Co.  ▼.  Christie, 

79  Mo.  App.  46 403 

Wharton  v.  Clements,  3  Del.  Ch. 

209 458,     469 

Whaun  v.  Atkinson,  84  Ala.  592     513 
Whayne  v.  Morgan,  11  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  254 823 

Wheatley  v.  Chamberlain  Bank- 
ing House  (Neb.),  101  N.  W. 

1135 160 

Wheaton    v.    Neville,     19    Cal. 

41 458, 

464,  488,  489,  492,  501,  570,     593 
Wheby  v.  Moir,  102  Va.  875.. 

582,  979 
Whedbee  v.  Stewart,  40  Md.  414  572 
Whedon  v.  Champlin,  59  Barb. 

(N.  Y.)  61 683 

Wheelden  v.  Wilson,  44  Me.  11 

32,  344,     571 


-A 


Wheeler  v.  Brady,     4    Thomp. 

(N.  Y.)  AC.  547 244 

Wheeler  v.  Caryl  Ambl.  (Eng.) 

121 324 

Wheeler  v.  Kirkland  23  N.  J. 

Eq.  13 83 

Wheeler  v.  Koust,  46  Wis.  398.  1000 
Wheeler  v.  Lasch,    106   N.  W. 

(Mich.)  689 970 

Wheeler  v.  Nichols,  32  Me.  233  644 
Wheeler  v.  Selden,  63  Vt.  429 . .  529 
Wheeler  v.  Single,  62  Wis.  380  269 
Wheeler  v.  Stone,  4  GUI  (Md.) 

38 459 

Wheeler  v.  Taylor,  41  N.  C.  225  771 
Wheeler  v.  Train,  20  Mass.  255 

521,    539 
Wheeler  v.   Wallace,  53   Mich. 

364 69,  632,  660,    674 

Wheeler,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Bjcl- 

land,  97  Iowa,  U37 160 

Wheeler,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Has- 

brouck,  68  Iowa,  554 1017 

Wheeler,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Mona- 

han,  63  Wis.  198 349,     376 

Wheelock  v.  Lee,  64  N.  Y.  242.  119b 
Wheelock  v.  Wood,  93  Pa.  St. 

298 334 

Whelan  v.  Whelan,  3  Cow.  (N. 

Y.)  537 325,    818 

Whelpley     v.     Stoughton,     119 

Mich.  314 892 

Whetmore  v.  Murdock,  29  Fed. 

Cas.  No.  17,509 392 

Whitaker  v.  Gamett,  66  Ky.  402  971 
Whitaker  v.  Sumner,  37  Mass. 

399 312 

Whitaker  v.  Whitaker,  157  Mo. 

342 632,     639 

Whitcher  v.  Shattuck,  85  Mass. 

319 945 

White  V.  Barcow,  14  Ohio  St. 

339 681 

White  V.  Benjamin,  150  N.  Y. 

258 396,  512,     941 

White  V.  Benjamin,  3  Misc.  Rep. 

(N.  if.)  490 252 

White  V.  Bettis,  56  Tenn.  645 . .  192 
White  V.  Brocaw,    14    Ohio  St. 

339 .634,  640,     653 

White  V.  Cates,  37  Ky.  357 ... . 

214,  810,  1021 
White  V.  Cole,  24  Wend.  116... 

539,    540 
White  V.  Gaines,  29   La.  Ann. 

769 736 

White  V.  Gibson,  113  Mo.  App. 


Table  of  Cases* 


cclix 


PASS 

568 223,  231,  247,    533 

White  T.   Gravefl,   30  Ky.   523 

434,  446 
White  T.  Gunn,  205  Pa.  St.  229 

527  986  990 
White  V.  HUdreth,  32  Vt.  266. .'  131 
White  V.  Magarahan,  87  Ga.  217  407 
White  V.   Megill,    18   Atl.    (N. 

J.)  355 251,  355,     444 

Whit«  V.  Miller,  46  Vt.  65 . .  627,     990 
White  v.  MilUon,  102  Mo.  App. 

437 

408,  694,  615,  709,  718,  986,  989 
White  ▼.  Pease,  15  Utah,  170. .  562 
White  V.  Perry,  14  W.  Va.  86..9,  980 
White  v.  Kassell,  79  111.  155 . . 

641,  789 
White  v.  Sansom,  3  Atk.  410. . 

142,  336 
White  ▼.  Seldon,  4  Nev.  280. . .  90 
White  V.  Slaughter,  5  La.  Ann. 

136 390 

White  V.  Sdiloerb,  178  U.  S.  542  1215 
White  V.  Sterzing,  11  Tex.  Civ. 

App.  553 683 

White  V.  Stevens,  7  U.  C.  Q.  B. 

340 463,    601 

White  V.  Thompson    9  Am.  B. 

R.  663 1226 

White  V.  Trotter,  14  Sm.  A  M. 

(Miss.)  30 27,  63,  812,    966 

White  V.  White,  35  N.  C.  265 

77,  135,     138 

White  V.  Wise,  134  Cal.  613 1009 

WUte  V.  Wilson,  102  Mo.  App. 

437 665 

White's  Bank  v.   Farthing,   10 

St.  Bep.  830 

343,  346,  586,  920,    986 
White's  Bank  v.  Farthing,  101 

N.  Y.  344 815,     816 

White  Sewing  Mach.  Go.  v.  At- 
kinson, 76  Tex.  330.. 99,  760,  1028 
Whitehead  v.  Woodruff,  74  Ky. 

209 469 

Whitehouse  v.  Bolster,  96  Me. 

468. .. .  182,  205,  265,  343,  986,     998 
Whitehouse  v.  Nelson  (Wash.), 

86  Pac.  174 176 

Whitescarver  v.  Bonney,  9  Iowa, 

480 179 

Whiteeel  v.  Hiney,  62  Ind.  168.     290 
Whitele^   v.   Sksrc^n,    95    111. 

App.  630 958,    963 

Whitfield  V.  Stiles,  57  Mich.  410 

460,  473,  906,     929 
Whiting  V.  Barrett,  7  Lans.  (N. 


PAGE 

Y.)  106 151,     155 

Whiting  V.  Beckwith,  31  Conn. 

696 106 

Whiting     V.     Earle,     3     Pick. 

(Mass.)    201 110 

Whiting  V.  Hogland,   127  Wis. 

135 979 

Whitinff  V.  Johnson,  11  Serg.  & 

R.   (Pa.)  328 78,  238,    318 

Whiting  V.  Laurason,  7  Grant 

Ch.   (U.  C.)   603   783 

Whiting    V.    Prentice,    12   Rob. 

141 272,    580 

Whiting  V.  Ralph,  76  Conn.  41 

187,  347 
Whiting  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Gephart,  6 

Wash.  616    526 

Whitley,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Roach,  8 

Am.  B.  R.  606 1163 

Whitman    V.    O'Brien,    29    Pa. 

Super.  Ct.  208   »  .  .600,    607 

Whitmore  v.  Woodward,  28  Me. 

392   13,  136,  187,  192,     817 

Whitney    v.    Brunette,    3    Wis. 

621 623 

Whitney   v.   Davis,    148   N.   Y. 

266 772,  776,    783 

Whitney  v.  Freeland,  26  Minn. 

481 69,     177 

Whitney    v.    Iieominster    Sav. 

Bank,  141  Mass.  86  461 

Whitney  v.  Levon,  34  Neb.  443 

236  237 
Whitney  v.  Lynde,  16  Vt.  679 

644,  646 
Whitney  v.  Rose,  43  Mich.  27.  894 
Whitney  v.  Stark,  8  Cal.  514. .  524 
Whitney  v.   Stearns,  62   Mass. 

319 768 

Whitney  v.  Wenman,  198  U.  S. 

639 1215,  1217 

Whitson  V.  Griffis,  39  Kan.  211 

392,  416 
Whitt   V.   Kendall,    11    Ky.    L. 

Rep.    116    164 

Whittier  v.  Vamey,    10  N.  H. 

291 948 

Whittington  v.  Jennings,  3  L. 

J.  Ch.   (Eng.)    167   183 

Whittle  v.  Bailes,  66  Mich.  640 

920,  926 
Whittlesey  v.  Delaney,  73  N.  Y. 

571 860 

Whittlesey     v.     McMahon,     10 

Conn.    137    36 

Whittredge  v.  Edmunds,  63  N. 

H.  248    228,  238,    317 


cclx 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAGE 

Whyte  T.  Denike,  53  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)   320   327,    686 

Wick  V.  DawBon,  42  W.  Va.  43 

280,  346,  376 
Wick  V.  Hickey  (Iowa),  103  N. 

Wick    ▼.    Kunzeman,    30    Misc. 

Rep.    (N.  Y.)    457 267 

Wickea  v.  Oark,  8  Paige    (N. 

Y.),   161    147 

Wickes  V.  Clark,  3  Edw.  Ch.  (N. 

Y.)   68   140,  142,  266,    327 

Wickham  v.   Miller,    12   Johns. 

(N.  Y.)    320   689 

Wickler  v.  People,  68  111.  App. 

282 468,     465 

Wickliffes  v.  Lyon,  28  Ky.  84.     632 
Widdall  V.  Garsed,  125  Pa.  St. 

358 998 

Widgery  v.  Haskell,  6  Mass.  144 

460,  894,  906 
Wier  V.  Day,  57  Iowa,  84.  .200,  642 
Wiggins  V.  Armstrong,  2  Johns. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)    146    22,  1041 

Wiggins  V.  Tumlin,  96  Ga.  753     480 
Wiggington  v.   Winter,  28  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  79..255,  589,  627,  897,  952 
Wightman  v.  Hart,  37  111.  123  395 
Wilbur     v.     Fradenburgh,     52 

Barb.  (N.  Y.)  474 

278,  290,  309,  311,  966 
Wilbur  V.  Nichols,  61  Vt.  432. .  284 
Wilcher  v.   Thompson    (Miss.), 

12  So.  828   160 

Wilcox  V.  Fitch,  20  Johns.   (N. 

Y.)   472   19,  198,  1058 

Wilcox  V.  Hammond,  128  Mich. 

616 902 

Wilcox  V.  Hawley,  31  N.  Y.  648  1202 
Wilcox  y.  Lundberg,  30  Minn. 

93 430,     448 

Wilcox  V.  Payne,  66  Hun    (N. 

Y.),  607    802 

Wilcoxen  ▼.  Annesley,  23   Ind. 

286 431,  448,  459,  476,     477 

506,    507 
Wilcoxon  V.  Burton,  27  Cal.  228 

44,  48,  238,     317 
Wilcoxson  y.  Darr,  139  Mo.  660 

857,  870,  959 
Wilcoxen    y.    Morgan,    2    Colo. 

473 191,  347,  711,     921 

Wilder  v.  Fondey,  4  Wend.   (N. 

Y.)    100   62,      63 

Wilder  y.  Watts,  16  Am.  B.  R. 

57 1092,  1124 

Wilder  y.  Winne,  6   Cow.    (N. 


PAOB 

Y.)   284 43,  64,  79,  456,     465 

471,  500,  1064,  1066 
Wilds  y.  Bogan,  56  Ind.  331..  363 
Wiley  y.  Carter,  77  Iowa,  761.  644 
Wiley  y.  Knight,  27  Ala.  336. . 

603>     690 
Wiley    y.    Lashlee,    8    Humph. 

(Tenn.)    717    623 

Wilhelmi  y.  Leonard,  13  Iowa, 

330  .  988 

Wilhite    V.'    banielsj     67     Pa. 

(Kan.)    452    316 

Wilkerson  y.  Moffett-West  Drug 

Co.   (Miss.),  21  So.  564 917 

Wilkes  y.  Ferris,  5  Johns.   (N. 

Y.)   335   456 

Wilkinson  y.   Buster,    115   Ala. 

578 964 

Wilkinson    y.    Goodin,    71    Mo. 

App.  394    856,     857 

Wilkinson      y.      Wilkinson,      1 

Head    (Tenn.),  305    141 

Wilkinson   y.    Yale,    6    McLean 

(U.  S.),   16   781 

Wilks   y.   Vaughan    (Ark.),   83 

S.  W.  913. .  151,  159,  162,  832,     896 
Willard   y.   Masterson,   160   111. 

443 67,     734 

Willett  y.   Frodich,  28   Ky.  L. 

Rep.  798   862 

Willett  y.  Malli,  65  Iowa,  675.     931 
William   y.   Newberry,   41    Ala. 

168 687 

William  y.  Rapelje,  8  U.  a  C. 

P.  186   534 

William     Ottman     &     Co.     y. 

Cooper,  81  Hun   (N.  Y.),  530    428 
Williams   y.   Andrews,    186   111. 

98 458,     464 

Williams  y.  Ayent,  40  N.  C.  47 .   1038 
Williams  y.  Banks,  11  Md.  198 

187,  196,  265,     267 
279,  281,  283,     340 
Williams    y.    Bamett,    62   Tex. 

130 297 

Williams  y.  Blzzell,  11  Ark.  716 

182,    206 
Williams  y.  Borgwardt,  119  Cal. 

80 722 

Williams  y.  Brown  (Mich.),  100 

N.  W.  786   621 

Williams    y.    Brown,    4    Johns. 

Ch.    (N.  Y.)   682   

44,  456,  465,  474,  804 
Williams  y.  Clink,  90  Mich.  297  667 
Williams   y.   Dayis,  69   Pa.   St. 

21 6,  191,  268,352,     677 


Table  of  Cases. 


cclxi 


PAGE 

Williams     v.      Desenberg,      41 

Mich.  166   227 

Williams  v.  Harris,  4  S.  D.  22 

367,  398,  399 
Williams  v.  Harris,  95  Ga.  453.  1044 
Williams  ▼.  Hawthorn,   14  La. 

Ami.   616    816 

Williams    ▼.    Higgins,    69    Ala. 

617 639,    648 

Williams  v.  Hughes,  136  N.  C. 

58 281,    282 

Williams  v.  Jones,  2  Ala.  314. . 

240,  457,  499,  501 
Williams  v.  Kelsey,  6  Ga.  366.  992 
Williams  ▼.  Kemper,  99  Minn. 

301 193 

Williams  v.  Kemper,  etc.,  Dry 

Goods  Co.,  4  Okla.   146 

86,  87,      88 
Williams   v.   Kemper    (Minn.), 

109  N.  W.  242 413,  420,     864 

Williams  v.  Kirk,  68  Mo.  App. 

467 253,     660 

Williams  y.  Lerch,  66  Cal.  330    644 
Williams  v.  Lord,  76  Va.  390 . . 

161,    463 
Williams  ▼.  Love,  23  Tenn.  62 

233,    646 
Williams   v.   Lowe,   4   Humph. 

(Tenn.)    62    70 

Williams  t.  Michenor,  11  N.  J. 

£q.  620 741,  742,  753,     761 

782,  818,  1044 
WiUiams  ▼.  Neel,  10  Rich.  £q. 

(S.  C.)   338   870 

Williams    ▼.    Osborne,    96    Ind. 

347 341 

Williams  v.  Perry,  3  Tex.  Civ. 

Cas.,  sec.  209 462 

Williams  v.  Porter,  41  Wis.  422 

623,    911 
Williams    v.    Rawlins,    33    Ga. 

117 2J 

Williams  ▼.  Robbins,   15   Gray 

(Mass.),  690   96 

Williams  ▼.  Robbins,  81  Mass. 

590 292,     925 

Williams  v.  Savage  Mfg.  Co.,  3 

Md.  Ch.  418   330,    691 

WUliams  v.  Simms,  70  Fed.  40 

467,  960,  970 
WUUams  v.  Snebly,  92  Md.  9.  701 
WiUiams  v.  Snyder,  94  N.  W. 

(Iowa)    846   373 

Williams  v.  Spragins,  102  Ala. 

424    818,  824,  866,     868 

Williams     v.     Stowell      (Kan. 

App.),  48  Pac.  894 237 


PAGE 

Williams    v.    Stowell,    6    Kan. 

App.   880    315,   316,     317 

Williams      v.      Thompson,      30 

Mass.    298    376 

Williams   v.    Thorn,    70   N.    Y. 

270 90,  134,     137 

Williams  v.  Tipton,  6  Humphr. 

66    (Tenn.) 206 

Williams  v.  Tipton,  24  Tenn.  66    774 
Williams    v.    Tye,    19    Ky.    L. 

Rep.   818    299,    408 

Williams  v.   Walton^   16  Tenn. 

387 660 

Williams     v.     White,    7    Kan. 

App.   664    998 

Williams   v.   Williams,   2   Ohio 

Dec.    467    368 

Williams  v.   Williams,   180  111. 

361 659 

Williamson    v.    Beardsley,    137 

Fed.  467 855 

Williamson    v.    Blackburn,    26 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  857   332 

Williamson  v.  Brown,  15  N.  Y. 

364 616,    623 

Williamson  v.  Furbush,  31  Ark. 

639 789,     790 

Williamson      v.     Goodwyn,      9 

Gratt.    (Va.)    603    231,    680 

Williamson  v.  Russell,  39  Conn. 

406 722 

Williamson  v.  Wachenheim,  68 

Iowa,  277 . .  688,  612,  622,  670,    706 
Williamson    v.    Wilkinson,    81 

Miss.   603    162,     164 

Williamson     v.     Williams,     79 

Tenn.  356   172,  680,     896 

Williford  v.  Conner,   12  N.  C. 

379 736 

Willington  v.  Small,  67  Mass. 

146 766 

Willis    V.    Gathman,    63    Miss. 

721 330,    716 

Willis    V.    Heath,    18    S.    W. 

(Tex.)    801    386 

Willis  V.  Hudson,  72  Tex.  698.     197 
Willis  V.  Moore,  Clark  Ch.  (N. 

Y.)    160    771 

Willis    V.    Murphy,    28    S.    W. 

(Tex.)    362    608 

Willis  V.  Pounds,  6  Tex.   Civ. 

App.   612    165 

Willis  V.  Roberts,  18  Colo.  App. 

149 626 

Willis    V.    Scott,    33    La.    Ann. 

1026 85,     178 

Willis  V.  Thompson,  93  Ind.  62 

821,  859,     861 


cclxii 


Table  of  Cases. 


TACK 

Willis  v.  Whittsitt,  67  Tex.  673 

240,  262,  1001 
Willis  V.  Willis,  79  App.  Div. 

(N.  Y.)    9    

368,  519,  562,  563,    974 
Willis  V.  Yates,  12  S.  W.  (Tex.) 

232 603 

Willis  ft  Bro.  v.  Murphy  (Tex. 

Civ.  App.),  28  S.  W.  362. . . .       74 
Willison  V.  Desenberg,  41  Mich. 

166,  2  N.  W.  201   317 

Willows  Bank  ▼.  Small,  144  Cal. 

709 920 

Wilmerding  ▼.  Jarmulowsl^,  28 

App.  Div.   (N.  Y.)   629 907 

Wilmerding  v.  Jarmulowsl^,  86 

Hun  (N.  Y.),  286 614 

Wilson  V.  Ayer,  7  Me.  207.. 91,  146 
Wilson  V.  Beadle,  39  Tenn.  510  742 
Wilson   V.   Berger,    5   St.    Rep. 

(N.  Y.)  822. . .  .494,  495,  496,     497 
Wilson  V.  Boone,  136  Ind.  142 

852,  861 
Wilson  V.   Buchanan,  7  Gratt. 

(Va.)   334 67,  195,  264,    270 

274,  279,  343,    738 
Wilson  V.  Butler,  3  Munf.  ( Va.) 

559 558 

Wilson  V.   Calveit^   15   Ky.   L. 

Rep.  489    166,     167 

WilBon  V.  Garrico,  50  W.  Va. 

336 613 

Wilson  V.  Cheshire,   1  McCord 

£q.   (S.  C.)   233   418 

Wilson  V.  Clark,   1    Ind.  App. 

182 579,    946 

Wilson     V.     Cunningham,     24 

Utah,  167    893,    955 

Wilson  V.  Curtis,  13  La.  Ann. 

601 1036 

Wilson   V.   Demander,   71    Tex. 

603 209,  641,     765 

Wilson   V.   Deerwaldt,    100   111. 

App.   396    848 

Wilson    V.     Edwards,     32    Pa. 

Super.  Ct.  296  175 

Wilson  V.  Eifler,   47   Tenn.   31 

676,  597,  583,    586 
Wilson  T.  Fawkner,  38  111.  App. 

438 703 

Wilson  V.  Fuller,  9  Kan.  176.. 

580,  722 
Wilson  V.  Harris,  19  Mont.  69. 

968  970 
Wilson  V.  Hill,  17  Nev.  401 . . .'  525 
Wilson   V.   Hillhouse,    14   Iowa, 

199 918 


PAfiB 

Wilson  V.  Hooper,  12  Vt.  658. .     549 
Wilson  V.  Horr,  15  Iowa,  489 

598,  690 
Wilson  V.  Howser,   12  Pa.   St. 

109 280,  290,     343 

WilBon  V.  Hunter,  30  Ind.  466    616 
Wilson  V.  Jones,  76  Fed.  484. 

319,  380,  457,  492,     620 
Wilson  V.  Jordan,  30  Fed.  Cas. 

No.   17,814    376 

Wilson  V.   Kohlheim,   46   Miss. 

346 339,  377,    986 

Wilson  V.  Lexington  Bank,  72 

N.  C.  621    864 

Wilson  V.  Loomis,  55  111.  352. 

112,  115 
WUson  V.  Lott,  5  Fla.  305.  .224,  394 
Wilson   V.   Marion,    147   N.   Y. 

589 614 

Wilson  V.  Martin-Wilson  Auto- 
matic   Fire   Alarm    (Do.,    149 

Mass.   24    118 

Wilson  V.  McMillan,  62  Ga.  16 

110,  381 
Wilson    V.    Prewett,    3    Woods 

(U.   S.)    631    924 

Wilson  V.  Prewett,  30  Fed.  Cas. 

No.   17,828    583 

Wilson  V.  Robertson,  21  N.  Y. 

587 573 

Wilson  V.  Russell,  13  Md.  494. 

226,  301 
Wilson  V.  Silkman,  97  Pa.  St. 

509   397,  894,  898,     899 

Wilson    V.    Snelling,    3    Bush 

(Ky.),   322    42 

Wilson  V.  Spear,  68  Vt.  145. . . 

336,  340,  582,  586,  817,  824,  1008 
Wilson  V.  Stevens,  129  Ala.  630 

186,  347 
Wilson    V.    Stoddard,    30    Fed. 

Cas.  No.   17,838    258 

Wilson   V.    Sullivan,    17    Utah, 

341 856 

Wilson  V.  Taylor,  49  Kan.  774 

160,  163 
Wilson  V.   The   City  Bank,   17 

Wall.    (U.  8.)    473    

1072,  1095,  1157 
Wilson  V.  Trawick,  10  Tex.  428 

70,  636 
Wilson  V.  Vanden,  99  Tenn.  224  181 
Wilson  V.  Watts,  9  Md.  366. . ."  7 
Wilson  V.  W^elsh,  41  Fed.  570.. 

617,  980 
Wilson  V.  Wilson,  8  U.  C.   C. 

r.  525   216 


( 


Table  of  Cases. 


ocbdii 


WilMm  T.  WilaoB,  113  Ind.  416    509 

WilaoD  Bros.  t.  Nelson,  183  U. 
S    191    1096 

Wiltoe  V.  Flaek,  116  Iowa,  51. .     330 

Wilt  T.  Franklin,  1  Binn.  (Pa.) 
602 13,  462,  662,    653 

Wimberly  ▼.  Montgomery  Fer- 
tilizer Co.,  132  Ala.  107.... 

403,  871,  896,  963,    966 

Wimbiah  ▼.  Tailboia,  Plowd. 
38a 16 

Wimpfheimer  v.  Perrine,  60 
Atl.    (N.  J.)    366   203 

Winana  v.  Graves,  43  K.  J.  Eq. 
263 203 

Winbome  v.  Lassiter,  89  N.  C. 

1 76,      78 

Winch  V.  James,  68  Pa.  St.  297  402 
Winchester  ▼.  Charter,  94  Mass. 

606 977 

Winchester  v.  Charter,  97  Mass. 

140 270 

Winchester     v.     Charter,     102 

Mass.  272 671,  986,  1006 

Winchester  v.  Cnudall,  Clarke, 

371 722 

^nchester  v.  Gadd,   72  N.   C. 

116 153 

Winchester    v.    Keid,  53  N.  C. 

377 109,    379 

WindhauB   v.    Boots,    26    Pac. 

(Cal.)    404 203,  278,.. 283 

801,    969 
Windmiller  v.  Chapman,  38  HI. 

App.  276 703,    704 

Windmueller  v.  Van  Home,  44 

ni.  App.  143  660 

Winebrinner     v.     Weisiger,    19 

Ky.  32 390 

Winegerd  v.  Fallon,  96  Pa.  St. 

184 367 

Winelaad  v.  Ooonee,  5  Mo.  296.  721 
Winfield    t.    Adams,    34    Mich. 

437 938 

Winfield  Nat.  Bank    ▼.    Crooo, 

46  Kan.  629   509,    613 

Winfield  Nat  Bank  v.  Crooo,  46 

Kan.  634 298 

Winfield  Nat.  Bank  v.  Johnson, 

8  Kan.  App.  830 1000 

Wing  ▼.  Miller,  40  Kan.  611 .. .  958 
Wing  V.  Peabody,  57  Vi.  19. . .  544 
Wing  v.  Roswald,  74  Ala.  346 . . 

105,  106,  146,  149,    371 

Wing  ▼.  Weeks,  88  Me.  115 

1055,  1059 
Winkley  v.  Hill,  9  N.  H.  31 . . .  446 
Winn  V.  Barnett,  31  Miss.  653. 


PA6B 

85v  189,  193,  641,    790 
Winnebrenner  v.    Edgerton,    30 

Barb.   (N.  Y.)   185 49 

Winner  v.  Hoyt,  66  Wis.  227 . . 

8,  915 
Winslow  V.  Clark,  47  N.  Y.  261  1171 
Winslow  V.  Dousman,   18  Wis. 

456 764,  811,    823 

Winslow  V.  Gilbreth,  60  Mo.  90  898 
Winslow  y.  Leland,  128  111.  304  781 
Winslow  V.  Putnam,  130  Mich. 

359 973 

Winslow  V.  Stewart,  7  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  368 726 

Winsmith  v.  Winsmith,  15  S.  C. 

611 435,    436 

Winstead  v.  Hulme,  32  Kan.  568  333 
Winter   ▼.    Mannen,    4    Ky.    L. 

Rep.  949 220,    221 

Winter   v.    Railway    Co.,    Fed. 

Gas.  No.   17,890    1092 

Winter  ▼.  Ritchie,  57  Kan.  212. 

135,  160,  164,  165 
Winton  v.  Freeman,  102  Pa.  St. 

366 643 

Wintringham   ▼.    Wintrin^iam; 

20  Johns.   (N.  Y.)   296 185 

Wintz  V.  Webb,  14  N.  C.  27. . . .  733 
Wisconsin  Granite   Co.  v.  Ger- 

rity,  144  111.  77   274,    794 

Wisconsin  Granite  Co.  ▼.  Ray, 

144  lU.  77    362 

Wise  V.  Jeflferies,  51  Fed.  641.. 

741,  810,    883 

Wise  y.  Pfaff,  98  Md.  576 968 

Wise  ▼.  Rider,  34  N.  Y.  Snpp. 

782  74        81 

Wise  V.*Rider,'88  Huii'(N.  Y.)! 

620 77 

Wise  V.  Tripp,  13  Me.  9... 608,  716 
Wise  v/  Wilds,  47  Iowa,  586. . . 

509,    512 

Wise  V.  Wimer,  23  Mo.  237 581 

Wiseman  ▼.  McAIpin,  6  Ky.  L. 

Rep.  660 580,    613 

Wisner  v.  Famham,  2  Mich.  472  296 
Wisner  v.  Osborne,  64  N.  J.  Eq. 

614 97,     110 

Wiswall  V.  Potts,  57  N.  C.  184.  304 
Wiswall  V.  Ticknor,  0  Ala.  178. 

31,      32 
Wiswell  V.  Jarvis,  9  Fed.  84. . . 

283,  327,  338,  375 
Witham  v.  Blood,  124  Iowa,  695  861 
Withrow  V.    Fowler,   Fed.   Gas. 

17,919 1159 

Withrow  V.   Warner,   66  N.   J. 

Eq.  795... 330,  331,  691,  971,  1016 


cclxiv 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOS 

Witmer      ▼.      Port    Treverton 

Church,  17  Pa.  06.  Ct.  38...   1042 
Witz  V.  Lockridge,   39  W.  Va. 

463 647,  778,  1035 

Woerell     v.     Jacob.     3     Meriv. 

(Eng.)    256 291 

Wofford  V.    Farmer    (Tex.   Civ. 

App.),  40  S.  W.  739 907 

Woloott  V.  Ashenfelter,  5  N.  M. 

442 774 

Woloott  V.  namilton,  61  Vt.  79. 

132,  667,  674 
Wolcott  V.  Rickey,  22  Iowa,  171  110 
Woloott  V.  Tweddle,    133  Mich. 

389 713 

Wolf  V.  Anderaon.  118  N.C.890.  999 
Wolf  ▼.  Arthur,  118  N.  C.  890. 

681,  595,  613 
Wolf  V.  Hunter,  11  111.  App.  32.  535 
Wolf  V.  Kohr,  133  Pa.  St.  13. .  925 
Wolf  V.  Van  Metre,  23  Iowa,  397 

215,    220 
Wolfe  y.  Beecher  Mfg.  Co.,  47 

Conn.  .231 646 

Wolfe  V.   McGugin,  37  W.  Va. 

562 275,  469,    476 

Wolflf  ▼.  Wolflf,  47  liBL  Ann.  548  947 
Wolfley  V.  Rising,  8  Kan.  297.  520 
Wolford  T.  Famhom,  47  Minn. 

95 ....  38,  272,  273,  364,  570,     682 

684,    889 
Wolfsberger  ▼.   Mort,    104    Mo. 

App.  257   103,  114,     969 

Wollenberg  v.   Minard,    37    Or. 

621 763 

WolterB  ▼.  Roeai,  126  Cal.  644.  341 
Wood  ▼.  Auguatine,  61  Mo.  46.  207 
Wood  V.  Caatlebury,  34  S.  W. 

653 595 

Wood  V.  Carpenter,   101   U.   8. 

135 864,     865 

Wood  ▼.  Oarr   (Ky.  Ct.  App.), 

10  Am.   B.  R.  577 1144 

Wood  y.  Chambers,  20  Tex.  247. 

1^3,  161,  1002 

Wood  y.  aark,  121  111.  359 

458,  482,  489,  490,     908 

Wood  V.  Dixie,  7  Q.  B.  892 

443,  463,  466,  495,     501 
Wood  V.  Elliott,  9  Ky.  L,  Rep. 

952 617 

Wood  V.  Fiak,  45  Or.  276 207 

Wood  y.  Franks,  67  Cal.  32 

468,  473,  993 
Wood  V.  Genet,  8  Wend.  (N. 

Y.)  9 326 

Wood  V.  Goflfs'  Curatir,  70  Ky. 

59 ..691,    695 


PAGE 

898 
365 
Sl'J 
697 


Wood  y.  Harmison,  41  W.  Va. 

376 234,  355,  376, 

Wood  y.  Harrison,   41   W.   Va. 

376 

Wood  V.  HoUister,  3   Abb.  Pr. 

(N.  Y.)    14    

Wood  y.  Hunt,  38  Barb.  (N.  Y.) 

302 585,  620,  692,  693, 

1012,  1038 
Wood  y.   Irwin^  16  Grant    Cfa. 

398 689 

Wood  y.  Keith,  60  Ark.  425... 

593,    604 
Wood  y.   Loomis,  21    111.   App. 

004 534 

Wood  y.  Mann,    1    Sumn.    (U. 

S.)   578 876 

Wood    y.    Mitchell,    17    N.    Y. 

Supp.  782 600,    602 

Wood  y.  Mitchell,  63  Hun  (N. 

Y.),  629 241 

Wood  y.  Mitchell,  53  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  451 44 

Wood  y.  Moore,  84  Ala.  253 . .  457 
Wood  y.  O'HanlcMi,  26  Neb.  627 .  39 
Wood  y.  Porter,  179  Mo.  56.460,  472 
Wood  y.  Potts,  140  Ala.  425. . . 

210,  337,  807,  808 
Wood  y.  Rabe,  96  N.  Y.  414. . .  644 
Wood  y.  Reesor,  22  Ont.  App.  57 

84,  214 
Wood  y.  Riley,  121  Ala.  100. .. .  373 
Wood  y.  Robinson,  22  N.  Y.  564 

136,  312,  682,  714,  752,     767 
Wood  y.  Sayage,  Walk.  (Mich.) 

471 327 

Wood  y.  Scott,  55  Iowa,  114.. 

228,  238,  316,  318 
Wood  y.  Timmerman,  29  S.  C. 

176 162 

Wood  y.  United  States,  16  Am. 

B.  R.  21 1161 

Wood  &  Huston  Bank  y.  Read, 

131  Mo.  653 325 

Woodard  y.  Martin,  106  Mo.  324  964 
Woodard   y.    Mastin,    106    Mk>. 

324 50,  61, 

67,    79,    83,     737,     738,    829,  1014 
Woodbury  y.  Nevada  Southern 

R.  Co.,  120  Cal.  463 814,  1018 

Woodbury  y.  Sparrell  Print,  187 

Mass.  426 192,  198,     848 

Wooden  y.  Wooden,    72    Mich. 
347 339 

Woodh'ili  V.'  WhittVe,  63  Mich. 

676 386,     968 

Woodlnan  y.  Bodfish,  25  Me.  317 

69,     177 


Table  of  Cases. 


cclxv 


TAOM 

Woodman  ▼.  Qay,  69  N.  H.  63 

946,    951 
Woodrow   ▼.   Sargent,    6    Ohio 

Dec.  209    328,    683 

Woodruff  V.  Bowles,  104  N.  C- 

197.. 327,  333,  346,  376,  581,    897 
Woodruff  V.  Wilkinson,   73   Ga. 

115 914 

Woods  V.  Allen,  109  Iowa,  484 

367,  902,  968 
Woods  V.  Berry,  7  Mont.  195..  1051 
Woods  V.  Bugbey,  29  Cal.  466. .  540 
Woods  V.  Hull,  81  Pa.  St.  461 . .  644 
Woods  V.  Morrell,  1  Johns.  Ch. 

(N.  Y.)  103 875 

Woods   V.   Van  Brunt,  6   App. 

Div.   (N.  Y.)  220... 699,  626,    696 
Woodson  ▼.  Carson,     135     Mo. 

521 210,  213,  333,  607,  1037 

Woodson  ▼.  Pool,  19  Mo.  340. . 

264,  342,  375,     359 
Woodward  v.  Braynard,  6  Mart. 

<0.  S.)  572 303 

Woodward  ▼.  Kelly,  85  Ala.  368    299 
Woodward  v.  Solomon,    7    Qa. 

246 796 

Woodward  v.  Wyman,    63    Vt. 

645 299 

Woodworth  v.  Byerly,  43  Iowa, 

106 628 

Woodworth  v.  Hodgson,  56  Hun 

(N.  Y.),  236 990 

Woodworth  v.  Sweet,  51  N.  Y. 

8 149,361,512,900,    988 

Woodworth   ▼.    Woodworth,   21 

Barb.  (N.  Y.)  343 658 

Woody  T.  Dean,  24  S.  C.  499. . 

337,    686 
Wooland  v.  Kimberlin,  45  Ky. 

608 459 

Wooley  V.  Fry,  30  111.  158 ... . 

227,  238,  317,    992 
Woolridge    v.     Boardman,    115 

Cal  74 920,  936,    969 

Wooldridge  v.  Gage,  68  111.  157     179 
WoonsocKet  Rubber  Co.  v.  Fal- 

ley,  30  Fed.  808 466 

Wooster  ▼.  Devote,    6    Mackey 

(D.  C.),362 281 

Wooten  V.  dark,  23  Miss.  75. . 

23,  413,  425,     563 
Wooten  V.  Bobins,  128  Ala.  373 

211,    212 
Wooten  ▼.  Steele,  109  Ala.  563 

266,  337,  670,  585,  805,  848,    904 
Wooters  t.  Osbom,  77  Ind.  513 

271,  276,  286,    346 


PAQE 

Wordall  t.  Smith,  1  Campb.  332 

517,    530 
Work  V.  Coverdale,  47  Kan.  307 

610,    706 
Worland  v.   Kimberlin,  45  Ky. 

608 594 

Worland   v.  Outten,     3     Dana 

(Ky.),477 67 

Worland  v.  Outten,  33  Ky.  477 

198,    737 
Worman  v.  Kramer,  73  Pa.  St. 

530,    544 
Worman    v.    Wolfersberger,   19 

Pa.  St.  69  .    .    .    ..462,  474,    475 
Worrell  v.  Vickers,  30  La.  Ann. 

202 314,     909 

Worseley  v.  DeMattos,  1  Burr. 

467    (Eng.)    255,  1150 

Worth    V.   Northam,    26   N.    C. 

102 636 

Worthington  v.  Bullitt,   6  Md. 

172 233,  264,  265,  353,    586 

Worthington   v.   Jones,   23   Vt. 

646 383 

Worthington  v.   Rogan    (Ala.), 

26  So.  299   508 

Worthing    v,    Shipley,    5    Gill. 

(Md.)  449   ...265,  273,  339,    377 
Worthy  v.  Brady,  91  N.  C.  265 

274,  346,  383,  669,     994 
Worthy  v.  Caddell,  76  N.  C.  82 

54,  218,    908 
Wortman  ▼.  Price,  47  111.  22..     115 

Wrad  V.  Trotter,  19  Ky.  1 594 

Wray  v.  Davenport,  79  Va.  19.     523 
Wright  V.   Bosworth,   7  N.  H. 

660 746 

Wright  V.  Brandis,  1  Ind.  336.     243 
Wright  V.  Campbell,  27  Ark.  637 

344,  773,  789 
Wright  V.  Cornelius,  10  Mo.  174  820 
Wright  V.  Crockett,  7  Mo.  126.  956 
Wright  V.  Craig,  40  Or.  191 .. . 

691,  897,  966 
Wright   V.   Douglass,    2   N.    Y. 

373 965 

Wright    V.    Douglass,    3    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    554 179,  736,    762 

Wright  V.  Eldred,  2  Aik.  (Vt.) 

401 1054,  1056 

Wright    V.    Fergus    Falls    Nat. 

Bank,  48  Minn.  120 476 

Wright  V.  Grover,  27  111.  426. .     535 
Wright    V.    Hancock,    3    Munf. 

(Va.)    521    604 

Wright  V.  Henderson,   1  U.  C. 

Q.  B.  O.  S.  304  858 


cdzvi 


Table  of  Cases. 


PAOB 

Wright  y.  His  Creditors,  12  La. 

308 272 

Wright  ▼.  Hogan,  11  La.  Ann. 

563 211 

Wright  ▼.  Howell,  35  Iowa,  288  720 
Wright  V.  Jones,  105  Ind.  17 . .  147 
Wright  ▼.  Mack,  95  Lid.  332.. 

41,  43,      50 
Wright  V.  Mahaffey,   76  Iowa, 

96 442,.  444 

Wright  ▼.  McCk>rmick,  67  Mo. 

426 628,    655 

Wright  y.  Nipple,  92  Ind.  310. 

182,  586,     964 
Wright  y.  Nostrand,  94  N.  Y. 

31 921 

Wright  y.  Petrie,  1  6m.  &  M. 

Ch.  (Miss.)  282.. 60,  99,  101,    801 
Wright  y.  Sampter,  18  Am.  B. 

R.-  355  1127,  1130 

1131,  1132,  1166 
Wright  y.  Shelton  (Miss.),  Sm. 

&  M.  Ch.  399  824 

Wright  y.  Skinner,  14  Am.  B. 

R.  600 1206 

Wright  y.  Smith,  66  Ala.  514. .  949 
Wright  y.  Solomon    (Tex.  Ciy. 

App.),  43  S.  W.  68 

915,  919,  938,  046 
Wright    y.    Stanard,    30    Fed. 

Cas.  No.  18,094    

232,  330,  354,  369 
Wright  V.  Wheeler,  14  Iowa,  8.  890 
Wright  V.  Wright,  12  Ky.  8. . .  664 
Wright    y.    Wright,    69    Barb. 

(N.  Y.)    605    322 

Wriffhtman  y.  Hart,  37  111.  123  271 
W.  W.  Kendall  Boot,  etc.,  Co. 

y.  Bain,  46  Mo.  App.  681 461 

Wyatt  y.  Brooks,  42  Hun   (N. 

Y.),  602   881 

Wyatt  y.  Stewart,  34  Ala.  716. 

619,  557 
Wyatt  y.  Wyatt,  81  Miss.  219.  636 
Wyer's     Syndics    y.    Sweet,    2 

Mart.  N.  S.   (La.)  688 286 

Wylie  y.  Basil,  4  Md.  Ch.  327. 

148,  361 
Wylie  y.  Kelly,   41   Barb.    (N. 

Y.)    694    651 

Wylie  y.  Posey,  71  Tex.  34... 

378,  1002 
Wyman  y.  Brown,  60  Me.  139 

220,  232,  366,  413,     443 

Wyman  y.  Fox,  59  Me.  100 

67,  737,  739,    763 
Wyman  y.  Gay,  90  Me.  36 


PAGB^ 

119,  154,     157 
Wyman    y.    Jensen,    26    Mont. 

227 842,  847,     841^ 

Wyman  y.  Richardson,  62  Me. 

293 737,    804 

Wynne  y.  Mason,  72  Miss.  424 

351,  356,  397,  469,  497,    910 
T 

Yale  y.  Bond,  46  La.  Ann.  997. 

620,    910 
Yank    y.    Bordeaux,    23    Mont. 

206 625,     650 

Yankee  y.  Sweeney,  85  Ky.  56. 

346,  377,  796,    807 
Yardley  y.  Sibbs,  84  Fed.  631.. 

436,    608 
Yardley  y.  Torr,  67  Fed.  857.. 

182,  342,     717 
Yates  y.  Fisher,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 

721 38,    364 

Yates  y.  Joyce,  11  Johns.    (N. 

Y.)   136  76G 

Yates  y.  Law,  86  Va.  117 

188,  192,  899,     929 
Yates  County  Nat.  Bank  y.  Car- 
penter, 119  N.  Y.  560   156 

Ybarra   y.    Lorenzana,   63    Cal. 

197 654 

Yeatman   y.    Sayings   Inst.,   95 

U.  S.  764   1112 

Yeend  y.  Weeks,  104  Ala.  331 

182,  191,  266,     666 
904,  933,  960,     968 
Yerbe    y.    Martin,    38    S.    W. 

(Tex.)    641    621 

Yetzer  y.  Yetzer,  112  Iowa,  162 

828,     963 
Yocum  y.  Bullit,  6  Mart.  N.  S. 

(La.)    324    823 

Yocum  y.  Kehler,  1  Walk.  (Pa.) 

84 46,     635 

Yoder    y.    Reynolds,    28    Mont. 

183 646,  721,  722,    930 

Yoder  y.    Standiford,   7   T.   B. 

Mon.    (Ky.)    478    41,      53 

York  y.  Merritt,  80  N.  C.  286. .     646 
York  y.  Merritt,  77  N.  C.  213 

651,   655,    66e 
York  y.  Rockwood,  132  Ind.  368 

685,    862 
York   County   Bank  y.   Carter, 
38  Pa.  St.  446.  .270,  462,  466,    471 

476,  477,  490,     491 
York   Mfg.    Co.   y.    Cassell,    16 

Am.  B.  R.  632....  1114,  1117,  1193 
Yost  y.  Hudiburg,  70  Tenn.  627 

879,    885- 


Table  of  Cases. 


oclxvii 


PA0B 

Youd  ▼.  Qermaii  Sftviiu^s,  etc., 

Soc.  (Cal.  App.),  86  Pac.  991     192 
Youmans     ▼.     Boomhower,     3 
Thomp.  &  C.   (N.  Y.)   21... 

151,  166 
Young  ▼.  Clapp,  147  III.  176.. 

468,  469,  474,  484,  682,    600 
Young  V.  Dumas,  39  Ala.  60 . . 

394,  451,  467 
Young  ▼.  Eyans,  118  Iowa,  144  526 
Young  V.  Harris,  4  Dak.  367 . . 

727,  998,  1003 
Young  ▼.  Heermans,  66  N.  Y. 

374 6,  16,  136,  182,  189,     248 

266,  412,  414,  418,  422,  423,     686 
Young    y.    Hurst    (Tenn.    Ch. 

App.),  48  8.  W.  365. 900 

Young  y.  Kellar,  94  Mo.  581 . .     609 
Young  y.  Keller,   16  Mo.  App. 

650 271 

Young  y.  Lathrop,  67  N.  C.  63. 

723,  728 
Young    y.    Lemieux,    79    Conn. 

434 176 

Young  y.  Pate,  4  Yerg.  (Tenn.) 

164 72,  192,    623 

Young  y.  Stallings,  44  Ky.  307 

459,  466,  466,  471,    609 
Young  y.  Upson,  116  Fed.  192 

647,  1162 
Young  y.  Ward,  115  111.  264..  671 
Young  y.  Ward,  24  Ont.  App. 

147 214 

Young  y.  White,  26  Miss.  146. 

322,686,    902 
Young  y.  Willis,  83  Va.  291 .. . 

414,  436 
Younger  y.  Massey,  39  S.  C.  116 

76,    973 
Younger  y.  Ritchie,  116  N.  G. 

782 166 

Youngs  y.  Public  School  Trus- 
tees, 31  N.  J.  £q.  290 

102,  103,    274 
Youngs  y.    Sexton  Nat.   Bank, 

69111.  App.  152 979 

Z 
Zacharia  y.   Swanson,  34   Tex. 

Ciy.  App.  1  1008 

Zacharie  y.  Kirk,  14  La.  Ann. 

433 620 

Zacharius  y.  Paint,  etc.,  Co.,  11 

Pa.  Diet.  171  1069 

Zadik  y.  Schafer,  77  Tex.  601 . . 

66,  964,    966 
Zahm    y.    Fry,    Fed.    Gas.    No. 

18.198 1163 


PAGB 

Zahm  y.  Smith,  18  Atl.   (Md.) 

865 968 

Zartman   y.    First   Nat.    Bank, 

109  App.  Diy.   (N.  Y.)   406..     413 
Zartman  y.  National  Bank,  16 

Am.   B.   R.   162 1123,  1136 

Zeigler  y.  Maddoi,  26  Mo.  676 

414,  420,     434 
Zeliff  y.  Schuster,  31  Mo.  App. 

493 977 

Zelincker  y.  Brigham,  74  Ala. 

698 904 

Zell  y.  Guano  Co.  y.  Heatherly, 

38  W.  Va.  409 333,    867 

Zell  Guano  Co.  y.  Heatherly,  46 

W.  Va.  311    86 

Zerbe  y.  Miller,  16  Pa.  St.  488 

915,  916,  917,  940 
Zick  y.  Guebert,  142  111.  164..  619 
Ziegler  y.  Carter,  94  Ala.  291.  699 
Ziegler    y.    Handrick,    106    Pa. 

St.   87    630,    637 

Ziekel  y.  Doufl^ass,  88  Mo.  382.  1060 
Zieyerink  y.   Kemper,    10   Ohio 

Dec.  465    968 

Zinmier  y.  Miller,  64  Md.  296 

246,  669,  671,  626,  894,    976 
Zimmerman     y.     Bannon,     101 

Vvis.  407   189,  321,     600 

Zimmerman    y.    Fitch,    28    La. 

Ann.  464 1774,  819,    863 

Zimmerman   y.   McMasters,   26 

Ky.  L.  Rep.  466 967 

Zimmerman  y.  Lamb,  7  Minn. 

421 180 

Zimmerman  y.  Willard,  114  111. 

364 866 

Zimmerman    y.    Schoenfeldt,    3 

Hun  (N.  Y.),  692 216 

Zinn  y.   Brinkerhoff,  48  N.  J. 

Eq.  513   193 

Zinn  y.  Law,  32  W.  Va.  447 .. .  368 
Ziques  y.  Riyas,  16  La.  Ami.  81  569 
Zoeller  v.  Riley,  100  N.  Y.  102.     722 

ZoU  y.  Soper,  75  Mo.  460 

769,  761,    771 
Zugalla  y.  International  Merc. 

Agency,  12  Am.  B.  R.  67 

1101,  1102 
Zuyer  y.  Clark,  104  Pa.  St.  222 

83,    211 
Zweig    y.    Horican    Iron,   etc., 

Co.,  17  Wis.  362  801 

X 
Xigues  y.  Riyas,  16  La.  Ann. 

402 468 


FRAUDULENT    CONVEYANCES 


CHAPTER  I. 


Fbaudulbnt  Convbyanoes  Oenbbaixt. 

Section  1.  No  positive  dofinition  of  fraud. 

2.  What  constitutes  a  fraudulent  conveyance. 

3.  Tests  as  to  fraudulent  conveyances. 

4.  Characteristics  of  fraud. 

5.  Circumstances  establishing  fraud. 

6.  Origin  of  written  law  against  fraudulent  conveyances. 

7.  Early  E«nglish  statutes  avoiding  fraudulent  conveyances. 

8.  Statute  of  13  Elizabeth  for  the  protection  of  creditors. 

9.  Statutes  in  the  United  States. 

10.  Statutes  merely  declaratory  of  the  common  law. 

11.  Statute  of  27  Elizabeth  in  favor  of  subsequent  purchasers. 

12.  Construction  or  interpretation  of  statutes. 

13.  Effect  of  subsequent  statutory  provisions. 

14.  Twyne's  Case. 

15.  Prevalence  of  fraudulent  transfers. 

16.  History  and  comparative  legislation. 


Section  1.  No  positive  definition  of  fraud. — ^PMloeophy 
teaches  with  great  force  the  fact  that  complete  definitions  can  be 
given  only  of  things  abstract  and  theoretical,  such  as  concepts  in 
geometry,  or  physics,  or  formal  logic.  Definitions  in  law  are  al- 
ways extremely  diflScnlt,  and  the  greatest  jurists  of  all  times, 
the  ancient  Romans,  have  laid  down  the  rule  that  ^^  all  definitions 
are  dangerous  {omrUs  definitio  periculosa).^^  The  difficulty  of 
defining  what  is  fraud,  or  what  is  a  fraudulent  conveyance,  be- 
comes more  apparent  when  we  consider  that  the  questions  are 
not  pure  questions  of  law,  but  of  fact  or  of  mixed  law  and  fact, 
and  requiring  for  their  determination  inferences  of  facts  not 


FbAUBULENT   C02!ryBYANCBB. 


found.  ^  TI16  danger  of  defining  fraud  or  a  fraudulent  convey- 
ance, by  laying  down  any  definite  rule  as  to  the  precise  nature 
of  it,  or  by  formulating  rules  by  the  application  of  which  the 
presence  of  fraud  may  be  detected,  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  craft 
of  men  is  likely  to  find  ways  of  committing  fraud  which  might 
escape  the  limits  of  such  a  rule  or  definition,  and  hence,  it  is 
part  of  the  equity  doctrine  of  fraud  not  to  define  it*  Evidently 
there  can  be  no  fraud  in  law  or  in  fact  without  a  breach  of  some 
1^1  or  equitable  duty.'  Fraud  has,  therefore,  been  said  to 
include  all  acts,  omissions  or  xxmcealments  Iwhich  involvie  a 
breacli  of  legal  or  equitable  duty,  trust,  or  confidence  justly  re- 
posed and  are  injurious  to  another,  or  by  which  an  undue  or 
unconscientious  advantage  is  taken  of  another.^  The  unlawful 
appropriation  of  another's  property,  with  knowledge,  by  design, 
and  without  criminal  intent,'  or  the  intention  to  prevent  creditors 
from  recovering  their  just  debts  by  an  act  which  withdraws  the 
property  of  a  debtor  from  their  reach,'  alike  constitute  actual  or 
positive  fraud,  or  fraud  in  fact.  There  may  be  legal  or  con- 
structive fraud,  or  fraud  in  law,  where  no  actual  fraudijdent  in- 
tent is  proved,  but  in  such  cases  the  law  presumes  fraud,  because 
it  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  some  established  act  In.  other 
words,  fraud  in  law  exists  only  when  the  acts  upon  which  it  is 
based  carry  in  themselves  inevitable  evidence  of  it,  independently 
of  the  motive  of  the  actor.  This  principle  is  illustrated  where 
an  insolvent  debtor  makes  a  gift  of  his  property.^  But  a  credi- 
tor cannot  complain  that  a  debtor  is  giving  away  his  property 


1.  JeweU  V.  Knight,  123  U.  S.  426, 
8  Sup.  Ct  193,  31  L.  Ed.  190;  Smith 
▼.  Craft,  128  U.  S.  436.  See  Qnes- 
tione  for  jury;  questions  of  law  and 
fact,  chap.  XVIIT,  §9  4-10,  infra. 

2.  Bouv.  L.  Diet,  vol.  1,  p.  613. 
Fraud  is  "so  subtle  in  its  nature, 
and  so  protean  in  its  disguises,  as  to 
render  it  almost  impossible  to  give  a 
definition  which  fraud  would  not  find 
means  to  evade."  Shoemaker  v. 
Cake,  88  Va.  5. 


3.  Delaney  v.  Valentine,  154  K.  T. 
692,  704,  49  N.  E.  65. 

4.  Bouv.  L.  Diet.,  vol.  1,  p.  618; 
Bunn  v.  Ahl,  29  Pa.  St.  890. 

6.  Bouv.  L.  Diet.,  vol.  1,  p.  612. 

6.  McKibbin  v.  Martin,  64  Pa.  St. 
356,  8  Am.  Rep.  588. 

7.  Delaney  v.  Valentine,  154  K.  T. 
692,  704,  49  N.  E.  65.  See  Fraudulent 
intent  and  knowledge,  chap.  XIII; 
preferences,  chap.  XI,  infra.  Fraud  iit 
law  consists  in  acts  which,  though  not 


Fbauduubnt  Contbyancxb  Gsnbbaixt, 


8 


unless  he  can  show  that  the  gift  produces  insolvency,  and  is  made 
to  defraud  creditors."  Whenever  fraud  occurs  it  vitiates  the 
transaction  tainted  by  it.^  Fraud  is  an  extrinsic,  collateral  act, 
which  vitiates  the  most  solemn  proceedings  of  courts  of  justice. 
Lord  Coke  says  it  avoids  all  judicial  acts,  ecclesiastical  or  tem- 
poral.*® "Fraud/'  said  Justice  Story,  "will  vitiate  any,  even 
the  most  solemn  transactions;  and  an  asserted  title  to  property, 
founded  upon  it,  is  utterly  void."**  It  is  the  judgment  of  law 
on  facts  and  intents.*^  Its  existence  is  often  a  presumption  of 
law  from  admitted  or  established  facts,  irreepective  of  motive, 
and  too  strong  to  be  rebutted.*'  The  rule  is  universal,  whatever 
fraud  creates,  justice  will  destroy.*^ 

§  2.  What  constitutes  a  fraudulent  conveyance. — ^A  fraudu- 
lent conveyance  has  been  defined  to  be  a  conveyance,  the  object, 
tendency,  or  effect  of  which  is  to  defraud  another,  or  the  intent 
of  which  is  to  avoid  some  duty  or  debt  due  by  or  incumbent  on 
the  party  making  it.*'  To  constitute  a  disposition  of  his  property 
by  a  debtor  with  intent  to  defraud  his  creditors  three  things  must 
concur :  first,  the  thing  disposed  of  must  be  of  value,  out  of  which 
the  creditor  could  have  realized  all  or  a  portion  of  his  claim; 
second,  it  must  be  transferred  or  disposed  of  by  the  debtor;  and 


fraudulently  intended,  yet  as  their 
tendency  is  to  defraud  creditors  if 
they  vest  the  property  of  the  debtor 
in  his  grantee,  are  void  for  legal 
fraud,  which  is  deemed  tantamount 
to  actual  fraud,  full  evidence  of 
fraud,  and  fraudulent  in  themselyes, 
the  policy  of  the  law  making  the  acts 
illegal.  McKibbin  v.  Martin,  64  Pa. 
St  352,  3  Am.  Rep.  588. 

8.  Rogers  v.  Dimon,  106  HI.  App. 
201.  See  Financial  condition  of 
grantor,  chap.  VII;  effect  of  want  of 
consideration,  chap.  VIII,  infra. 

0.  Fenner  v.  Dickey,  1  Flippin,  36. 

10.  Eex  y.  Duchess  of  Kingston, 


20  How.  St.  Tr.  544,  2  Smith  Lead. 
Cas.  687. 

11.  United  States  ▼.  Anistad,  16 
Pet.  (U.  S.)  594. 

12.  Sturtevant  y.  Ballard,  0 
Johns.  (N.  T.)  342;  Pettibone  v. 
Stevens,  15  Conn.  26;  Morgan  v. 
Elam,  4  Yerg.  (Tenn.)  438;  Otley  v. 
Manning,  9  East,  64. 

13.  Belford  v.  Crane,  16  N.  J.  Bq. 
265. 

14.  Vreeland  ▼.  New  Jersey  Stone 
Go.,  29  N.  J.  Eq.  190. 

16.  2  Kent,  Comm.  440;  4  id.  462; 
Bout.  L.  Diet,  vol.  1,  p.  015;  1 
Story  £q.,  H  349,  352;  McKibbin  y. 
Martin,  64  Pa.  St  352. 


4  Fbaudulbnt  Conveyances. 

third,  this  must  be  done  with  intent  to  defraud.  ^^  Or,  as  it  has 
been  stated  in  another  form,  to  constitute  a  fraudulent  convejanoe 
within  the  meaning  of  the  statute,  there  must,  as  a  rule^  exist  a 
creditor  to  be  defrauded,  a  debtor  intending  to  defraud,  and  a 
conveyance  of  property  which  is  appropriable  by  law  to  the  pay- 
ment of  the  debt  dua^^  A  conveyance  to  be  fraudulent  must  be 
devised  of  malice,  fraud,  covin,  collusion,  or  guile.**  Any  instru- 
ment is  fraudulent  which  is  a  mere  trick  or  aham  contrivance^  or 
which  originates  in  bad  motives  or  intentions,  that  is  made  and  re* 
received  for  the  purpose  of  warding  off  other  creditors.  *•  Whether 
the  contract  be  oral  or  in  writing;  whether  executed  by  the  par- 
ties with  all  the  solemnities  of  deeds  by  seal  and  acknowledgment ; 
whether  in  form  of  the  judgment  of  a  court,  stamped  with  judicial 
sanction,  or  carried  out  by  the  device  of  a  corporation  organized 
with  all  the  forms  and  requisites  demanded  by  the  statute  in  that 
regard,  if  it  be  contaminated  with  the  vice  of  fraud,  the  law  de- 
clares it  to  be  a  nullity.  Deeds,  obligations,  contracts,  judg- 
ments, and  even  corporate  bodies  may  be  tiie  instruments  throu^ 
which  parties  may  obtain'  the  most  unrighteous  advantages.  All 
such  devices  and  instruments  have  been  resorted  to  to  cover  up 
fraud,  but  whenever  the  law  is  invoked  all  such  instruments  are 
declared  nullities;  they  are  a  perfect  dead  letter;  the  law  looks 
upon  them  as  if  they  had  never  been  executed.  They  can  never 
be  justified  or  sanctified  by  any  new  shape  or  cover,  by  forms  or 
recitals,  by  covenants  or  sanctions  which  the  ingenuity,  or  skill, 
or  genius  of  the  rogue  may  devise.^^  A  fraudulent  transfer,  how- 
ever perfect  in  form,  is  void  as  to  creditors.^*  The  use  of  sheriff's 
deeds  and  other  legal  instruments  to  effect  a  fraudulent  coaivey- 

16.  Hoyt  V.  Godfrey,  88  N.  Y.  669,  17.  O'Connor  v.   Ward,   60  Ifias. 

where   a  debtor   cancelled  upon   his  1036. 

books,  without  consideration,  an  old  18.  United  States  v.  United  States 

account   against   one    who   was    in-  Bank,  8  Rob.   (La.)   262. 

solvent,     the    transaction    did    not  19.  Hughes  y.  Cory,  20  Iowa,  405. 

amount  to  a  disposition  of  property  20.  Booth  t.  Bunce,  33  N.  Y.  139, 

with    intent    to    defraud    creditors;  166,  88  Am.  Dec.  372. 

Florence  Sewing  Mach.  Co.  v.  Zeigler,  21.  Skowhegan  Bank  v.  Cutler,  49 

68  Ala.  224.  Me.  318. 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances  Oeneballt. 


anoe  of  property  by  a  debtor  is  no  bar  to  its  avoidance.**  The 
transfer  of  property  for  a  valuable  consideration  may  be  made  the 
cover  for  fraudulent  practices.  Exchanges  by  which  one  kind 
of  property  is  coniverted  into  another  more  easily  concealed  or 
transported;  the  incumbrance  of  visible  and  unavailable  prop- 
erty, and  the  retention  of  that  which  is  convertible,  or  even  the 
reverse  of  this,  and  other  cases,  where  the  aggregate  value  of  the 
debtor's  property  is  not  diminished,  but  an  apparent  obstacle  to 
a  creditor's  proceeding  is  created,  are  among  the  methods  by  which 
frauds  may  be  perpetrated  by  an  insolvent  debtor.  Such  trans- 
actions are  in  fact  fraudulent  and  condemned  by  the  statute.*' 
Where  there  is  an  actual  intent  to  defraud,  no  form  in  which  the 
transaction  is  put  can  shield  the  property  so  transferred  from 
the  claims  of  creditors,  even  though  a  full  and  adequate  considera* 
tion  be  received  for  the  same.*^ 

§  3.  Tests  as  to  fraudulent  conveyances. — The  tests  as  to 
whether  a  conveyance  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors  or 
not  in  enrery  case,  except  in  the  case  of  voluntary  conveyances  in 
certain  jurisdictions,  are  whether  the  conveyance  was  a  bona  fide 
transaction,  or  whether  it  was  a  trick  and  contrivance  to  defeat 
creditors,*'  whether  it  hinders  creditors  in  enforcing  their  debts 
and  deprives  them  of  a  right  which  would  be  legally  effective,  had 
the  conveyance  or  device  not  been  resorted  to,*'  or  whether  it  se- 
sures  or  reserves  to  the  grantor  some  benefit  or  advantage  incon- 
sistent with  its  avowed  purpose,  or  an  unusual  indulgence,  at  the 
espenae  of  creditors,  or  by  which  creditors  are  prevented  from 


ZZ.  Watson  v.  Bonflls,  116  Fed. 
157,  53  C.  C.  A.  635.  See  also  Ctol- 
lusive  and  fraudulent  legal  proceed- 
ings, chap.  II,  9  0>  infra, 

23.  Billings  v.  RusseU,  101  N.  Y. 
226,  4  N.  E.  531 ;  Pettit  v.  Shepherd, 
5  Paige  (N.  Y-)  493,  501,  28  Am. 
Dec.  437. 

24.  Greenwald  v.  Wales,  174  N.  Y. 
140,  144;  BiHings  t.  Russell,  9upra; 
Sterin  v.  Kelly,  88  N.  Y.  421.    See 


also  Consideration,  chap.  XIII,  S  30, 
infra. 

26.  United  States  v.  Hooe,  3 
Cranch,  73;  Cadogan  v.  Kennett,  2 
Cowp.  432;  2  Story  Eq.  Jur.  S  353. 
See  also  Fraudulent  intent  and 
knowledge,  chap.  XIII ;  Retention  of 
possession  or  apparent  title,  ohap. 
XII;  Reserrations  and  trusts  for 
grantor,  chap.  X. 

26.  Salzenstein    y.    Hettrick,    105 


6 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


compelliiig  an  immediate  appropriation  of  the  debtor's  property 
to  the  payment  of  his  debts.^^    Whether  a  coiweyanoe  is  fraudu- 
lent or  not  as  against  creditors  depends  on  whether  it  was  made 
on  good  consideration  and  bona  fide.     It  is  not  enough  that  it 
be  on  good  consideration  or  bona  fide;  it  must  be  both.    If  de- 
fective in  either  respect^  although  valid  between  the  parties  and 
their  representatives,  it  is  voidable  as  to  creditors.^^    In  order  that 
a  transaction  may  be  attacked  as  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  how- 
ever, prejudice  to  the  rights  of  creditors  must  result  therefrom.^^ 
Fraud  is  always  a  question  of  fact  with  reference  to  the  intent  of 
I  the  grantor  and  every  case  depends  upon  its  circumstances.    The 
:  vital  question  is  always  the  good  faith  of  the  transaction.    There 
;  is  no  other  test*^ 

§  4.  Characteristics  of  fraud. — Fraud  has  various  characteris- 
tics. It  may  be  passive  as  well  as  active.^*  Fraud  does  not  con- 
sist in  mere  intention,  but  in  intention  carried  out  by  hurtful  acts.** 


in.  App.  99;  Wagner  v.  Smith,  81 
Tenn.  669. 

27.  N.  r.— Young  v.  Heermans, 
66  N.  Y.  374. 

Oo.-ttitclien  V.  Stetson,  64  Ga. 
442 ;  Edwards  v.  Stinson,  69  Ga.  443. 

Me. — Graves  v.  Blondell,  70  Me. 
190. 

Mtnn.— Henry  r.  Hinman,  26  Minn. 

199. 

Mi88, — ^Thompson  ▼.  Furr,  67  Miss. 
478. 

Ifo.—- Monarch  Rubber  Co.  y.  Bunn, 
78  Mo.  App.  66. 

pa.— Bentz  V.  Rockey,  69  Pa. 
St.  71. 

Eng. — ^Alton  v.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4, 
Ch.  622,  38  L.  J.  Ch.  669,  21  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  282,  17  Wkly.  Rep.  1034; 
Natha  y.  Maganehand,  27  Indian 
Taw  Rep.  327,  the  test  of  good  faith 
in  such  cases  is  whether  the  transfer 
is  a  mere  cloak  for  retaining  a  bene- 
fit to  the  grantor. 


28.  Blennerhassett  y.  Sherman, 
106  U.  S.  100,  26  L.  Ed.  1080;  Basey 
y.  Daniel,  Smith  (Ind.),  262;  Glenn 
y.  Randall,  2  Md.  Ch.  220;  Smith  y. 
Muirhead,  34  N.  J.  Eq.  4;  Randall  y. 
Vroom,  30  N.  J.  Eq.  363;  Sayre  y. 
Fredericks,  16  N.  J.  Eq.  206;  1 
Story  Eq.  Jur.,  8  363.  See  also  Ef- 
fect of  consideration  where  there  is 
fraudulent  intent,  chap.  XIII,  8  30, 
infra. 

20.  Shand  y.  Hanley,  71  N.  Y. 
319;  Soott  y.  Thomas,  104  Va.  330, 
61  S.  E.  829.  See  also  Prejudice  to 
the  rights  of  creditors,  chap.  Ill,  8  9, 
infra,  and  cases  there  cited. 

SO.  Lloyd  y.  Fulton,  91  U.  S.  479, 
486,  23  L.  Ed.  363.  See  Fraudtilent 
intent  and  knowledge,  chap.  XIII, 
infra. 

31.  Holt  y.  Creamer,  34  N.  J.  Eq. 
181. 

32.  Williams  y.  Dayis,  69  Pa.  St 


Fraudulent  Conveyances  Genekallt.  7 

It  may  be  any  kind  of  artifice  employed  by  one  person  to  deceive 
amother  by  ^ord  or  act^^'  conduct  that  operates  prejudicially  on 
the  rights  of  others,'^  or  withdraws  the  property  of  a  debtor 
from  the  reach  of  his  creditors.'^  It  must  be  directed  by  the 
debtor  against  his  creditors  or  purchasers.'^  Fraud  may  be  mani- 
festly indicated  by  the  cirorumstanoes,'^  and  may  be  established 
by  circumstances  as  against  the  denial  of  the  parties  interested.'^ 
Intent  or  intention  is  an  operation  or  emotion  of  the  mind,  and 
can  usually  be  shown  only  by  acts  or  declarations^  and,  as  acts 
speak  louder  than  words,  if  a  party  does  an  act  which  must  de- 
fraud another,  his  declaration  that  he  did  not  by  the  act  intend  to 
defraud  is  weighed  down  by  the  evidence  of  his  own  act.'^  Slight 
circumstances,  or  circumstances  of  an  equivocal  tendency,  or 
circumstances  of  mere  suspicion,  leading  to  no  certain  results,  are 
not  sufficient  to  establish  fraud ;  but  they  must  be,  when  taken  to- 
gether and  aggregated,  when  interlinked  and  put  in  proper  rela- 
tion to  each  other,  inconsistent  with  an  honest  intent/^"  The  law 
will  not  deduce  fraud  from  any  number  of  acts,  each  of  which  is 
lawful  and  innocent  in.  itself,  but  one  who  seeks  to  attach  a  fraudu- 
lent character  to  such  acts  must  go  further  and  show  that  they 
were  in  fact  done  with  a  fraudulent  intent  and  for  a  fraudulent 
purpose.'*^  Suspicion  of  fraud  is  not  sufficient  to  impart  notice 
of  it,  and  knowledge  of  facts  sufficient  to  excite  the  suspicions  of  a 


21.    See  Accomplishment  of  purpose, 
chap.  Xin,  9  3,  infra, 

33.  Goke  litt.  357b. 

34.  Bunn  y.  Ahl,  20  Pa.  St.  390. 
36.  McKibbin   v.   Martin,   64   Pa. 

8t  366. 

36.  Metz  ▼.  Blackburn,  0  Wyo. 
481,  65  Pac.  867.  See  Fraud  directed 
against  debtor,  chap.  II,  S  26, 
infra, 

37.  Stockwell  t.  Stockwell,  72  N. 
H.  69,  64  Ail.  701.  See  Circum- 
stantial evidence,  chap.  XVII,  S  44, 
infra. 

38.  Ham  t.  Gilmore,  7  Misc.  Rep. 
<N.  Y.)  596,  28  N.  Y.  Supp.  126* 


39.  Babcock  v.  Eckler,  24  N.  Y. 
632. 

40.  Foster  v.  McAlesier,  114  Fed. 
145,  62  C.  C.  A.  107. 

41.  Warren  t.  Union  Bank,  157  N. 
Y.  250,  51  N.  E.  1036,  68  Am.  St. 
Rep.  777,  43  L.  R.  A.  256;  Warner  ▼. 
Blakeman,  4  Abb.  Dec.  (N.  Y.)  535; 
Goff  V.  Alexander,  20  Misc.  Rep.  (N. 
Y.)  408,  45  N.  Y.  Supp.  737;  Kemp- 
ner  ▼.  Churchill,  8  Wall.  (U.  S.) 
362,  10  L.  Ed.  461;  Foster  ▼.  Mc- 
Alester,  9upra;  Engraham  r.  Pate, 
61  Qa.  637;  Wilson  y.  WatU,  0  Md. 
356. 


8 


Frauj>ui.£nt  Conveyancbs. 


prudent  man,  or  to  lead  a  person  of  ordinary  perception  to  sus- 
pect fraud,  does  not  amount  to  actual  notice  of  it.'*^  The  question 
whether  fraud  exists  in  a  tranaactioon  may  be  a  question  of  law, 
or  of  fact,  or  one  of  both  law  and  fact^  Where  the  facts  have 
been  ascertained  by  the  trial  court,  the  conclusion  to  be  drawn 
from  the  facts  so  found,  including  the  determination  of  the  ex- 
istence of  constructive  fraud  and  of  a  valuable  consideraticm,  is 
a  question  of  law.** 

§  5.  Circumstances  establishing  fraud. — In  investigations  of 
allied  fraudulent  conveyances  much  more  latitude  is  allowed  than 
in  other  cases  and  the  field  of  circumstances  imvestigated  ought  to 
be  very  wide.  The  intent  is  seldom  disclosed  on  the  face  of  the 
transaction,  but  is  generally  concealed  under  legal  forms,  and 
can  seldom  be  proved  by  direct  evidence.*^  The  vermiculations 
of  fraud  are  chiefly  traceable  by  covered  tracks  and  studious  con- 
cealments.*^ It  must  in  most  cases  be  established  by  inference 
from  a  variety  of  facts,  and  all  the  surrounding  circumstances 
may  properly  be  examined.*^    Even  negative  evidence  may  some- 


4k2.  Urdangen  A  Greenberg  Bros. 
V.  Boner,  122  Iowa,  633,  98  N.  W. 
317.  See  Mere  siupicion,  chap.  XIII, 
9  19,  infra, 

48.  Jewell  v.  Knight»  123  U.  S. 
426,  8  Sup.  Gt.  193,  31  L.  Ed.  190; 
Foster  ▼.  Woodfin,  11  Ired'.  (N.  C.) 
339;  Estwick  v.  Caillaud,  5  T.  R. 
420.  See  Questions  of  law  and  fact, 
chap.  XVIII,  §  4,  infra, 

44.  Clarke  y.  Black,  78  Conn.  467, 
62  Atl.  757. 

46.  Beuerlein  v.  O'Leary,  149  N. 
Y.  33,  43  N.  E.  417,  revg,  28  N.  Y. 
Supp.  1133;  Engraham  v.  Pate,  61 
Ga.  637.  See  Admissibility  and  rele- 
vancy of  evidence,  chap.  XVII,  9  16, 
infra. 

46.  Bliss  V.  Couch,  46  E^n.  400, 
26  Pae.  706. 


47.  U,  8, — ^Humes  v.  Scruggs,  94 
U.  S.  22,  24  L.  Ed.  51 ;  Knowlton  ▼. 
Mish,  8  Sawy.   (U.  S.)  627. 

Colo. — ^Eversman  v.  Clements,  6 
Golo.  App.  224,  40  Pac  575. 

Me. — Spear  v.  Spear  (1903),*  64 
Atl.   1106. 

Md. — Aticinson  v.  Phillips,  1  Md. 
Ch.  607. 

Pa.— McKibbin  v.  Martin,  64  Pa. 
St.  366. 

Tr«.~Winner  v.  Hoyt,  66  Wis. 
227,  28  N.  W.  380,  57  Am.  Rep.  267. 

Eng, — In  re  Holland  (1902),  2Ch. 
360,  71  L.  J.  Ch.  518,  86  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  542,  9  Manson,  259,  50  Wkly. 
Rep.  575;  Thompson  v.  Webster,  28 
L.  J.  Ch.  700,  7  Wkly.  Rep.  648, 
affd,  4  Drew,  628,  5  Jur.  N.  S.  668, 
28  L.  J.  Ch.  700,  7  Wkly.  Rftp.  696. 


Fraudulent  Conveyances  Generally. 


9 


tiiiieB  have  a  positive  value  in  cases  of  fraud.*®  Every  case  de- 
pends upon  its  ciroumstacces  and  is  to  be  carefully  scrutinized.*^ 
It  is  upon  these  and  like  considerations  that  courts  have  held  that 
^Hhe  case  of  fraud  is  among  the  few  exceptions  to  the  general 
Tvley  that  other  offenses  of  the  accused  are  not  relevant  to  establish 
the  main  charge."^^  Fraud  implies  a  fraudulent  intent^  and  is 
an  inference  or  conclusion  of  fact  drawn  from  the  facts  or  circum- 
stances of  the  particular  transaction.  The  circumstances  to  show 
fraud,  and  the  circumstances  to  rebut  it,  are  argumenits  on  the 
question  of  fraud,  and  a  conclusion  on  the  question  of  fraud  is 
a  conclusion  of  fact  arrived  at  by  weighing  those  arguments.^  ^ 
The  evidence  of  fraud  is  almost  always  circumstantial.  Never-^ 
theless,  though  circumstantial,  it  produces  conviction  in  the  mind 
often  of  more  force  than  direct  testimony.^^  And  if  the  facts  and 
cinsumstaoces  surrounding  the  case,  and  distinctly  proven,  are 
such  as  would  lead  a  reasonable  man  to  the  conclusion  that  fraud 
« in  fact  existed,  this  is  all  the  proof  that  the  law  requires.^^  The 
general  subject  of  evidence  pertaining  to  fraudulent  conveyances 
will  be  considered  in  a  later  chapter .'^^ 


§  6.  Origin  of  written  law  against  fraudulent  conveyances. — 
Certain  provisions  in  Magna  Charta,  the  Great  Charter  of  English 
liberties,  so  called,  but  which  was  really  a  compact  between  the 
king  and  his  barons,  and  almost  exclusively  for  the  benefit  of  the 
latter,  though  confirming  the  anciait  liberties  of  Englishmen  in 
some  few  particulars,  are  sometimes  referred  to  as  one  of  the 
original  sources  of  written  law  against  covinous  alienations  of 


48.  Sonnentlieil  v.  Christiani 
Moerlein  Brewing  Co.,  172  U.  S.  401, 
19  Sup.  Ct.  233,  43  L.  Ed.  492. 

49.  Uoyd  V.  Fulton,  91  U.  S.  486. 
60.  Beaerlein  v.   Oljeary,  supra; 

Gary  ▼.  Hotailing;  1  Hill  (N.  Y.), 
311,  37  Am.  Bee.  311. 

Bl.  Baboock  t.  Eckler,  24  N.  T. 
023. 

S2.  Warner  v.  Blakeman,  4  Abb. 


App.  Dec.  (N.  Y.)'535;  Newman  v. 
CJordell,  43  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  466; 
Kempner  v.  ChurchiU,  8  Wall.  (U. 
S.)  369;  Tnmlin  v.  Crawford,  61  Ga. 
128;  Harnett  y.  Dundass,  4  Pa.  St. 
181. 

63.  White  v.   Perrj,    14  W.   Va. 
86;  Lockhard  v.  Beckley,  10  W.  Va. 

87. 

64.  See  chap.  XVII,  infra. 


10 


Pbaudulekt  CoifyEYANOXS. 


property.  They  provided  that  no  freeman  should  give  or  sell 
away  his  lands  so  that  no  residue  would  remain  to  the  lord  of  the 
fee,  out  of  which  the  service  pertaining  to  the  fee  mi^t  be  en- 
forced, and  that  a  gift  of  lands  in  mortmain  should  be  void  and 
lands  so  given  go  to  the  lord  of  the  fee.^^ 

§  7.  Early  English  statutes  avoiding  fraudulent  convejrances. 

The  famous  statute  of  13  Elizabeth  (1570),  perpetuated  by  the 
statute  of  29  Elizabeth  (1587),  was  preceded  by  earlier  legisla- 
tion by  the  parliament  of  England  against  fraudulent  transfers, 
enacted  to  more  dearly  formulate  the  common  law  with  a  view  to 
suppress  voluntary  conveyances  and  secret  trusts  made  by  debtors 
who  escaped  arrest  for  debt,  or  avoided  service  of  process  by 
fleeing  to  sanctuaries  or  holy  ground  The  statute  of  Edward  I,** 
the  statute  of  Bicbard  11,^^  and  the  statute  of  Edward  III,'^ 


6B.  Magna    Charta,    chapters    32 
and  36,  June  19,  1215. 

66.  St.    13    Edward    I,    chap.   1, 
enacted  in  1290. 

67.  St.  2  Richard  11,  chap.  3, 
enacted  in  1379.  This  statute  reads 
as  follows.  'Mtem,  in  case  of  dsbt, 
where  the  debtors  make  feigned  gifts 
and  feoffments  of  their  goods  and 
lands  to  their  friends  and  others, 
and  after  withdraw  themselyes,  and 
flee  into  places  of  holy  church  privi- 
I^ed,  and  there  hold  them  a  long 
time,  and  take  the  profit  of  their 
said  lands  and  goods  so  given  by 
fraud  and  collusion,  whereby  their 
creditors  have  been  long  and  yet  be 
delayed  of  their  debts  and  recovery, 
wrongfully  and  against  good  faith 
and  reason ;  it  is  ordained  and  estab- 
lished, that  after  that  the  said 
creditors  have  thereof  brought  their 
writs  of  debt,  and  thereupon  a  capias 
awarded,  and  the  sheriff  shall  make 
his  return  that  he  hath  not  taken  the 
said  persons  because  of  such  places 


privileged  in  which  th^  be  or  shaU 
be  entered,  then  .  .  .  another 
writ  shall  be  granted  .  .  .  that 
proclamation  be  made  openly  at  the 
gate  of  the  place  so  privileged,  where 
such  persons  be  entered,  by  five 
weeks  continually,  every  week  once, 
that  the  same  persons  be  at  a  certain 
day,  .  .  .  before  the  King's  jus- 
tices, and  ...  if  the  said  persons 
called  come  not  .  .  •  judgment 
shall  be  given  against  them  upon  the 
principal  for  their  default.  .  .  . 
Execution  shall  be  made  of  their 
goods  and  lands,  being  out  of  the 
place  privileged,  as  well,  that  is  to 
say,  of  those  lands  and  goods  so 
given  by  collusion,  as  of  any  other 
out  of  the  same  franchise,  after  that 
such  collusion  or  fraud  be  duly  found 
in  the  same  manner  as  that  ought  to 
have  been,  if  no  devise  had  been 
thereof  made,  notwithstanding  the 
same  devise.'* 

58.  St.  50  Edward  m,  chap.  6» 
enacted  in  1376. 


Fbaudui-ent  Conveyancbs  Oenxkallt.  11 

contained  provisions  aimed  at  fraudulent  debtors.  The  latter  aol; 
read  as  followis:  ^'Divers  people  ...  do  give  their  tene- 
ments and  chattels  to  their  friends^  bj  collusion  to  have  the  profits 
at  their  will,  and  after  do  flee  to  the  franchise  of  Westminster^ 
of  St.  Martin-le-Grand  of  London,  or  other  such  privileged  places, 
and  there  do  live  a  great  time  with  an  high  countenance  of  an^ 
other  man's  goods  and  profits  of  the  said  tenements  and  chattels, 
till  the  said  creditors  shall  be  bound  to  take  a  small  parcel  of  their 
debt,  and  release  the  remnant,  it  is  ordained  and  assented,  that  if 
it  be  found  that  such  gifts  be  so  made  by  collusion,  that  the  said 
creditors  shall  have  execution  of  the  said  tenements  and  chat- 
tels as  if  no  such  gift  had  been  made.''  By  the  statute  of  Henry 
YH  ''all  deeds  of  gift  of  goods  and  chattels  made  or  to  be  made 
of  trust  to  the  use  of  the  person  or  persons  that  made  the  same 
deed  of  gifti,"  are  declared  "void  and  of  none  effect"**  These 
early  statutes  show  that  fraud,  which  was  greatly  abhorred  by 
the  common  law,  was  so  much  practiced  by  debtors  upon  creditors 
as  to  call  forth  frequent  legislation  in  those  early  times,  and  that 
fraudulent  conveyances  by  debtors  are  not  an  outgrowth  of  modern 
civilization,  although  more  prevalent  in  more  recent  times  and  at 
the  present  day. 


§  8.  Statute  of  13  Elizabeth  for  the  protection  of  creditors. — 
The  most  important  of  the  English  statutes  against  fraudulent 
conveyances  is  the  justly  celebrated  act  of  13  Elizabeth,*^  perpetu- 
ated by  the  statute  of  29  Elizabeth.^  ^  This  statute  was  passed  for 
the  protection  of  creditors.  By  its  provisions  all  conveyances  and 
dispositions  of  property,  real  or  personal,  made  with  the  intention 
of  defrauding  creditors,  are  declared  null  and  void  as  against 
ereditors.^^    The  leading  object  of  the  statute  was  to  prevent  those 

B9.  St.     3    Hen.  VH,    cbap.    4,      The  statute  declares  that  "all   and 

enacted  in  1487.  every  Feoffment,  Gift,  Grant,  Aliena- 

60.  8t.  13  Eliz.,  chap.  5,  enacted  taon.  Bargain  and  Conveyance  of 
in  1570.  Lands,     Tenements,     Hereditaments, 

61.  St.  29  Eliz.,  chap.  5,  enacted  Goods  and  Chattels,  or  of  any  of 
in  1587.  them,  or  of  any  Lease,  Heat,  Common 

62.  Drake  v.  Bice,  130  Mass.  410.      or  other  Profit  or  Charge  oat  of  the 


12 


Fraudulent  Cohvbyancbs. 


collusive  transfers  of  the  legal  owner^p  which  plaoe  the  property 
of  a  man  indebted  out  of  the  reach  of  his  bona  fide  creditors,  and 
leave  to  him  the  beneficial  enjoyment  of  that  which  ought  in  con- 
science to  be  open  to  their  legal  remedies.^ 

§  9.  Statutes  in  the  United  States. — The  statute  of  13  Eliza- 
beth, a  5,  against  fraudulent  conveyances  has  been  universally 
adopted  in  American  law  as  the  basis  of  our  jurisprudence  on  that 
subject,**  and  either  re-enacted  in  terms,  6r  nearly  so,  or  with 
some  change  of  language,  by  the  legislatures  of  practically  all  the 
states,  or  recognized  as  aa  exposition  of  the  principles  of  the 
common  law  and,  although  not  re-enacted,  adopted  as  and  held 
to  be  a  part  of  the  common  law  in  force  here.^  In  Iowa,  for  ex- 
ample, although  the  statutes  of  13  Elizabeth  and  27  Elizabeth 


same  Lands,  Tenements,  Heredita- 
ments, Goods  and  Chattels,  or  any 
of  them,  by  Writing  or  otherwise, 
and  all  and  every  Bond,  Suit,  Judg- 
ment and  Execution,  at  any  Time 
had  or  made  sithence  the  Beginning 
of  the  Queen's  Majesty's  Reign  that 
now  is,  or  at  any  Time  hereafter  to 
be  had  or  made,  to  or  for  any  In- 
tent or  Purpose  before  declared  and 
expressed,  shaU  be  from  henceforth 
deemed  and  taken  (only  as  against 
that  Person  or  Persons,  his  or  their 
Heirs,  Successors,  Executors,  Admin- 
istrators and  Assigns,  and  every  of 
them,  whose  Actions,  Suits,  Debts, 
Accounts,  Damages,  Penalties,  For- 
feitures, Heriots,  Mortuaries  and 
Reliefs,  by  such  guileful,  covinous  or 
fraudulent  Devices  and  Practices,  as 
is  aforesaid,  are,  shall  or  might  be 
in  any  ways  disturbed,  hindered,  de- 
layed or  defrauded)  to  be  clearly  and 
utterly  void,  frustrate  and  of  none 
Effect;  any  Pretence,  Colour,  feigned 
Consideration,  expressing  of  Use,  or 
any  other  Matter  or  Tiling  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding." 


63*.  Roberta  on  Fraud.  Conv.,  p.  554. 

64.  Story  Eq.  Jur.,  §  353. 

65.  N.  r.— Hall  V.  Tuttle,  8 
Wend.  375;  Sands  v.  Hildretfa,  14 
Johns.  493;  Jackson  v.  Henry,  10 
Johns.  185;  Sturtevant  v.  Ballard,  9 
Johns.  337. 

U.  fir.— Peters  v.  Bain,  133  U.  S. 
670,  685,  10  Sup.  Ct.  354,  33  L.  Ed. 
696;  Clement  v.  Nicholson,  6  Wall. 
299,  18  L.  Ed.  786;  Sumner  v.  Hicks, 
2  Black,  532,  1*7  L.  Ed.  355;  Cath- 
cart  V.  Robinson,  5  Pet.  264,  8  L.  Ed. 
120;  Hamilton  v.  Russell,  1  Cranch, 
309,  2  L.  Ed.  118;  McClellan  v. 
Pyeatt,  66  Fed.  843,  14  C.  C.  A.  140. 

Ala. — ^Anderson  v.  Anderson,  64 
Ala.  403. 

D,  C— Kansas  City  Packing  Co.  v. 
Hoover,  1  App.  Cas.  268. 

Chi. — Westmoreland  v.  Powell,  59 
Ga.  256;  Peck  v.  Land,  2  Ga.  1,  46 
Am.  Dec.  368. 

Ill,— Ewing  V.  Runkle,  20  111.  448. 

JTy. — Doyle  v.  Sleeper,  31  Ky.  (1 
Dana)  531. 

La. — ^United  States  v.  United 
States  Bank,  8  Rob.  262,  402. 


FSAUDULEKT  CONYEYAITGES  GeNEBALLY. 


13 


had  never  ibeen  legifilatively  re-enacted^  it  was  said  hy  Jud^ 
Dillon:  '^But  aoxtedating  as  these  statutes  do  the  settlemenit  of 
this  country,  and  being  mainly^  if  not  wholly,  declaratory  of  the 
conunon  law,  which  sets  a  face  of  flint  against  frauds  in  every 
shape,  they  constitute  the  basis  of  American  jurisprudence  on 
these  subjects,  and  are,  in  this  state,  part  of  the  unwritten  law."^ 

§  10.  Statutes  merely  declaratory  of  the  common  law. — That 
the  famous  statutes  of  Elizabeth  and  other  early  statutes  were 
merely  declaratory  of  rules  and  principles  which  eodsted  and 
were  applied  at  common  law  before  these  statutes  against  fraudu- 
lent cocweyiances  were  enacted,  and  by  which  all  conveyances  made 
in  fraud  of  creditors  were  regarded  as  voidable  at  the  instance 
and  suit  of  such  creditors,  is  generally  conceded.^     It  was  aaid 


Me. — ^Butler  v.  Moore,  73  Me.  151, 
40  Am.  Bep.  348;  Whitmore  v. 
Woodward,  28  Me.  392;  Howe  v. 
Ward,  4  Me.  105. 

Md. — Crookg  v.  Brydon,  93  Md. 
640,  49  Atl.  921. 

IfMA.— Carlisle  v.  Tindall,  49  Miss. 
229,  234. 

y.  H.— Robinson  v.  Holt,  39  N.  H. 
557,  75  Am.  Dec.  233. 

N.  J, — ^Mnlford  v.  Peterson,  36  N. 
J.  L.  127. 

N.  C— Moore  v.  Hinnant,  89  N.  C. 
465 ;  Gfowing  v.  Rich,  23  N.  C.  563. 

Pa.—Heath  v.  Page,  63  Pa.  St.  108, 
3  Am.  Rep.  533;  Clark  v.  Douglass, 
62  Pa.  St  408;  McCulloch  v.  Hutch- 
inson, 7  Watts,  434,  32  Am.  Dec. 
776;  Wilt  V.  Franklin,  1  Binn.  502, 
2  Am.  Dec.  474. 

Fa.— Davis  v.  Turner,  4  Qratt.  422. 

Wash. — ^Bates  v.  Drake,  28  Wash. 
447,  68  Pac.  961;  Wagner  v.  Law,  3 
Wash.  500,  28  Pac.  1109,  29  Pac. 
927,  28  Am.  St.  Rep.  56,  15  L.  R.  A. 
784. 

66.  Gardner  y.  Cole,  21  Iowa,  205. 

67.  N.   r.— Curtis  ▼.   Leavitt,   15 


N.  Y.  9,  124;  Heroy  v.  Kerr,  2  Keyes, 
5S2,  2  Abb.  Dec.  359;  Nellis  v.  Qark, 
20  Wend.  24;  Sturtevant  v.  Ballard, 
9  Johns.  337,  6  Am.  Dec.  281.  Com- 
pare Delaney  v.  Valentine,  154  N.  Y. 
692,  49  N.  E.  65. 

U,  S. — Baker  v.  Humphrey,  101  U. 
6.  494,  25  L.  Ed.  1065;  Clements  v. 
Nicholson,  6  Wall.  299,  18  L.  Ed. 
786;  Sumner  y.  Hicks,  2  Black,  532, 
17  h.  Ed.  355;  Hamilton  y.  Russel, 
1  Cranch,  309,  2  L.  Ed.  118;  Meeker 
y.  Wilson,  16  Fed.  Cas.  No.  9,392,  1 
Gall.  419. 

A  to.— Anderson  y.  Anderson,  64 
Ala.  403;  Adams  y.  Broughton,  13 
Ala.  731;  Anderson  y.  Hooks,  9  Ala. 
704;  Cato  y.  Easley,  2  Stew.  214; 
Killough  y.  Steele,  1  Stew.  &  P.  262. 

Conn, — Fox  y.  Hillis,  1  Conn.  296. 

6a.— Peck  y.  Land,  2  Ga.  1,  46 
Am.  Dec.  368. 

ZU.-— Ewing  y.  Runkle,  20  HI.  448, 
461. 

Iowa. — Gardner  y.  Cole,  21  Iowa, 
209. 

Kan, — ^Diefendorf  y.  Oliyer,  8  Kan. 
366. 


14 


Fraudulent  Conveyaitoibs. 


by  Lord  Mansfield,  in  an  early  English  case,  tliat  ^%e  principles 
and  rules  of  the  common  law,  as  now  nniveraally  known  and 
imderetood,  are  so  strong  against  fraud  in  every  shape,  that  the 
common  law  would  have  attained  every  end  proposed  by  the 
statutes  of  13  Elizabeth,  a  5,  and  27  Elizabeth,  c.  4."*^  And 
Chancellor  Kent  early  asserted  the  American  view  that  the 
^^statute  of  Elizabeth"  was  ''aoly  in  aiBrmance  of  the  principles 
of  the  common  law."®  The  right  of  a  creditor  to  subject  prop- 
erty of  his  debtor,  fraudulently  conveyed,  was  said  in  a  later.  Ameri- 
can case  to  be  ^'founded  on  that  principle  of  the  common  law  which 
enjoins  integrity  as  a  virtue  paramount  to  generosity."'*  The 
statutes  againfit  fraudulent  conveyances  are,  therefore,  merely 
declaratory  of  principles  which  the  courts  would  enforce  inde- 
pendently of  their  enactment,  and  are  to  be  construed  in  the  li^t 
of  those  principles.^ 

§  11.  Statute  of  27  Elizabeth  in  favor  of  subsequent  pur- 
chasers*— .The  statute  of  27  Elizabeth  was  enacted  in  favor  of 
purchasers,  and  renders  void  as  against*  subsequent  purchasers  of 
the  same  land  all  conveyances,  etc.,  made  with  the  intention  of 
defeating  them,  or  containing  a  power  of  revocation.'*     This 


Ky, — ^Doyle  y.  Sleeper,  1  Dana, 
531;  Lmard  ▼.  McGee,  4  Bibb.  166. 

Ma8%, — In  re  Jordan,  9  Mete.  292. 

Minn, — Blackman  v.  Wheaton,  13 
Mizm.  326;  Piper  y.  Johnston,  12 
Minn.  60. 

V,  F.— Bobinson  y.  Holt,  39  N.  H. 
557,  75  Am.  Dee.  233. 

V.  C— O'Daniel  v.  Crawford,  15  N. 
C.  197. 

Ohio. — Brice  y.  Myers,  5  Ohio,  121. 

Pa.— Clark  y.  Douglass  62  Pa.  St. 
408,  416;  McCulloch  y.  Hutchinson, 
7  VTatts,  434,  32  Am.  Dec.  776. 

8,  (7.— Hudnal  v.  Wilder,  4  Mc- 
Cord,  294,  17  Am.  Dec.  744;  Teas- 
dale  y.  Atkinson,  2  Brey.  48;  Foot-' 
man  y.  Pendergrass,  3  Rich.  Eq.  83. 


Va. — ^Davis  y.  Turner,  4  Oratt. 
422. 

Bng, — ^Notes  to  Twyne's  Case,  3 
Coke,  80a,  1  Smith  Lead.  Cas.  1,  con- 
tinued in  18  Am.  L.  R^.  N.  S.  137. 

68.  Cadogan  y.  Kennett,  2  Cowp. 
432.  See  Starin  y.  Kelly,  88  N.  Y. 
421 ;  Clements  y.  Moore,  6  Wall.  (U. 
S.)  299. 

69.  Sands  y.  Codwise,  4  Johns. 
(N.  T.)  596,  4  Am.  Dee.  313. 

70.  Planters',  etc.,  Bank  y. 
Walker,  7  Ala.  926,  946. 

71.  Seymour  y.  Wilson,  19  N.  Y. 
417. 

72.  St  27  Eliz.,  chap.  4,  proyided 
in  substance,  in  section  2,  that  eyery 
conyejance,     grant,     charge,     lease. 


Fbauduubnt  Coifvetances  Gbnbballt. 


15 


fiptatute  i^ch^  like  the  statute  of  13  Elizabeth,  has  been  held  to 
be  merely  declaratory  of  the  common  law,  has  been  either  substan* 
tiallj  re^nacted  in  the  United  States,  or  reoognized  as  a  part 
of  the.eommon  law.^  This  statute  and  some  of  the  statutes  in  the 
United  States  based  upon  it  are  in  terms  limited  to  convejyiances 


estate,  oicnmbranoe  and  limitation 
of  use  or  uses  of,  in,  or  out  of  any 
lands,  tenements^  or  other  heredita- 
ments -whatsoever,  had  or  made  for 
the  intent  and  of  purpose  to  defraud 
and  deeeiye  such  person  or  persons, 
bodies  politic  or  corporate,  as  shaU 
in  fee  simple,  fee  tail,  for  life,  lives, 
or  years,  the  same  lands,  tenements 
and  hereditaments,  or  any  part  or 
parcel  thereof,  so  formerly  conveyed, 
granted,  leased,  charged,  encumbered, 
or  limited  in  use,  or  to  defraud  and 
deceive  such  as  shall  purchase  any 
rent»  profit  or  commodity  in  or  out 
of  the  same,  or  any  part  thereof, 
shaU  be  deemed  and  taken  only  as 
against  that  pers<m  and  persons, 
bodies  politic  and  corporate,  his  and 
their  heirs»  successors,  executors,  ad- 
ministrators and  assigns,  and  against 
all  and  every  other  person  and  per- 
sons lawfully  having  or  claiming  by, 
from  or  under  them,  or  any  of  them, 
which  have  purchased  or  shall  here- 
after so  purchase  for  money  or  other 
good  consideration,  the  same  lands, 
tenements  or  hereditaments,  or  any 
part  or  parcel  thereof,  or  any  rent» 
profit  or  conmiodity  in  or  out  of  the 
same,  to  be  utterly  void,  frustrate, 
and  of  none  effect;  any  pretense,  color, 
feigned  consideration,  or  expressing 
of  any  use  or  uses  to  the  contrary 
notwithstanding.  Section  4  excepts 
eonveyances,  etc.,  had  or  made  upon  or 
for  good  consideration  and  bona  fide. 
Section  5  avoids  conveyances  con- 
taining a  power  of  revocation.  Sec- 
tion 6  provides  that  the  act  shaU  not 


avoid  any  lawful  mortgage  made 
bona  fide  and  upon  good  considera- 
tion. 

By  56  and  67  Vict.,  chap.  21,  an 
act  to  amend  the  law  relating  to 
voluntary  conveyances^  sudi  convey- 
ances if  hona  fide  are  not  to  be 
avoided  under  27  Eliz.,  chap.  4,  sav- 
ing transactions  completed  before 
the  passing  of  the  act. 

7^.  N.  y. — Jackson  v.  Henry,  10 
Johns.  186,  6  Am.  Dec.  328. 

U.  8. — O&thcart  v.  Robinson,  5  Pet 
280,  8  L.  Ed.  120. 

ilia.— Sewall  v.  Glidden,  1  Ala.  62 ; 
KiUough  V.  Steele,  1  Stew.  &  P.  262. 

FZa.— Gibson  v.  Love,  4  Fla.  217. 

Gfa.— Harper  v*  Scott»  12  Ga.  126; 
Fleming  y.  Townsend;  6  Ga.  103,  60 
Am.  Dec.  318. 

Ind. — ^Anderson  v.  Etter,  102  Ind. 
116,  26  N.  E.  218;  Pence  v.  Groan, 
61  Ind.  336. 

/oiixi.--Gardner  v.  Cole,  21  Iowa, 
206. 

If  ({.—Cooke  V.  Kell,  13  Md.  460; 
Baltimore  v.  Williams,  6  Md.  236. 

N.  J. — ^Mulford  V.  Peterson,  36  N. 
J.  li.  127 ;  Boice  v.  Conover,  64  N.  J. 
Eq.  631,  36  Atl.  402. 

N,  C. — Garrison  v.  Brice,  48  N.  C. 
86;  Hiatt  v.  Wade,  30  N.  C.  840. 

8.  C— Hudnal  v.  Wilder,  4  Mc- 
Oord,  204,  17  Am.  Dec.  744;  Teas- 
dale  ▼.  Atkinson,  2  Brev.  48;  Foot- 
man ▼.  Pendergrass,  3  Rich.  Eq.  33. 

Bng. — Cftdogan  v.  Kennett^  2 
Cowp.  432.  See  also  Subsequent  pur^ 
chaser,  chap.  V,  (  22,  infra. 


16 


Fbaudulent  Convetances. 


of  real  property,  and  liave  beeia  held  in  many  jurisdicticMOB  not 
to  extend  to  transfers  of  personal  property  J*  Other  cases  hare 
held  that^  since  the  statute  is  dedaratory  of  the  common  law, 
and  the  common  law  applies  to  personal  property,  it  may  be 
interpreted  as  defining  the  nature  and  effect  of  frauduleout  con- 
veyances generally,  notwithstanding  it  in  terms  applies  only  to 
land.'* 

§  12.  Construction  or  interpretation  of  statutes. — ^The  stat- 
utes  of  13  Elizabeth  and  other  statutes,  protecting  creditors  and 
others  from  fraudulent  conveyances,  are  to  be  construed  equitably 
and  liberally,  and  have  always  had  a  liberal  interpretation  by  the 
courts^  for  the  prevention  of  frauds  and  in  favor  of  the  daas  of 
persons  designed  to  be  protected  from  such  frauda  The  term 
^'  creditor  "  has  not  received  a  restricted  or  limited  interpretation.''* 
It  was  said  in  Twyne's  case  that  ^^  because  fraud  and  deceit  abound 
in  these  days  more  than  in  former  times  ...  all  statutes  made 
against  fraud  should  be  liberally  and  beneficially  expounded  to 
suppress  the  fraud."  "    The  law,  which  "  loves  h(Miesty  and  fair 


74.  Ala.—SewM  t.  Glidden,  1 
Ala.  52. 

Md. — Bohn  v.  Headley,  7  Harr.  & 
J.  267. 

37^.  J. — Boice  v.  Ck)iiover,  supra. 

y.  C. — Garrison  v.  Brice,  48  N.  C. 
86;  Hiatt  v.  Wade,  30  N.  C.  340, 
growing  grass  is  real  property  and 
within  27  Eliz.  and  similar  statutes. 

8.  C, — ^Teasdale  y.  Atkinson,  2 
Brev.   48. 

Eng. — Jones  v.  Croucher,  1  Sim.  & 
St.  315,  1  Eng.  Oh.  315,  57  Eng.  Re- 
print, 128. 

75.  Gibson  v.  Love,  4  Fla.  217; 
Harper  v.  Scott,  12  Ga.  125;  Flem- 
ing y.  Townsend,  6  Ga.  103,  50  Am. 
Dec.  318;  Avery  v.  Wilson,  47  S.  C. 
78,  25  S.  E.  286;  Hudnal  v.  WUder, 
supra, 

76.  N.  7.— Young  y.  Heermans, 
66  N.  Y.  374,  383. 


Ala. — ^Anderson  v.  Anderson,  64 
Ala.  403. 

Conn, — ^AUen  y.  Bundle,  50  Gonn. 
9,  47  Am.  Bep.  509. 

Fto.— Gibson  v.  Love,  4  Fla.  217. 

flk».— Peck  v.  Land,  2  Ga.  1,  46 
Am.  Dec.  368. 

Md, — Spuck  V.  Logan,  97  Md.  152, 
64  Atl.  989,  99  Am.  Rep.  427 ;  Welde 
V.  Scotten,  59  Md.  72;  Cooke  v. 
Cooke,  43  Md.  522. 

ifm.— Pennington  v.  Seal,  49 
Miss.  518. 

Ohio, — ^Brice  v.  Myers,  6  Ohio,  121. 

jBn^.— -Gooch's  Case,  6  Coke,  60a; 
Wimbish  v.  Tailbois,  Plowd.  38a. 
See  also,  as  to  liberal  construction 
of  the  term  "creditor,"  chap.  V, 
infra. 

77.  3  Coke,  80a,  82a,  1  Smith 
Lead.  Cas.  1. 


Fraudulsnt  Convbtanoes  Gekebaixt. 


17 


dealing/'  construes  liberally  statutes  to  suppress  frauds^  so  far  as 
tbey  annul  the  transaotion.^  The  statutes  on,  this  subject  are 
liberally  expounded  for  the  protection  of  creditors^  and  to  meet 
the  schemes  and  devioes  by  which  a  fair  exterior  may  be  given  to 
that  which  is  in  reality  coUusive.^^  In  the  federal  courts^  the  con- 
struction' placed  upon  the  statute  by  the  highest  courts  of  the  state 
are  considered  as  controlling.^  A  statutory  provision  on  the  sub- 
ject of  fraudulent  convey ances^  where  it  establishes  a  rule  of  prop- 
erty and  not  merely  a  rule  of  procedure  or  evidence^  will  not 
operate  retrospectively  so  as  to  apply  to  oonveyanoes  made  before 
its  enactment.^^  But  statutes  which  merely  affect  the  remedy  may 
be  given  a  retrospective  effect^ 

§  13.  Effect  of  subsequent  statutory  provisions. — ^The  effect 
of  a  later  statute  upon  a  prior  statute  cocceiming  fraudulent  con- 
veyances depends  upon  the  intention  of  the  legislature^  and;  as  a 
rule,  where  the  statutes  are  not  inconsistent  and  both  may  stand, 
a  repeal  is  not  to  be  implied.  For  example,  the  provisions  of 
the  Georgia  Code  as  to  fraudulent  conveyances  are  amendatory, 
and  not  in  repeal,  of  the  statute  of  13  Elizabeth.^  The  provision 
of  the  New  York  statute  (3  R.  S.  7tii  ed.  2329)  that  every  con- 
veyance or  assignment,  made  with  the  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or 


78.  Cadogan  v.  Kenneti,  2  Cowp. 
432.  "Statutes  against  frauds  are 
to  be  liberally  and  beneficially  ex- 
pounded. This  may  seem  a  contra- 
diction to  the  rule  that  penal  stat- 
utes are  to  be  construed  strictly; 
most  statutes  against  frauds  being 
in  their  consequences  penal.  But 
this  difference  is  here  to  be  taken; 
where  the  statute  acts  upon  the  of- 
fender and  inflicts  a  penalty,  as  a  pil- 
lory or  a  fine,  it  is  then  to  be  taken 
strictly;  hut  when  the  statute  acte 
upon  the  olfenee,  by  setting  aside  the 
fraudulent  transaction,  here  it  is  to 
be  construed  liberally."  1  61.  Com. 
88. 

2 


79.  McCulloch  y.  Hutchinson,  7 
Watts  (Pa.),  434,  32  Am.  Dec.  776. 

80.  Peters  ▼.  Bain,  133  U.  S.  670, 
10  Sup.  Ct.  364,  33  L.  Ed.  696;  Jaf- 
fray  v.  McGehee,  107  U.  S.  361,  2 
Sup.  Ct.  367,  27  L.  Ed.  405 ;  lioyd  v. 
Fulton,  91  U.  S.  479,  23  K  Ed.  363; 
Allen  y.  Massey,  17  Wall.  (U.  S.) 
851,  21  L.  Ed.  542;  Sumner  y.  Hicks, 
2  Black  (U.  S.),  532,  17  L.  Ed.  355. 

81.  McCldlan  y.  Pyeatt,  66  Fed. 
843,  14  a  C.  A.  140;  Cook  y. 
Cockins,  117  Cal.  140,  48  Pac.  1095. 

82.  Stanton  y.  Keyes,  14  Ohio  St. 
443. 

83.  Westinoreland  y.  Powell,  59 
Ga.  256. 


18  Frauduusnt  Convetancbs. 

defraud  creditors^  is  void,  is  still  in  force  and  operation,  nottdth- 
standing  the  act  of  1858  aad  the  various  acts  relating  to  voluntary 
assignments  for  Uie  benefit  of  oreditors,  and  an  assignment  made 
with  such  fraudulent  intent  may  be  set  aside  at  the  suit  of 
judgment  creditors,**  The  "Neiw  York  act  of  April  29,  1833, 
relating  to  the  filing  of  chattel  mortgages,  did  not  repeal  the  statute 
concerning  fraudulent  oonvejances«  It  only  added  another  to 
the  grounds  on  which,  a  mortgage  of  personal  property  will  be 
declared  void.^  But  where  the  provisions  of  the  two  statutes  are 
inconsistent,  or  where  it  appears  that  the  legislature  intended  the 
later  statute  to  oover  the  whole  subject^  there  is  an  implied  re- 
peal." 

§  14.  Twyne*8  Cjase. — The  leading  case  imder  the  statute  of 
13  Elizabeth  is  Twyne's  case,  a  decision  promulgated  in  1601, 
thirty  years  after  the  enactment  of  the  statute.  Its  interpreta- 
tion of  the  statute  and  dear  exposition  of  the  rules  governing 
fraudulent  conveyances  have  gained  for  it  equal  prominence  with 
the  statute  itself,  and  it  is  relied  upon  as  an  authority  and  pre- 
cedent, and  is  perhaps  as  widely  cited  as  any  decision*  extant.  It 
and  the  statute  which  it  expounds  are  regarded  as  distinctive 
landmarks  in  the  laiw.  The  conveyance  or  transfer  of  his  prop- 
erty by  the  debtor  in  this  case  was  adjudged  to  be  fraudulent 
within  the  statute,  and  tihe  signs  and  marks  were  stated  by  the 
court  to  be:  (1)  That  the  gift  was  general,  witliout  exception  of 
the  donor's  apparel,  or  of  anything  of  necessity;  (2)  the  donor 
continued  in  possession  and  used  the  goods  as  his  own,  and  by 
means  thereof  traded  with  others,  and  defrauded  and  deceived 

84L  Loos    y.    Wilkinson,    110    N.  "whether  his  debt  be  or  be  not  due, 

Y.    195,    18  N.   E.   99,    1    L.   R.   A.  or  be  or  be  not  in  judgment,"  was 

259.  repealed  by  Gen.  St.,  chap.  44,  S  1, 

85.  Otis  y.  Sill,  8  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  df^fining  fraud  as  to  creditors,  and 
102.  by  Civ.  Cknie,  SS   194,  439,  allowing 

86.  Vance  y.  Campbell,  3  Ky.  L.  attachment  of  property  fraudulently 
Bep.  448,  the  act  of  1838,  authoriz-  conveyed,  either  on  the  giving  of  a 
ing  a  suit  in  equity  by  a  creditor  to  bond  or  without  bond  on  return  of 
set   aside   a   fraudulent   conveyance,  nulla  bona. 


F&AUDULBNT  CONVEYANCES  GeNEBALLY. 


19 


theni;  (3)  it  was  made  in  secret;  (4)  it  was  made  pending  the 
writ;  (5)  there  was  a  trust  between  the  parties,  for  the  donor 
possessed  all  amd  used  them  as  his  proper  goods,  and  fraud  is 
always  apparelled  and  dad  with  a  trust,  and  a  trust  is  the  cover 
of  fraud;  and  (6)  the  deed  expressed  that  the  gift  was  made 
honestly,  truly,  and  bona, fide;  et  claumla  ineansueta  semper  in- 
dueuni  suspicianem/'  Although  the  leading  doctrine  of  this  case 
has  been  practically  superseded  in  England  by  the  statute  provid- 
ing that  a  voluntary  conveyance  if  made  in  good  faith  shall  not 
be  avoided,"  the  principles  of  the  case  are  of  very  general  appli- 
cation in  the  United  States  and  hold  a  prominent  place  in  our  jur- 
isprudence." The  principles  of  this  celebrated  decision  have  since 
been  extended,  as  will  appear  in  subsequent  chapters,  so  as  to 
avoid  fraudulent  connreyances  in  certain  cases  as  to  subsequent 
creditors,*^  contingent  subsequent  creditors,*^  creditors  suing  the 
debtor  for  tort,"  as  for  assault  and  battery,"  libel  and  slander," 
or  the  misapplication  of  trust  funds."  The  doctrines  of  this  case 
have  also  beea  enlarged  so  as  to  apply  to  fraudulent  transfers  of 


87.  Twyne's  Case,  3  Coke,  80a,  1 
Smith  Lead.  Cas.  1,  18  Am.  L.  Beg. 
K.  S.  137.  See  also  Davis  v. 
Sehvartc,  165  U.  S.  631,  15  Sup.  Ct. 
237,  30  L.  Ed.  289;  Blennerhassett 
y.  Sherman,  105  U.  S.  100,  26  L.  Ed. 
1080;  Peck  ▼.  Land,  2  Ga.  1,  46  Am. 
Dee.  368.  Compare  Billings  v.  Rus- 
seU,  101  N.  Y.  226,  4  N.  £.  531; 
Kidd  y.  Rawlinson,  2  6.  &  P.  50,  3 
Esp.  52»  5  Rey.  Rep.  540.  See  also 
Badges  of  Fraud,  chap.  Vi,  infra. 

88.  St  56  and  57  Vict.,  chap.  21. 

89.  Davis  v.  Schwartz,  supra. 
See  also  Effect  of  want  of  considera- 
tion, chap.  VIII,  SS  32-35,  infra. 

90.  Laughton  v.   Harden,  68   Me. 

212;  Day  v.  Cooley,  118  Mass.  627. 
See  also  Subsequent  creditors,  chap. 
V,  8  3,  infra. 

91.  Jackson    v.    Seward,    5    Cow. 


(N.  Y.)  71;  Pennington  v.  Seal,  40 
Miss.  525;  Hoffman  v.  Junk,  51  Wis. 
614.  See  also  Contingent  obliga- 
tions, chap.  V,  8  2,  infra. 

92.  Fox  y.  Hills,  1  Conn.  205; 
Walradt  v.  Brown,  6  111.  307;  Weir 
v.  Day,  57  Iowa,  87 ;  Oebhart  v.  Mer- 
feld,  51  Md.  525;  Post  v.  Stiger,  20 
N.  J.  Eq.  558;  Langford  v.  Fly,  26 
Tenn.  585.  See  also  Torts,  chap.  V, 
(  0,  infra. 

93.  Ford  v.  Johnston,  7  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  563;  Slater  v.  Sherman,  68  Ky. 
206. 

94.  Wilcox  V.  Fitch,  20  Johns. 
(N.  Y.)  472;  Jackson  v.  Myers,  18 
Johns.  (N.  Y.)  425;  Cooke  v.  Cooke, 
43  Md.  522. 

95.  Strong  v.  Strong,  18  Bear. 
408,  52  Eng.  Reprint,  161. 


20 


EsAJTBinUENT  CONVEYAHOSS. 


intangiUe  rights  and  ehoflee  in  aodon,^  suok  as  corporate  stock^^ 
axmuities,*^  life  insorance  policies,'*  and  insurance  prenumns,^ 
legacies^^  an  equity  of  redemption/  (md  alimony  granted  to  a  "wif  e 
under  a  judgment  for  divorce.^  The  principal  badges  and  ein- 
denoes  of  fraud  were  indicated  in  this  case,  however^  and  liie 
controlling  principles  and  rules  in  the  determination  of  the  vanoua 
phases  of  fraudulent  oonveyanoes  are  in  great  measure  deriyed 
from  this  sourca 

§  15.  Prevalence  of  fraudulent  transfers. — ^The  prevalence  of 
fraudulent  oonveyances  early  led,  as  we  have  seen,  to  statutory 
enactments  on  the  subject,  in  the  effort  to  discourage  and  pre- 
vent fraudulent  debtors  from  seeking  to  cover  up  their  property 
from  their  creditors.  But  the  tendency  of  legislation  for  the  last 
century  has  almost  uniformly  been  in  favor  of  the  poor  but  hon- 
est debtor,  and  the  object  of  nearly  every  law  upon  the  subject  has 
been  to  discourage  and  discountenance,  or  entirely  prevent,  the 
efforts  of  unfeeling  creditors  to  oppress  and  punish  him  for  his 
poverty.^  The  Debtors  Act  of  1869,  in  England,  and  the  general 
abolition  of  imprisonment  for  contract  debts  in  the  different 
states  of  our  own  country  were  humane  reforms  in  the  law,  in- 
spired by  the  desire  to  relieve  honest,  but  unfortunate,  debtors 
from  the  paiinf ul  oonsequenoes  formerly  incident  to  insolvency. 
But  the  disgrace  and  horrors  of  the  debtor's  prison  being  re- 


96.  Greenwood  v.  Brodhead,  8 
Barb.  (N.  Y.)  597;  Drake  v.  Rice, 
130  Mass.  410.  See  Choees  in  action, 
chap.  IV,  S  7,  infra. 

97.  Hadden  t.  Spader,  20  Johns. 
(N.  T.)  554;  Bayard  v.  Hoffman,  4 
Johns.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)  450;  Weed  v. 
Pierce,  9  Cow.  (N.  Y.)  728;  Edmes- 
ton  V.  Lyde,  1  Paige  (N.  Y.)  641; 
Scott  v.  Indianapolis  Wagon  Works, 
48  Ind.  75;  Beckwith  y.  Burrough, 
14  It.  I.  366. 

98.  Norcutt  y.  Dodd,  1  Cr.  ft  Ph. 
100,  41  Eng.  Reprint,  428. 


99.  Aetna  Nat.  Bank  y.  Manhat- 
tan Life  Ins.  Co.,  24  Fed.  769;  Bur- 
ton y.  Farinholty  86  N.  C.  260; 
Stokoe  y.  Cowan,  29  Beay.  637.  See 
Life  insurance,  chap.  IV,  S  20,  infra. 

1.  Aetna  Nat.  Bank  y.  United 
States  Life  Ins.  Co.,  24  Fed'.  770. 

2.  Bigelow  V.  Ayrault,  46  Barb. 
(N.  Y.)   143. 

3.  Sims  y.  Gaines,  64  Ala.  397. 

4.  Steyenson  y.  Stevenson,  34  Hun 
(N.  Y.)  167. 

5.  Steyens  y.  Merrill,  41  N.  H. 
315, 


Fbaudulent  Convbtancbs  Gbneballt.  21 

moved  by  this  radical  change  in  remediee,  and  the  personal  lib- 
erty of  the  debtor  being  no  longer  endangered^  the  most  effective 
preventive  of  fraudulent  conveyances  by  dishonest  and  unscrupu- 
lous insolvents  was  removed^  with  the  resultant  effect  that  fraudu- 
lent conveyances  have  increased  in  both  England  and  the  United 
States,  and  the  ability  of  creditors  to  enforce  payment  of  their 
just  obligations  from  this  class  of  debtors  has  proportionately  di- 
minished. The  ingenuity  of  fraudulent  debtors  in  devising 
schemes  for  colorable  or  covinous  transfers  of  their  property  and 
in  evading  by  cuiming  and  intricate  devices  the  payment  of  their 
just  debts  is  remarkable,  and  seems  to  justify  the  observation  of 
Balzac,  some  sixty  years  ago,  that  under  any  system  of  law  the  dis* 
honest  debtor  will  always  on  the  whole  come  out  ahead  of  the 
creditor.  The  perplexing  problem  of  modem  jurisprudence  as 
to  how  to  remedy  this  condition,  and  to  neutralize  or  avoid,  in 
favor  of  honest  creditors,  these  fraudulent  schemes  and  devices 
of  the  unscrupulous  deibtor,  is  to  some  extent  further  complicated 
by  the  fact  that  on  both  sides  stands  an  unscrupulous  dass  whose 
dishonesty  makes  misery  for  the  honest.  Money  lenders  and  in- 
stallment sharks  take  advantage  of  the  law  to  harrow  and  torture 
the  ignorant,  the  poor,  and  the  friendless  on  the  one  hand,  and 
dishonest  debtors  seek  to  siwindle  honest  creditors  on  the  other  and 
evade  payment  of  their  just  obligations.  The  statutes  permitting 
arrest  and  imprisonment  in  civil  actions  for  debts  fraudulently 
contracted  are  a  constant  menace  to  the  innocent,  and  are  the  oc^ 
casion  for  wrongs  more  serious,  because  committed  under  the 
guise  of  legal  process,  than  those  which  they  were  designed  to 
prevent  and  punish.  They  are  an  outgrowth  of  the  ancient  prac- 
tice of  obtaining  private  vengeance  by  the  punishment  of  fraudu- 
lent debtors.  The  policy  of  coercion  by  imprisonment  for  debt 
proved  to  be  a  failure  because  it  could  not  be  resorted  to  m 
order  to  reach  debtors  who  could  pay  but  refused  to  pay,  with- 
out involving  those  who  were  unable  to  pay,  arid  who  by  being 
kept  in  jail  were  deprived  of  the  means  of  making  a  livelihood, 
and  became  a  burden  to  the  community.  The  sound  and  tnie 
policy  of  the  law  should  be  to  provide  the  most  effective  means 


22  Fraudulent  Conveyances. 

for  the  discoveiy  and  subjection  to  the  just  demands  of  creditors 
of  assets  \vjhich  have  been  fraudulently  conveyed  or  transferred, 
by  liberal  provisions  for  attachmenst  of  property  and  by  effective 
bankrupt  laws.  The  question  is  one  which  oonoems  every  man, 
debtor  as  well  as  creditor,  because  any  man,  in  any  walk  of 
life,  is  liable  to  the  misfortunes  which  arise  from  hard  times, 
errors  of  judgment,  bad  ventures,  sickness,  the  failure  of  others, 
and  other  causes.  On  the  other  hand  the  honest  and  confiding 
creditor  is  too  often  made  the  victim  of  unscrupulous  and  dis- 
honest debtors  who,  either  not  having  the  skill  and  ability  to 
acquire  property  honestly  or  lacking  the  inclination  or  disposi- 
tion, seek  to  enrich  themselves  at  the  expense  of  their  creditors. 
Creditors  have  an  equitable  interest  for  the  payment  of  their 
claims,  in  their  debtor's  property,  or  the  means  he  has  of  satisfy- 
ing their  demands,  which  the  law  recognizes  and  enforces,  under 
certain  circumstances,*  and  their  rights  to  a  thorough  and  search- 
ing investigation  as  to  transfers  or  dispositions  of  the  debtor's 
property,  at  least  to  the  extent  of  their  demands,  should  be  mani- 
festly facilitated. 

§  16.  History  and  comparative  legislation. — ^The  usual  inci- 
dent of  property  of  every  kind  owned  or  possessed  by  persons 
sui  juris  is  the  right  and  power  of  alienatiooL  As  a  rule,  every 
man  may  in  theory  of  law  do  what  he  pleases  with  that  which 
is  his  own,  and  a  debtor  has  the  absolute  power  of  disposing  of  his 
property  and  is  not  deprived  of  the  control  of  it  by  mere  insol- 
vency. His  debts  are  only  persootal  obligations,  and  so  long  as  he 
acts  in  good  faith  and  in  a  manner  not  prohibited  by  law,  he  may 
deal  with  it  as  he  sees  fit.^  For  centuries  the  tendency  of  the  law 
has  been  in  favor  of  the  removal  of  old  restraints  on  the  alienation 
of  property  and  the  disallowance  of  neiw  ones,  and  legislatures  and 
courts  have  co-operated  to  this  end.  Almost  the  sole  remaining  re- 
straint upon  the  power  of  alienation  of  land  is  that  which  exists 

6.  Seymour  t.  Wilson,  19  N.  Y.  692,  704,  49  N.  E.  65;  Wigirins  v. 
418.  Armstrong,   2    Johns.    Ch.    (K.   Y.) 

7.  Dclancy  v.  Valentine,  154  N.  Y.      145. 


Ebaudui^ent  Conv£yancibs  Gsneballt. 


23 


under  tiie  ohamferty  laws  providing  tbat  every  grant  of  lands 
shall  be  ahsolutelj  void  if  at  the  time  of  the  delivei^  such  lands 
shall  be  in  the  actual  possession  of  a  person  claiming  under  a 
title  adverse  to  that  of  the  grantor.  These  statutes  ^'nvere  orig- 
iioally  introduced  partly  upon  the  theory  that  it  ^would  be  danger- 
ous to  permit  the  transfer  of  disputed  or  'fighting  titles/  lest 
powerful  and  influential  persons  might  purchase  and  use  such 
titles  as  a  means  of  oppressing  poor  people."  Such  statutes  are 
the  relic  of  an  ancient  policy  which  has  been  treated  with  but 
little  favor  by  either  legislatures  or  courts  iin  modem  times^  and 
are  being  steadily  abolished,  circumvented,  or  ignored  as  imprac- 
ticable and  unnecesaary  in  this  country,  where  no  aristocracy,  nor 
any  privileged  dass,  elevated  above  the  mass  of  the  people,  has 
ever  existed,  and  will  doubtless  eventually  be  wholly  superseded.* 
But  from  time  immemorial  there  has  existed  idi  our  jurisprudence 
a  dear  restraint  upon  a  debtor's  right  and  power  of  alienation  of 
his  property,  where  it  is  attem.pted  to  be  exercised  for  the  pur- 
pose of  hindering,  delaying,  or  defrauding  his  creditors,  or  de- 
feating their  lawful  ri^t  to  subject  his*  property  by  legal  process 
to  the  satisfaction  of  their  lanivful  demands.  The  property  of  a 
debtor,  by  the  laws  of  all  commercial  countries,  belongs  to  his 
creditors.  The  application  of  the  debtor's  property  is  rigidly 
directed  to  the  payment  of  his  debts.  He  cannot  transport  it  to 
another  country,  transfer  it  to  his  friend,  or  conceal  it  from 
his  creditor.*  The  debtor  must  devote  all  his  property  absolutely 
to  the  payment  of  his  debts ;  reserve  no  control  to  himself  ;^*  pro- 
vide for  no  benefit  to  himself,^^  other  than  what  may  result  from 
the  payment  of  his  debts ;  impose  no  condition  upon  the  right  of 


8.  Dawley  v.  Brown,  79  N.  Y. 
390 ;  Matter  of  Department  of  Parks, 
73  N.  T.  560;  Crary  v.  Goodman,  22 
V.  Y.  177;  Sedgwick  y.  Stanton,  14 
N.  Y.  296;  Humbert  v.  Trinity 
Church,  24  Wend.  (N.Y.)  611;  Wil- 
liams v.  Bawlins,  33  Ga.  117;  Mc- 
Mahan  v.  Bowe,  114  Mass.  145. 

9.  Abbey  ▼.  Deyo,  44  N.  Y.  343. 


10.  Riggs  V.  Murray,  2  Johns.  Ch. 
(N.  Y.)  565;  Means  ▼.  Dowd,  128 
U.  8.  281;  West  v.  Snodgrass,  17 
Ala.  554;  Usher  r.  Henderson,  8  N. 
B.  R.  175;  Donovan  v.  Dunning,  69 
Mo.  436. 

11.  Lukins  v.  Aird,  6  Wall.  (U. 
S.)  79;  Wooten  y.  Clark,  23  Miss. 
75;  Towie  y.  Holt,  14  N.  H.  61. 


24 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


the  creditors  to  participate  in  the  fund;  authorize  no  delay  on 
the  part  of  the  trustee."  The  claims  of  the  creditors  rest  upon 
legal  obligations  which  are  paramount  to  the  demands  of  affec- 
tion or  generosity.  The  debtor  must  be  just  before  he  is  gener- 
ous. He  must  pay  before  he  gives."  His  property  must  not  be 
dliverted  from  the  payment  of  his  debts  to  the  injury  of  his 
creditors.'^  Creditors  are  a  favored  dass,"  and  the  proteotion 
and  preservation  of  their  rights  has  been  and  is  a  fundamental 
policy  of  all  enli^tened  nations."  This  fundameatal  principle 
governing  the  policy  of  all  civilized  nations  became  an  established 
principle  or  rule  of  the  common  law,  and  was  subsequently  writ- 
ten in  the  statute  law  of  England  and  this  country.  This  policy 
of  the  law  in  favor  of  the  creditor  class  existed  in  ancient  times^ 
as  well  as  modem,  and  the  debtor  class  was  treated  with  greater 
severity  under  ancient  laws.  But  while  the  application  of  the 
debtor's  property  has  under  the  laws  of  all  countries  been  rigidly 
applied  to  the  payment  of  his  debts,  no  country,  unless  both  bar- 
barous and  heathen,  has  ever  authorized  the  sale  of  the  person  of 
a  debtor  for  the  satisfaction  6f  his  debt^^  Under  the  laws  of 
the  ancient  Boman  republic,  the  insolvent  debtor  might  be  put  to 
death,  or  sold  into  foreign  slavery,  or  his  creditors  might  dis- 
member and  pro-rate  his  body,  as  well  as  his  estate.  Some, 
under  the  Emperors,  however,  granted  a  discharge  to  the  honest 
insolvent."     Even  in  England  as  late  as  1663,  an  imprisoned 


12.  Oliver  Lee  &  Oo/s  Bank  y. 
Taloott,  19  N.  Y.  148. 

13.  Abbey  v.  Deyo,  44  N.  Y.  343; 
Wait  V.  Day,  4  Den.  (N.  Y.)  439; 
Potter  ▼.  Oracle,  58  Ala.  303;  Slier- 
man  v.  Barrett,  1  McMul.  (S.C.)  147. 

14.  Clements  v.  Moore,  0  Wall. 
(U.  S.)  312;  Tompkins  v.  Sprout,  65 
Cal.  36;  Hunters  v.  Waite,  3  Gratt. 
(Va.)  26;  Lockhard  v.  Beckley,  10 
W.  Va.  96. 

15.  Fouche  y.  Broker,  74  Ga.  251 ; 
Qable  v.  Columbus  Cigar  Co.,  140 
Ind.  563,  566,  38  N.  E.  474. 


16.  1  Story  Eq.  Jur.,  §  350. 

17.  Abbey  v.  Deyo,  44  N.  Y.  343. 

18.  "The  cruelty  of  the  Twelve 
Tables  of  the  Boman  laws  against  in- 
solvent debtors  still  remains  to  be 
told;  and  I  shall  dare  to  prefer  the 
literal  sense  of  antiquity  to  the 
specious  refinements  of  modem  criti* 
cism.  After  the  judicial  proof  or 
confession  of  the  debt,  thirty  days 
of  grace  were  allowed  before  a 
Roman  was  delivered  into  the  power 
of  his  fellow-citizen.  In  this  private 
priscm,  twelve  ounees  of  rice  were  hia 


Fraudulent  Conyetanobs  Gbkxballt. 


25 


debtor  might  be  alloiKned  to  die  in  prison  if  his  friends  failed  to 
provide  for  his  necessities.^  The  savagery  of  the  early  Latins, 
though  much  softened^  still  survives  in  the  continental  insolvent 
and  bankruptcy  systems  of  to-day.  In  France,  not  only  must 
a  bankrupt  in  effect  pay  his  debts  in  full,  but  imprisonment  for 
debty  escept  in  casee  of  misfortune,  and  the  penalty  of  penal 
servitude  for  a  number  of  years  for  fraudulent  bankruptcy  still 
exists,  and  these  restraints  cm  the  liberty  of  the  dishonest  trader 
are  characteristic  of  all  European  laws.  They  are  a  survival  of 
the  time  when  inability  to  pay  ai  debt  was  a  crime.  England 
stands  midway  between  these  systems  and  our  own.  Fraudulent 
bankruptcy  is  a  crime^'*  but^  except  as  against  certain  well  defined 
statutory  objections,  a  discharge  may  generally  be  obtained  what- 
ever the  rate  per  cent.^ 


daily  food;  he  might  be  bound  with 
a  ohain  of  fifteen  pounds  weight;  and 
his  misery  was  thrice  exposed  in  the 
market-plaoe,  to  solicit  the  compas- 
sion of  his  friends  and  oonntrymen. 
At  the  expiration  of  sixty  days,  the 
debt  was  discharged  by  the  loss  of 
liberty  or  life;  the  insolvent  debtor 
was  either  put  to  death,  or  sold  in 
foreign  slayery  beyond  the  Tiber;  but 
if  several  creditors  were  alike  ob- 
stinate and  unrelenting,  they  might 
legally  dismember  his  body,  and 
satiate  their  revenge  1^  this  horrid 
partition.  The  advocates  for  this 
savage  law  have  insisted,  that  it 
must  stron^y  operate  in  deterring 
idleness  and  fraud  from  contracting 
debts  which  they  were  unable  to  dis- 
charge; but  experience  would  dissi- 
pate this  salutary  terror,  by  prov- 
ing, that  no  creditor  could  be  found 
to  exact  this  unprofitable  penalty  of 
life  or  limb.  As  the  manners  of 
Rome  were  insensibly  polished,  the 
criminal  code  of  the  decemvirs  was 
abolished    by   the    humanity    of    ac- 


cusers, witnesses,  and  judges;  and 
impunity  became  the  consequence  of 
immoderate  rigor.  The  Porcian  and 
Valerian  laws  prohibited  the  magis- 
trates from  infiioting  on  a  free  citi- 
zen any  capital,  or  even  corporal 
punishment;  and  the  obsolete  stat- 
utes of  blood  were  artfully,  and  per- 
haps truly,  ascribed  to  the  spirit,  not 
<^  patrician,  but  of  regal  tyranny." 
Milman's  Gibbon's  Rome,  vol.  Ill, 
pp.   183-184. 

19.  Manby  v.  Soott»  1  Mod.  132, 
Hyde  J.,  '*  If  a  man  be  taken  in  exe- 
cution, and  lie  in  prison  for  debt, 
neither  the  plaintiff  at  whose  suit 
he  is  arrested,  nor  the  sheriff  who 
took  him,  is  boimd  to  find  him  meat, 
drink,  or  clothes;  but  he  must  live 
on  his  own,  or  on  the  charity  of 
others;  and  if  no  man  will  relieve 
him,  let  him  die  in  the  name  of  God', 
says  the  law;  and  so  say  I." 

SO.  Debtors  Act  of  1869,  part  II. 
21.  Act    of    1800,    I    8;    Collier 
Bankr.  (5th  ed.)  168. 


26  'FMixmm^ssT  Coittetancbs. 


CHAPTER  IL 

Natubb  and  Fobm  of  Tbansfee  • 

Section   1.  Nature  and  form  of  transfer  generally. 

2.  Particular  forms  of  fraudulent  conveyances. 

3.  Transfers  a^  security. 

4.  Conditional  sales. 

6.  Purchase  of  property  through  or  in  name  of  third  person. 

6.  Purchase  of  property  by  husband  in  name  of  wife. 

7.  Purchase  of  personal  property  by  husband  in  name  of  wife. 

8.  Payments  of  liens — ^Loans — Improvements  on  lands  of  another. 

9.  Collusive  and  fraudulent  legal  proceedings. 

10.  Collusive  judgments. 

11.  Confession  of  judgment. 

12.  Statutory  requirements  as  to  confessions  of  judgment. 

13.  Foreclosure  of  mortgages  and  deeds  of  trust. 

14.  Execution  and  other  judicial  sales. 

15.  Collusive  attachment. 

16.  Fraudulent  organization  of  corporation. 

17.  Waste  or  loss  through  debtor's  negligence. 

18.  Payment  of  debt  before  it  is  due. 

19.  Cancellation  or  release  of  debt  or  claim. 

20.  Rescission  of  contracts  and  neglect  or  failure -to  take  convsyanee. 

21.  Conducting  business  in  the  name  of  another. 

22.  Keeping  mortgage  in  force  after  payment. 

23.  Keeping  judgment  open  after  payment. 

24.  Keeping  certificate  of  execution  sale  in  force. 
26.  Antedated  note. 

26.  Fraud  directed  against  debtor. 

Section  1.  Nature  and  form  of  transfer  generally* — Ai  oonyej- 
ance  by  a  debtor  of  his  property^  whether  directly  or  indirectly 
made,  and  whatever  its  form^  is  void  as  against  the  grantor's  credi- 
torS;  if  made  with  the  intent  and  purpose  to  defraud  them.  The 
nature  and  form  of  the  transfer  are  of  small  importance.  Where 
fraud  appears  courts  will  ignore  all  matters  of  form  and  expose  and 
punish  the  corrupt  act.^    It  is  a  principle  as  old  as  the  law  of 

1.  Ind, — ^Buek  v.  Voreis,  89  Ind.  by  attachment  or  other  judicial  pro- 

116.  eeeding,  will  be  revoked,  if  there  is 

La. — ^Haas  v.   Haas,   35  La.  Ann.  fraud  or  collusion. 
885,  a  conveyance  of  property,  though  Md. — Schaferman    v.    CBrieOi    28 


Natubb  and  Fobm  of  Tbavbfeb. 


27 


morals^  and  ndiich  has  been  engrafted  into  the  law  of  eqnily  and 
jnstice,  that  good  faith  is  the  basis  of  all  dealing,  and  that  every 
description  of  oontract,  and  every  transfer  or  conveyanoe  of 
property,  by  what  means  soever  it  be  done,  is  vitiated  by  frauds 
Deeds,  obligations,  contracts,  judgments,  corporate  bodies,  and 
all  devices  and  instruments  resorted  to  to  cover  up  fraud,  are, 
whenever  the  law  is  invoked,  dedared  nullities  and  are  looked 
upon  as  if  tliey  had  never  been  executed.'  It  does  not  alter  the 
character  of  a  fraudulent  arrangement^  or  enable  it  to  defy  jus- 
tice, that  it  was  accomplished  through  the  agency  of  a  valid  judg- 
ment regularly  enforced.  That  often  may  be  made  an  effective 
agency  in  accomplishing  beyond  its  own  legitimate  purpose  a 
further  result  of  fiuud  and  dishonesty,  and  may  even  be  selected 
as  the  suitable  means  by  reason  of  its  inherent  oharacter.'  The 
use  of  sheri£Ps  deeds  and  otlier  legal  instruments  to  effect  a 
fraudulent  conveyanoe  of  properly  by  a  debtor  is  no  bar  to  its 
avoidance  by  creditors.^  In  some  instances  the  term  ^^convey- 
ance," as  used  in  statutes  against  fraudulent  conveyances,  is  ex- 
pressly defined  as  including  ^^  every  instrument  in  writing,  ex* 
oept  a  last  will  and  testament,  whatsoever  may  be  its  form  and 
by  whatever  name  it  may  be  known  in  law,  by  which  any  estate 
or  interest  in  lands  is  created,  aliened,  assigned,  or  surrendered."^ 


Md.  665,  02  Am.  Dec.  708,  however 
solemn  the  instrument  in  its  for- 
malities, if  it  had  its  origin  in  fraud 
it  is  a  nullity,  so  far  as  the  creditors 
«f  the  grantor  are  concerned. 

JfiM.— White  y.  Trotter,  14  Sm.  ft 
M.  30,  50  Am.  Bee.  112. 

2.  Booth  V.  Bunce,  33  N.  T.  139, 
S8  Am.  Dec.  372.  See  also  Skow- 
began  Bank  v.  Cutler,  49  Me.  315; 
Forsyth  t.  Matthews,  14  Pa.  St.  100, 
53  Am.  Dec.  522,  that  a  transfer  of 
personal  property  was  evidenced  by 
an  elaborate  instrument  in  writing 
is  a  circumstance  of  slight  import- 
ance. 


8.  Decker  ▼.  Decker,  108  N.  T.  128, 
15  N.  £.  307;  Hardt  v.  Schwab,  72 
Hun  (N.  Y.),  109,  25  N.  Y.  Supp. 
402,  a  creditor  haying  a  just  claim 
against  a  failing  debtor  must  not 
use  it  for  the  purpose  of  placing  the 
property  of  the  debtor  beyond  the 
reach  of  other  creditors,  and  for  the 
benefit  of  the  failing  debtor. 

4.  Watson  v.  Bonfils,  116  Fed.  157, 
53  C.  C.  A.  535;  Lee  ▼.  Cole,  44  N.  J. 
Eq.  323,  15  Atl.  531;  Metropc^iUn 
Bank  y.  Durant,  22  N.  J.  Eq.  35.  See 
also  Execution  and  other  judicial 
sales,  chap.  II,  S  14,  infra. 

5.  Bfili  Annot.  St.  Colo.  1891,  ( 
2036;    Mich.   Comp.    Laws,    1897,   I 


28 


FSAUBULBITT   CoNVBYANCXB. 


§  2.  Particular  forms  of  fraudulent  convejrances. — The  forms 
in  whidx  conveyances  or  transfers  of  a  debtor's  property  may 
be  made  in  fraud  of  his  creditors  are  many  and  various  and  em- 
brace absolute  con/veyances  or  transfers  of  real  property/  and 
of  personal  property/  whether  made  with  or  without  an  adequate 


9638;  Minn.  St.  1894,  S  4226;  Wis. 
St,  1898,  I  2326. 

6.  Jnd.— Thorp  v.  JarreU,  66  In<L 
52,  a  Toluntary  deed  placed  on  reoord 
bj  the  grantor,  but  never  delivered 
to  the  grantee,  nor  accepted  by  him. 

La. — Emswiller  v.  Burham,  6  La. 
Ann.  710,  a  transfer  by  a  totally  in- 
solvent debtor  of  all  his  real  and  per- 
sonal property  is  out  of  the  usual 
course  of  business,  and  is  indicative  of 
fraud. 

Ifd.— Birely  v.  Staley,  5  Gill  &  J. 
432,  25  Am.  Dec.  303,  a  deed  otherwise 
void  cannot  be  sustained  on  account 
of  a  secret  oral  contract  that  the 
property  should  be  held  in  trust  by 
the  grantee  and  sold  for  the  benefit 
of  grantor's  creditors;  Duvall  v.  Wat- 
ers, 1  Bland,  569,  18  Am.  Dec.  360, 
a  loose  and  irregular  description  of 
the  property  is  indicative  of  fraud. 

Mi88, — ^Roach  v.  Deering,  9  Sm.  & 
M.  316,  where  a  sale  under  a  mort- 
gage with  power  of  sale  was  held 
merely  colorable. 

N.  J, — ^McEeague  v.  Armstrong,  60 
N.  J.  Eq.  309,  24  Atl.  398,  convey- 
ance by  father  to  son  in  consideration 
of  the  assumption  of  the  father's 
debts. 

Ohto.— Piatt  V.  St.  Clair,  6  Ohio, 
227,  Wright,  261,  sale  by  an  admin- 
istrator to  a  trustee  for  the  benefit  of 
his  heirs. 

Or.— Morrell  v.  Miller,  28  Or.  354, 
43  Pac.  490,  deed  by  debtor  to  his 
attorney  held  to  be  valid  only  as  se- 
curity to  the  amount  of  the  attor- 
ney's fees. 


Pa. — ^American  Academy  of  Music 
V.  Smith,  54  Pa.  St.  130,  a  convey- 
ance to  avoid  payment  of  ground 
rent;  Hays  y.  Heidelberg,  9  Pa.  St. 
203,  sale  on  execution  to  administra- 
tor of  judgment  debtor  to  hold  in 
trust  for  creditor  while  the  value  of 
the  proper^  increases. 

OoaTvyaaoe  l&ald  to  ba  Talld. — 
Blish  V.  Collins,  68  Mich.  542, 36  N.  W. 
731,  deeds  executed  in  good  faith  for 
a  valuable  consideration  and  recorded 
prior  to  an  attachment;  Samuel  v. 
Kittenger,  6  Wash.  261,  33  Pac.  609, 
conveyance  to  grantee  in  good  faith 
in  trust  for  the  equitable  owners  of 
the  property. 

7.  N.  r.—Downing  v.  Kelly,  49 
Barb.  547,  a  failing  debtor  has  no 
right  to  interpose  a  legal  title  be- 
tween his  property  and  his  debts,  to 
compel  his  creditors  to  take  notes 
drawn  on  time  in  payment  of  their 
debts. 

XJ,  flf.— Kempner  v.  Churchill,  75  U. 
S.  362,  19  L.  Ed.  461,  property  sold 
much  below  cost  within  a  month  after 
it  was  bought  and  before  it  was  paid 
for  hastily  removed;  Smith  v.  New 
York  L.  Ins.  Co.,  57  Fed.  133,  where 
$5,000  in  money  was  included  in  the 
bill  of  sale;  Judson  v.  Courier  Co., 
15  Fed.  541,  transfer  made  outside  of 
the  usual  course  of  business;  Nisbet 
V.  Quinn,  7  Fed.  760,  sales  of  nearly 
two-thirds  of  his  stock  made  to  three 
persons  by  a  retail  merchant  within  a 

few  days. 

Ala.— -Rodenberg  v.  H.  B.  Claflin 
Co.,  104  Ala.  560,  16  So.  448;  H.  B. 


Natube  and  Fobm  of  Teanbfkr. 


29 


and  valuable  oonsideratioii/  and  wiiether  or  not  the  inatrument  of 
conveyance  be  duly  acknowledged  and  Teeorded.*    Tbe  conveyance 


Claflin  Co.  t.  Rodenberg,  101  Ala.  213» 
13  So.  272,  where  more  goods  were  de- 
livered to  the  purchaser  than  were 
mentiooed  in  the  bill  of  sale  the  entire 
sale  is  vitiated. 

/2{.— Orieb  v.  Garaker,  69  111.  App. 
236;  Thorne  v.  Crawford,  17  111.  App. 
395,  transfer  hy  debtor  to  certain 
creditors  of  all  his  available  assets 
valued  at  three  times  the  amount  of 
their  claims. 

if  e.— Richardson  v.  Kimball,  28  N. 
E.  463,  vessel  transferred  without 
bill  of  sale  or  other  written  evidence. 

if<f.— Duvall  V.  Waters,  1  Bland. 
569,  18  Am.  Dec.  350.  A  bill  of  sale 
is  invalid  by  statute  unless  indorsed 
with  an  affidavit  as  to  consideration 
and  bona  fides  thereof.  Denton  v. 
Qrifflth,  17  Md.  301. 

Mass, — Bliss  v.  Crosier,  169  Mass. 
498,  34  N.  E.  1075,  transfers  not  ac- 
cording to  the  usual  course  of  busi- 
ness; Killam  v.  Pierce,  163  Mass.  602, 
27  N.  E.  620,  sale  of  stock  of  goods, 
taking  notes  in  payment  which  were 
not  yet  due. 

Jfo. — Crane  v.  Timberlake,  81  Mo. 
431,  sale  by  an  execution  debtor  to  an 
antecedent  creditor  of  certain  sheep 
which  were  never  separated  from  other 
sheep. 

]Ve5.— Switz  V.  Bruce,  16  Neb.  463, 
20  N.  W.  639,  preference  to  creditor. 

Pa. — Forsyth  v.  Matthews,  14  Pa. 
St.  100,  53  Am.  Dec.  622. 

T«.— Read  v.  Moody,  60  Vt.  668,  16 
Atl.  346,  transaction  not  in  the  usual 
course  of  business. 

Fa.^Briscoe  v.  Clark,  1  Rand.  213, 
conveyance  of  grantor's  entire  prop- 
erty, reserving  life  estate  to  himself 
and  wife. 

Payatemt  or  sstiaf  aetion  of  Ua- 


blUtieik—Where  plaintiff  sold  his 
merchandise,  fixtures  and  business  to 
Ky  who,  being  unable  to  pay  the  bal- 
ance of  the  price,  retransferxed  the 
property  to  plaintiff,  in  bulk,  in  con- 
sideration of  the  satisfaction  of  the 
debt,  without  making  an  inventory 
or  furnishing  a  list  of  his  creditors 
and  notifying  them,  as  required  by  a 
statute  regulating  sales  in  bulk,  such 
retransfer,  though  an  accord  and  sat- 
isfaction of  K's  debt  to  plaintiff,  was 
also,  in  respect  to  the  merchandise,  a 
"sale''  within  such  act,  and  was 
therefore  fraudulent  as  against  K's 
creditors.  Gallus  v.  Elmer,  193  Mass. 
106,  78  N.  E.  772. 

GoATejaaoes  bold  to  1>o  Talid. 
— U,  i9.— Jones  v.  Sleeper,  13  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  7,406,  a  transfer  of  goods  by 
a  general  description,  where  posses- 
sion is  delivered. 

Ala.— Andrews  v.  Jones,  10  Ala. 
400,  sale  on  credit  is  not  fraudulent 
if  the  vendee  has  taken  a  mortgage 
or  other  form  of  security  on  the  prop- 
erty transferred. 

/».— Ewing  V.  Runkle,  20  111.  448, 
transfer  by  insolvent  to  one  creditor 
with  the  consent  of  other  creditors. 

/ltd. — ^Kane  v.  Drake,  27  Ind.  29, 
taking  attested  bill  of  sale  not  a  badge 
of  fraud. 

/otoa.— Johnson  v.  McGrew,  11 
Iowa,  151,  77  Am.  Dec.  137,  sale  by 
debtor  to  one  creditor  for  a  fixed 
consideration,  paid  in  part  by  dis- 
charging his  claim,  in  part  by  paying 
other  debts  of  grantor,  and  balance 
in  money. 

La. — ^Hirsch  v.  Fndicker,  43  La. 
Ann.  886,  9  So.  742,  sale  to  one  not 
a  creditor  for  an  adequate  considera- 
tion in  oath. 


30 


Fraudulent  Convetangbb. 


or  transfer  mfij  be  in  the  form  of  a  voluntary  oonveyanoe  or  trans- 
fer^ the  effect  of  want  of  consideration  for  which  is  discussed 
under  that  head;^^  an  assignment  or  transfer  of  a  promissory 
note^"  life-insurance  poliey^^  the  ri^t  of  a  patentee  in.  a  patented 
invention^"  or  other  chose  in  action  ;^^  a  deed  of  trust,  mortgage 
of  real  or  personal  property,  or  a  pledge  of  personal  prc^rty  or 
choses  in  action  ;^  a  bond  and  mortgage  to  cover  up  property  ;^*  a 
fraudulent  foreclosure  of  a  real  estate  or  ehattel  mortgage  or  a 
deed  of  trust  ;^^  or  a  fraudulent  attachment^  A  fraudulent  judg- 
ment, by  confession  or  in  legal  procedings,  and  a  sale  on  execution 
thereon  ;^*  a  fraudulent  organization  of  a  corporation  and  transfer 
of  property  to  it  ;*'  an  ante-nuptial  or  post-nuptial  settlement  by  a 
husband  on.  his  wife,  directly  or  through  a  third  person,  or  to 
trustees  for  her  benefit  ;^  the  release  by  a  husband  to  his  right  to 
his  wife's  earnings;^  the  emancipation  of  his  diild  by  a  debtor;** 
or  the  attempted  creation  of  a  joint  tenancy  to  prevent  the  coUec- 


Jftim. — ^Derl^  v.  Gallup,  5  Minn. 
119. 

Jfo.— State  ▼.  Merritt,  70  Mo.  276, 
the  question  whether  the  sale  was 
made  in  the  usual  and  ordinary 
course  of  husiness  is  for  the  Jury. 

Pa. — ^Forsyth  ▼.  Matthews,  14  Fa. 
St  100,  63  Am.  Dec.  622. 

8.  Grieb  v.  Caraker,  69  HI.  App. 
286.  And  see  Effect  of  consideration, 
chap.  XIII,  §  30,  infra. 

0.  Schaferman  v.  O'Brien,  28  Md. 
566,  92  Am.  Dec.  708. 

10.  See  Effect  of  want  of  consid- 
eration, chap.  VIII,  K  32-36,  infra. 

11.  Killam  v.  Peiroe,  163  Mass. 
602,  27  N.  E.  620. 

12.  See  life  insurance,  chap.  IV, 
(  20,  infra. 

13.  Gilbert  ▼.  Bate,  86  N.  Y.  87. 
See  also  Patents,  copyrights  and 
trade  marks,  chap.  TV,  §  18,  inftxt, 

14.  Harding  ▼.  Elliott,  91  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  502,  36  N.  Y.  Supp.  648,  as- 
signment of  a  deposit  in  bank  by  a 


solvent  non-resident  to  prevent  at- 
tachment. See  also  Choses  in  action, 
chap.  IV,  §  7,  infra. 

15.  See  next  section. 

16.  Jordan  v.  Fenno,  13  Ark.  693. 

17.  See  Foreclosure  oi  Mortgages 
and  deeds  of  trust,  chap.  II,  §  13, 
infra. 

18.  See  Attachment,  chap.  II,  § 
16,  infra. 

10.  See  Cbllusive  and  fraudulent 
legal  proceedings,  chap.  11,  §  0,  infra. 

20.  See  Organization  of  corpora- 
tion, chap.  II,  S  16,  infra, 

21.  Fisher  ▼.  Schlosser,  41  Ohio 
St.  147;  Kanawha  Valley  Bank  v. 
Wilson,  26  W.  Va.  242;  Bulmer  v. 
Hunter,  38  L.  J.  Ch.  643,  L.  R.  8  Eq. 
46,  20  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  042.  See  also 
Marriage  as  consideration,  chap.  VIII, 
S  25,  infra. 

22.  See  Wages  of  debtor's  wife, 
chap,  rv,  S  0,  infra. 

23.  See  Wages  of  debtor's  minor 
child,  chap.  IV,  (  10,  infra. 


NaTTTXB  A2n>  FOBM  OF  T&AK8FEB. 


31 


tion  of  a  judgmenty^  are  other  forms  in  -which  a  debtor  may 
make  a  oonveyance  or  transfer  of  his  property  in  fraud  of  his 
creditors.  Where  a  debtor  is  induced  by  the  fraud  of  a  buyer 
to  sell  his  business  to  the  buyer^  the  buyer  becomes  a  constructive 
trustee  of  the  property  bought  for  the  debtor,  y^hiah  constitutes 
an  equitable  asset  of  the  debtor  subject  to  be  reached  by  a  judg> 
mant  creditor  in  a  suit  in  equity.^ 

§  8.  Tranaf en  as  security.— .A  mortgage  or  deed  of  trust  of 
real  property  made  by  a  debtor  to  secure  the  payment  of  ^debts, 
or  advances  made  or  to  be  made^  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  against 
creditors  of  the  mortgagor,  if  made  mth  intent  to  hinder,  de- 
lay, or  defraud  them.^    But  it  -will  not  be  held  fraudulent  when 


£4.  Foster  ▼.  Whelplej,  123  Mich. 
3S0,  82  N.  W.  123. 

25.  Prits  ▼.  Jones,  117  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)   643,  102  N.  Y.  Supp.  649. 

TnuuuMtioiiA  act  snbjeot  to  at* 
t—lu-  A  defendant  furnished  money 
to  a  third  person  with  which  to  buy 
the  stock  of  goods  and  business  of  a 
seller.  Defendant  never  had  in  his 
possession  any  of  the  property  sold. 
The  seller  was  incompetent  and  paid 
from  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  a  debt 
due  to  defendant.  Held,  that  a  judg^ 
ment  creditor  of  the  seller  was  not 
entitled  to  set  aside  the  transaction 
as  fraudulent.  Pritz  v.  Jones, 
supra. 

A  daMer  beld  a  lease  of  a  saloon 
for  a  year,  with  the  right  to  renew 
from  year  to  year  so  long  as  he 
bouj^t  beer  from  the  landlord.  The 
landlord  required  the  debtor  to  as- 
sume a  mortgage  on  the  premises. 
The  mortgage  was  not  a  lien  on  any- 
thing ever  owned  by  the  debtor  or 
transferred  by  him.  The  saloon 
building  and  fixtures  were  owned  by 
the  landlord.  There  was  nothing  to 
show  that  the  landlord  was  attempt- 
ing to  enforce  any  claim  secured  by 


the  mortgage.  Held,  that  a  judgment 
creditor  of  the  debtor  was  not  en- 
titled to  a  cancellation  of  the  mort- 
gage as  fraudulent.  Pritz  v.  Jones, 
supra. 

26.  U.  flf.— Valentine  v.  Hurd,  21 
Fed.  740;  Stephens  v.  Sherman,  22 
Fed.  Gas.  No.  13,369a,  affd,  Blenner- 
hassett  ▼.  Sherman,  105  U.  S.  100, 
26  L.  Ed.  80. 

Ala.— McDowell  v.  Steele,  87  Ala. 
493,  6  So.  288;  Hall  v.  Heydon,  41 
Ala.  242;  WiswaU  ▼.  Ticknor,  6  Ala. 
178. 

Coim.— DeWolf  v.  A.  &  W.  Sprague 
Mfg.  Co.,  49  Conn.  282;  North  v. 
Belden,  13  Conn.  376,  35  Am.  Dec. 
83,  to  render  a  mortgage  valid  as 
against  the  creditors  of  the  mort- 
gagor, the  real  nature  of  the  trans- 
action, so  far  as  it  can  be  disclosed, 
must  appear  from  the  record  with 
reasonable  certainty,  or  at  least  the 
record  must  point  out  a  track  by 
pursuing  which  the  inquirer  may 
ascertain  it. 

JTy.— Beeler's  Heirs  v.  Bullitt's 
Heirs,  3  A.  K.  Marsh,  280,  and  a  de- 
cree of  foreclosure  and  sale  under  it 
are  void  as  to  creditors. 


22 


FRA.UDnLJBNT  CiONVSYANOES. 


made  in  good  faith  and  not  with  the  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or 
defraud  creditors.''  If  there  is  actual  fraud  the  tranaf er  is  void 
notwithstanding  it  was  given  to  secure  bona  fide  indebtedness.'' 
A  transfer  of  <9hoses  in  action,  or  other  personal  property  as 
collateral  to  secure  indebtedness,  either  by  way  of  pledge,  or  by 
way  of  chattel  mortgage,  deed  of  trust,  or  contract  for  a  lien,  if 
made  without  consideration,  or  with  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or 
cLefraud  creditors,  or  if  it  contains  provisions  which  have  such 
effect,  is  fraudulent  and  void  tis  to  creditors  of  the  pledgor  or 
mortgagor.^  But  if  the  transfer  be  bona  fide  and  does  not  con- 
tain provisions  in  hindrance,  delay,  or  fraud  of  creditors,  it  leaves 
the  equitable  and  beneficial  ownership  in  the  debtor  while  so 


JTe.— Aiken  t.  Kilburne,  27  Me. 
252. 

Afo.--01iver-Finiii6  Grocer  Go.  v. 
Miller,  63  Mo.  App.  107,  when  facts 
which  invalidate  it  appear  expressly 
or  by  implication  on  its  face. 

Tenn. — Bennett  v.  Union  Bank,  5 
Humphr.  612. 

W.  Va.— Hope  v.  Valley  City  Salt 
Co.,  26  W.  Va.  789. 

27.  Bio  Grande  B.  Oo.  v.  Vinet, 
132  U.  8.  566,  10  Sup.  Ct.  168,  33  L. 
Ed.  438,  mortgage  of  his  individual 
property  by  a  partner,  to  his  firm, 
to  enable  it  to  continue  business,  is 
not  in  fraud  of  partnership  cred- 
itors; United  States  t.  Griswold,  8* 
Fed.  496;  Vincent  v.  Suoqualmie 
Mill  Co.,  7  Wash.  566,  36  Pac.  396. 

28.  Blennerhassett  v.  Sherman, 
105  U.  S.  100,  26  L.  Ed.  1080;  Mc- 
Donald ▼.  Hoover,  142  Mo.  484,  44  S. 
W^.  334. 

20.  y.  T, — ^Dearing  v.  McKinnon 
Dash,  etc.,  Co.,  33  App.  Div.  31,  63 
N.  Y.  Supp.  513,  a  chattel  mortgage 
given  to  secure  creditors,  which 
vested  the  trustee  with  discretionary 
power  as  to  the  time  and  manner  of 
converting   the   property   into   cash. 


and  gave  him  liberfy  to  sell  on  credit, 
and  defer  payment  of  creditors  in- 
definitely. 

U.  £r.— Tuck  V.  Olds,  29  Fed.  738; 
In  re  Bloom,  3  Fed.  Cas.  Na  1,667, 
Chattel  mortgage  on  present  and 
after-acquired  stock  of  goods. 

Afo.— Wiswall  V.  Ticknor,  6  Ala. 
178. 

Oa.— Hoffer  v.  Gladden,  75  Ga.  632. 

/22.— Grieb  v.  Caraker,  60  HI.  App. 
236. 

ife.— Wheelden  v.  Wilson,  44  Me. 
11. 

Mich, — Pettibone  v.  Byrne,  97 
Mich.  86,  66  N.  W.  236. 

ifMS.— Tobin  v.  Allen,  63  Miss. 
663. 

Mo, — Oliver-Finnie  Grocer  Co.  v. 
MUler,  63  Mo.  App.  107. 

Term, — ^McCrasly  v.  Hasslock,  63 
Tenn.  1. 

Tea. — Gr^gg  v.  Cleveland,  82  Te3E. 
187,  17  S.  W.  777. 

Wis. — Baum  v.  Bosworth,  68  Wis. 
196,  31  N.  W.  744. 

A  Torlial  •greemomt  between.  • 
debtor  aaid  eredltor,  by  which  the 
former  gives  a  lien  upon  certain 
property  to  the  latter,  is  valid  be- 


Katit&e  and  Fobm  of  Transfer. 


33 


held  ia  pledge  or  as  security,  and  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors 
of  the  pledgor  or  mortgagor.*^  An  absolute  conveyance  of  lands 
intended  as  a  security  for  a  debt  is  held  by  the  courts  in  some 
jurisdictions  to  be  fraudulent  and  void  ais  against  existing  credi- 
tors,  although  there  may  be  no  actual  fraudulent  intent/^  while 
in  other  jurisdictions  a  contrary  rule  is  held  in  the  absence  of 
actual  fraud.^  The  act  of  a  mortgagee  in  a  chattel  mortgage  re- 
leasing a  portion  of  the  chattel  mortgage,  taking  other  property 
as  security  in  lieu  thereof,  does  not  render  the  mortgage  void  at 
the  instance  of  creditors  of  the  mortgagor.'' 

§  4.  Conditional  ayales. — A  conditional  as  well  as  an  absolute 
sale  may  be  fraudulent  as  against  creditors.*^  A  conditional  sale, 
that  is,  a  sale  under  an  agreement  that  the  title  to  the  property, 
shall  remain  in  the  seller  until  the  purchase  price  is  paid,  although 
possession  is  delivered  to  the  purchaser,  was  valid  at  common  law 
and  its  validity  was  not  affected  by  the  English  statute  of  frauds.'' 
By  the  weight  of  authority  conditional  sales  of  personal  property 
are  valid  between  the  parties  and  as  against  creditors  of  and  sub^ 
sequent  purchasers  from  the  grantee,  in  the  absence  of  fraud.'* 


t#eeii  the  parties,  but  void  as  to 
creditors  and  subsequent  purchasers 
in  good  faith.  Osterbag  v.  Galbraith, 
23  Neb.  730,  37  N.  W.  637. 

SO.  AJo.— WalthaU's  Ex'rs  v. 
Rives,  34  Ala.  91. 

Ark. — Goodbar  v.  Locke,  56  Ark. 
314,  19  8.  W.  924. 

Mass. — Bliss  v.  Crosier,  159  Mass. 
498,  34  N.  E.  1075. 

Tea. — Simon  v.  McDonald,  85  Tex. 
237,  20  S.  W.  52. 

Wash. — ^Vincent  v.  Suoqualmie 
Mill  Co.,  7  Wash.  566,  35  Pac.  396. 

A  bin  of  sale  of  personal  prop- 
erty, containing  a  clause  of  defeasance 
for  a  valuable  consideration,  and  hona 
fide,  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors, 
under  the  statutes  of  Alabama.   Kil- 

3 


lough  V.  Steele,  1  Stew.  &  P.  (Ala.) 
262. 

81.  Sima  v.  Gaines,  64  Ala.  392. 

•32.  See  Badges  of  fraud — ^Abso- 
lute conveyance  as  security,  chap.  VI, 
§  15,  infra;  Secret  reservations  and 
trusts — ^Absolute  conveyance  in- 
tended as  security,  chap.  X,  §  16, 
infra. 

33.  Wellington  v.  Terry  (Ck>lo., 
1907),  88  Pac.  467. 

34.  Gifford  v.  Ford,  5  Vt.  532. 

35.  Thompson  v.  Walker,  5  Fed. 
419,  2  McCrary,  33,  the  Arkansas 
statute  of  frauds  has  no  operation 
on  such  sales  until  the  possession  has 
continued  in  the  vendee  for  five 
years. 

36.  U.    fif.— In    re    Binford,    Fed. 


34 


Fkaudulent  Conveyances. 


A  stipulation  in  a  sale  of  goo^  that,  though  the  goods  be  de- 
livered, the  title  shall  not  pass  until  the  prioe  is  paid,  is  valid; 
and  if  there  is  no  fraud,  and  nothing  more  than  mere  possession 
of  the  goods  by  the  buyer  to  indicate  authority  in  him  to  sell 
them,  a  sale  made  by  him  before  he  has  paid  the  price  to  his 
vendor  will  not  impair  the  latter's  title.'^  In  some  jurisdictions, 
however,  an  agreement  between  a  vendor  and  vendee  of  personal 
property  delivered  to  the  latter,  that  the  property  shall  be  con- 
sidered aj9  belonging  to  the  former  until  paid  for,  is  fraudulent 
and  void  as  to  creditors  of  the  vendee,"^  and  it  is  immaterial 
whether  the  creditor  trusted  the  debtor  on  the  credit  of  the  gooda 
which  were  in  his  possession  or  not.^  An  agreement  by  which  a 
chattel  is  delivered  to  another  for  hire,  without  a  definite  term 
and  with  an  option  to  purchase,  is  a  baiknent,  and  not  a  con- 
ditional sale,  and  hence  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  of  the 
bailee.^^  The  sale  of  a  stock  of  goods  cannot  be  conditional,  as 
between  the  vendor  and  the  creditors  of  the  vendee,  where  such 
goods  w^re  placed  in  the  possession  of  the  vendee  for  the  express 
purpose  of  selling  at  retail^  pending  arrangements  for  his  paying- 
for  them,  but  such  goods  must  be  deemed  the  property  of  such 
vendee.^^  In  some  jurisdictions  conditional  sales  are  required  by 
statute  to  be  recorded  to  be  valid  as  against  creditors  of  or  pur- 
chasers from  the  vendee  in  actual  possession,  without  notice.^ 


Cas.  No.  1,411,  3  Hughes,  295,  rev'd 
Fed.  Cas.  No.  1,411a,  3  Hnghes, 
304. 

Ala. — South  Alabama  Oil,  etc.,  Go. 
y.  Garner,  112  Ala.  447,  20  So.  628. 

Conn, — ^Tomlinson  v.  Roberts,  25 
Conn.  477,  68  Am.  Dec.  367;  Forbes 
T.  Marsh,  15  Conn.  384. 

Fla. — Campbell  Printing  Press, 
etc,  Co.  V.  Walker,  22  Fla,  412,  1  So. 
59. 

Mass. — Blanchard  v.  Cooke,  144 
Mass.  207,  11  N.  E.  83;  Ayer  v.  Bart- 
lett,  23  Mass.  71;  Patten  v.  Clark, 
22  Mass.  6,  16  Am.  Dec.  365. 


y.  H.— Esty  V.  Aldrich,  46  N.  H. 
127. 

37.  In  re  Binford,  supra* 

38.  McCormick  v.  Hadden,  37  111* 
370;  Frank  t.  Price,  1  Leg.  Rec.  Rep. 
(Pa.)  101;  Heppe  v.  Speakman,  3 
Brewst  (Pa.)  548,  7  Phila.  117. 

39.  Martin  t.  Mathiot,  14  Serg.  & 
R.  (Pa.)  214,  16  Am.  Dec.  491. 

40.  Sporer  v.  Dale,  5  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 
611. 

41.  Devlin  v.  O'Neill,  6  Daly  (N. 
Y.),  305. 

42.  Moline  Plow  Co.  ▼.  Braden,  71 
Iowa,  141,  32  N.  W.  247. 


NaTUBK  and  FoBM  of  T&AJ7SFBtB. 


35 


The  rnle  that,  if  posseesion  remains  with  the  grantor  in  an  ab* 
Bolute  bill  of  sale,  it  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  and  bona  fide 
purchasers,  does  not  apply  to  conditional  sales.^  But  if  the 
vendor  of  persofial  property,  after  a  conditional  sale,  remain  in 
possession,  it  is  evidence  of  fraud  as  against  the  creditors  of  the 
vendor  and  bona  fide  purchasers,^  and,  unless  sufficient  reason  is 
shown  for  it,  the  evidence  will  be  oondusiva**  Under  a  con- 
ditional sale,  followed  by  the  delivery  of  the  goods,  not  expressly, 
qualified,  the  vendee  takes  the  title  to  them,  which,  though  it  may 
be  defeasible  between  the  original  parties,  like  title  fraudulently 
obtained,  will  be  protected  as  to  subsequent  purchasers  from  such 
vendee.^ 

§  5.  Purchase  of  property  through  or  in  name  of  third  per- 
son.— It  has  been  held  in  some  cases  that  the  statute  of  13 
Elizabeth  and  similar  statutes  in  the  United  States  only  apply 
to  conveyances  made  by  the  fraudulent  debtor  himself,  and  that 
consequently  purchases  by  the  debtor  or  with  his  means,  when 
the  title  is  taken  in  the  name  of  a  third  person,  are  not  necessarily 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  creditors  of  the  debtor,  and  cannot 
be  avoided  by  them  as  fraudulent/^  But  the  courts,  as  a  general 
rule,  have  held  that  where  lands  were  conveyed  to  one,  which 


43.  Z7.  iSf.-*€onard  v.  Atlantic 
Ins.  Co.,  26  U.  S.  386,  7  K  Ed.  189. 

Colo.— Robets  v.  Hawn,  20  Colo. 
77,  36  Pac.  886. 

Go.— Scott  V.  Winship,  20  Ga.  429. 

Ky. — Bucklin  v.  Thompson,  24  Ky. 
223. 

Md. — ^Hudson  v,  Warner,  2  Harr. 
&  Q.  415. 

Mass. — Badlam  v.  Tucker^  18 
Mass.  389,  11  Am.  Dec.  202. 

But  Bee  King  v.  Bailey,  6  Mo.  575, 
poesession  of  personal  property  1^  a 
vendee,  after  a  conditional  sale,  is 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors, 
prior  or  subsequent.. 

44.  Swift  V.  Thompson,  9  Conn. 
63,  21  Am.  Dec.  718;   Hombeck  v. 


Vanmetre,  9  Ohio,  163.    See  Johnson 
V.  Hays,  5  Ohio  St  101. 

45.  Swift  V.  Thompson,  supra. 

46.  Mears  v.  Waples,  4  Houst. 
(Del.)  62.  Co»fra— Sawyer  V.  Shaw, 
9  Me.  47 ;  Corse  v.  Patterson,  6  Har. 
k  J.   (Md.)   153. 

47.  N,  F.— Cramer  v.  Blood,  67 
Barb.  155. 

Ky. — Marshall  v.  Marshall,  2 
Bush,  415;  Crozier  v.  Young,  3  T.  B. 
Mod.  157,  bank  stock  subscribed  and 
paid  for  by  a  father  for  and  in  the 
names  of  his  children,  without  valu- 
able consideration,  and  while  he  was 
insolvent;  Doyle  v.  Sleeper,  1  Dana, 
631. 

K — ^Edmonson  v.  Meaoham^  60 


36 


ib^fiAUDUI^KNT    CoNVEYAA'CEb. 


were  purchased  with  the  money  of  another,  the  grantee  was  to 
he  deemed  a  mere  trustee  for  the  actual  purchaser  and  that  the 
latter  was  entitled  to  a  resulting  trust,  which  could  be  asserted, 
in  equity,  either  by  him  or  by  his  judgment  creditors,  in  yirtue 
of  his  clear  and  absolute  right,  and  that,  therefore,  independently 
of  statute,  such  a  conveyance  was  f  raudul^it  as  to  creditors.^    In 


Miss.  34;  Gfetrlisle  v.  TindaU,  49 
Miss.  229. 

N.  C— Gowing  v.  Rich,  23  N.  C. 
553,  because  if  the  creditor  treated 
such  conveyance  as  void,  under  the 
statute,  the  effect  would  be  to  place 
the  legal  title  back  in  the  third  per- 
son, where  it  would  be  beyond  the 
creditor's    reach. 

Ohio, — Shorten  t.  Woodrow,  34 
Ohio  8t.  645;  Mason  v.  Echels,  8 
Wkly.  L.  Bui.  7. 

S.  C. — ^Taylor  v.  Heriot,  4  Desauss. 
Eq.  227. 

Eng. — Lamplugh  v.  Lamplugh,  1 
P.  Wms.  Ill,  24  Eng.  Reprint,  316. 

48.  7f.  y.— -McCartn^  v.  Bost- 
wick,  32  N.  Y.  63,  rev'g  31  Barb. 
390j  Kline  v.  McD<Minell,  62  Hun, 
177,  16  N.  Y.  Supp.  649. 

Ala.— KeUey  v.  Ckmnell,  110  Ala. 
543,  18  8o.  9;  Stoutz  v.  Huger,  107 
Ala.  248,  18  So.  126;  Peavey  v.  Ca- 
baniss,  70  Ala.  253;  Doe  t.  McKin- 
ney,  5  Ala.  719. 

Ark, — Stix  v.  Chaytor,  55  Ark. 
116,  17  S.  W.  707,  but  it  will  not  be 
considered  as  void,  the  grantee  being 
treated  as  a  trustee  for  the  benefit  of 
the  debtor's  creditors;  Bennett  v. 
Hutson,  33  Ark.  762;  Miller  v. 
Fraley,  21  Ark.  22. 

Colo. — Fox  V.  Lipe,  14  Colo.  App. 
258,  59  Pac.  850. 

Conn. — Botsford  v.  Beers,  11 
Conn.  369;  Whittlesey  v.  McMahon, 
10  Conn.  137,  26  Am.  Dec.  389? 

Del — Newell  v.  Morgan,  2  Harr. 
225. 


D.  C— Thyson  ▼.  Foley,  1  App. 
Oas.  182. 

Fla, — ^Reel  v.  Livingston^  34  Fla. 
377,  16  So.  284,  43  Am.  St.  Rep.  202; 
Alston  V.  Rowles,  13  Fla.  117. 

Oa.— Field  v.  Jones,  10  Ga.  229; 
Pitts  V.  Bullard,  3  Ga.  5,  46  Am. 
Dec.  405. 

Ilk — Bowman  v.  Ash,  143  111.  649, 
32  N.  E.  486. 

Ind, — Lindley  v.  Cross,  31  Ind.  106, 
99  Am.  Dec.  610;  Ewing  v.  Gray,  12 
Ind.  64;  Demaree  v.  DrisldU,  3 
Blackf.  115;  Kipper  v.  Glancey,  2 
Blackf.  356. 

Iowa.  Boulton  v.  Hahn,  58  Iowa, 
518,  12  N.  W.  560;  Gear  v.  Schrei, 
57  Iowa,  666,  11  N.  W.  625. 

Ky, — ^Matthews  v.  Albritton,  83 
Ky.  32;  Adams  v.  O'Rear,  80  Ky. 
129 ;  Rucker  v.  Abell,  8  B.  Mon.  566, 
48  Am.  Dec.  406;  Turner-Looker  Co. 
V.  Garvey,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1205,  43  S. 
W.  202;  Davu  v.  Justice,  14  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  741,  21  S.  W.  529. 

Me. — ^Trefethen  v.  Lynam,  90  Me. 
376,  38  Atl.  335,  60  Am.  St  Rep.  271, 
38  L.  R.  A.  190;  Augusta  Sav.  Bank 
V.  Crossman  (1886),  7  Atl.  396;  Gray 
▼.  Chase,  57  Me.  558;  Dockray  v.  Ma- 
son, 48  Me.  178;  Golding  v.  Brackett, 
34  Me.  27. 

Md, — Second  Nat.  Bank  v.  Yeat- 
man,  53  Md.  443;  Trego  v.  Skinner, 
42  Md.  426. 

M€t8S. — Bresnihan  v.  Sheehan,  125 
Mass.  11. 

Minn, — Blake  v.  Boisjoli,  51  Minn. 


KaTUBJB  AN1>  FoBM  of  T&A17SFEJEL 


37 


some  oases  it  has  been  held  that  the  conveyance  may  be  avoided 
by  a  purchaser,  at  a  sheriff's  sale  of  the  debtor's  title.^  In  some 
states  the  statutes  against  fraudulent  conveyances  and  transfers, 
while  abolishing  resulting  trusts^  preserve  such  trusts  when  re- 
sulting to  a  debtor  for  the  benefit  of  creditors,  or  declare  a  new  and 
independent  resulting  trust,  in  favor  of  the  general  creditors  of 
the  party  paying  the  consideration,  in  every  case  where  the  con* 
veyanoe  is  fraudulently  made  to  another  with  his  assent.^ 


296,  53  N.  W.  637;  Sumner  v.  Saw- 
telle,  S  Minn.  309. 

Misa. — Simmons  y.  Ingram,  60 
Miss.  886;  Edmonson  v.  Meacham,  50 
Miss.  34. 

Mo, — (rarrett  ▼.  Wagner,  125  Mo. 
450,  28  S.  W.  762;  Patton  v.  Bragg, 
113  Mo.  595,  20  S.  W.  1059,  35  Am. 
St.  Rep.  730;  Hart  v.  Leete,  104  Mo. 
315,  15  S.  W.  976;  CutzwiUer  v. 
Lackman,  23  Mo.  168. 

2^e5.— Cochran  v.  Cochran,  62  Neb. 
450,  87  N.  W.  152. 

y.  J, — Conover  v.  Ruclcman,  36  N. 
J.  Eq.  493;  Haggerty  v.  Nixon,  26  N. 
J.  Eq.  42;  Metropolis  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13. 

3^.  C— Gentry  v.  Harper,  55  N.  C. 
177;  Dobson  ▼.  Erwin,  18  N.  C.  569. 

Ohio. — ^Vanzant  v.  Davies,  6  Ohio 
St.  52;  Miller  v.  Wilson,  15  Ohio, 
108;  Edgington  v.  Williams,  Wright, 
439. 

8,  C— Godbold  v.  Lambert,  8  Rich. 
Eq.  155,  70  Am.  Dee.  102;  Brown  v. 
McDonald,  1  HiU  Eq.  297;  Taylor  v. 
Heriot,  4  Desauss.  Eq.  227. 

S.  D.— Smith  v.  Toeini,  1  S.  D. 
632,  48  N.  W.  299. 

Tenn, — Goff  v.  Dabbs,  4  Bazt.  300; 
Gaugh  ▼.  Henderson,  2  Head,  628; 
Walters  ▼.  Brown  (Ch.  App.),  46  S. 
W.  777. 

F^.—Corey  v.  Morrill  71  Vt.  51, 
42  Atl.  976;  Dewey  v.  Long,  25  Vt, 


564;  Waterman  v.  Cochran,  12  Vt. 
699. 

Va, — Coleman  v.  Cocke,  6  Rand. 
618,  18  Am.  Dec.  757. 

Wa«*.— Curry  v.  Catlin,  9  Wasn. 
495,  37  Pac.  678,  39  Pac.  101. 

W,  Fa.— Martin  v.  Warner,  34  W. 
Va.  182,  12  S.  E.  477;  Burt  v.  Tim- 
mons,  29  W.  Va.  441,  2  S.  E.  780, 
6  Am.  St.  Rep.  664;  McMasters  v. 
Edgar,  22  W.  Va.  673 ;  Rose  v.  Brown, 
11  W.  Va.  122;  Lockhard  v.  Beckley, 
10  W.  Va.  87. 

Can, — O'Doherty  v.  Ontario  Bank, 
82  U.  C.  C.  P.  285. 

Eng, — Stone  v.  Van  Heythuysen,  18 
Jur.  344,  11  Hare,  126,  1  Wkly.  Rep. 
420,  45  Eng.  Ch.  127. 

See  also  Property  purchased  in 
name  of  third  person,  chap.  IV,  §  29, 
infra;  Consideration  paid  by  hus- 
band lor  property  conifeyed  to  wife, 
chap.  VIII,  §  44,  infra;  Conveyancen 
to  wife  from  third  persons,  chap.  IX, 
S  6,  infra;  Procuring  conveyance 
from  third  person,  chap.  IX,  §  0, 
infra;  Conveyance  in  name  of  third 
person,  chap.  XIV,  §  34,  infra. 

49.  Elliott  V.  Horn,  10  Ala.  348, 
44  Am.  Dec.  488;  Kimmel  v.  Mc- 
Right,  2  Pa.  St.  38;  Clark  v.  Cham- 
berlain, 13  Allen  (Mass.),  257,  the 
land  is  liable  to  execution  on  a  judg- 
ment against  the  person  paying  the 
consideration,  by  statute. 

50.  y,  T. — ^Ehinlap  v.  Hawkins,  59 


38 


FbaudxtIiENT  Conveyances. 


§  6.  Purchase  of  property  by  husband  in  name  of  wife. — ^The 

rule  stated  in  the  last  section  as  to  the  purchase  of  property  in  the 
name  of  a  third  person  applies  to  a  purchase  of  lands  by  a  bus- 
band  with  his  own,  funds^  taking  the  title  in<  the  name  of  his 
wife,  or  in  the  name  of  a  third  person  for  her  benefit,  and  such 
a  conveyance  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  his  existing  credi- 
tors.^^ Property  purchased  by  a  husband  in  the  name  of  his 
wife,  but  paid  for  with  his  money,  is  subject  to  levy  and  sale 
under  execution  against  him.^  The  same  rule  applies  where  the 
husband  purchases  property  with  money  or  property  which  was 
his  wife's  but  which  became  his  by  virtue  of  his  marital  rights 
by  reduction  to  his  possession,  and  such  conveyances  are  declared 
to  be  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  the  husband's  creditors." 


N.  Y.  342;  McCartney  v.  Bostwick, 
32  N.  Y.  63;  Kline  v.  McDonnell,  62 
Hun,  177,  16  N.  Y.  Supp.  649;  Tap- 
pan  y.  Butler,  7  Boew.  480;  3  Birds- 
eye  Rev.  St.,  p.  3025,  S  74. 

/ftd.— Thornton  St.,  Sf  3461,  3462 
{ 1897 ) , 

ITy.— Adams'  Ex'r  v.  O'Lear,  80 
Ky.  129,  3  Ey.  L.  Rep.  605;  Gen.  St., 
chap.  63,  art  1,  S  20. 

Mich, — Fairbaim  v.  Middlemiss,  47 
Mich.  372,  11  N.  W.  203;  Comp.  Laws 
(1897),  SS  8835,  8836. 

Minn, — Blake  v.  Boisjoli,  51  Minn. 
296,  63  N.  W.  637;  Wolford  v.  Fam- 
ham,  47  Minn.  95,  49  N.  W.  528; 
Stone  V.  Myers,  9  Minn.  303,  86  Am. 
Dee.  104. 

Ohio, — Bloomingdale  t.  Stein,  42 
Ohio  St.  168;  Ohio  Rev.  St.,  S  6344, 
avoiding  all  "transfers,  conveyances 
or  assignments  **  made  with  intent  to 
defraud  creditors. 

61.  Ala, — ^Peevey  v.  Cabaniss,  70 
Ala.  253. 

Ark.-Stix  V.  Chaytor,  55  Ark.  116, 
17  S.  W.  707. 

Ky, — ^McBride    v.    McLaughlin,    6 


Ky.  L.  Rep.  174;  Yates  v.  Fisher,  4 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  721. 

Jfe.— Call  V.  Perkins,  65  Me.  439. 

Miss, — ^Bemheim  v.  Beer,  56  Miss. 
149. 

OAfo.— Parish  v.  Rhodes,  Wright, 
339. 

Fa. — Quarles  v.  Lacy,  4  Munf.  251. 

TFt*.— Hoxie  v.  Price,  31  Wis.  82. 

See  also  cases  cited  in  notes  to 
last  preceding  section. 

Compare  Cannon  v.  Castlemon,  164 
Ind.  343,  73  N.  E.  689. 

5S.  N,  Y, — Stokes  v.  Amerman,  55 
Hun,  605,  7  N.  Y.  Supp.  733. 

D,  C— Thyson  v.  Foley,  1  App.  D. 
C.  182. 

Fla, — Alston  v.  Rowles,  13  Fla.  117. 

Ind, — ^Laird  v.  Davidson,  124  Ind. 
412,  25  N.  £.  7. 

Iowa. — Gear  v.  Schrei,  67  Iowa,  666, 
11  N.  W.  625. 

Me. — ^Berry  v.  Berry,  84  Me.  541, 
24  Atl.  957;  CaU  v.  Perkins,  65  Me. 
439. 

Mo. — ^Rinehart  v.  Long,  95  Mo.  396, 
8  S.  W.  559. 

53.  Davis  v.  Justice,  14  Ey.  L.  Rep. 


NaTUB£  Ain>  FOBM  OF  T&AKSFBB. 


39 


But  the  husband's  creditors  caonot  reach  and  subject  to  the  pay- 
ment of  their  claims  property  which  was  purchased  by  the  hus^ 
band  in  his  wife's  name  and  paid  for  with  the  wife's  separate 
estate."  Nor  can  the  property  be  readied  by  his  creditors  where 
the  husband  gives  his  note  in  payment  for  land  so  purchased^  and 
the  note  is  paid  by  the  wife  from  her  separate  estate."  Where 
conveyances  are  made  to  the*  wife  of  a  debtor,  however^  the  con- 
sideration will  be  presumed  to  have  been  paid  by  the  husband, 
and  in  contests  with  creditors  of  her  husband  the  burden  of 
proof  is  upon  the  wife  to  show  affirmatively  that  it  was  paid 
for  with  funds  not  furnished  by  her  husband  but  from  her  separate 
estate." 


741,  21  S.  W.  629.  See  also  Haaband's 
curtesy  or  other  interest  in  wife's 
property,  chap.  IV,  S  37,  infra. 

64.  N.  y.— Popflnger  v.  Yutte,  102 
N,  Y.  38,  6  N.  E.  269. 

Z7.  £r.— Frankenthal  v.  Gilbert,  34 
Fed.  5. 

Ga. — ^Rutherford  t.    Chapman,    69 

Ga.  177. 

Ind, — Jones  v.  Snyder,  117  Ind.  229, 
20  N.  E.  140;  Tracy  v.  Kelley,  62  Ind. 
635;  Malady  ▼.  McEnary,  30  Ind. 
273. 

Iowa. — Gilbert  v.  Glenny,  76  Iowa, 
613,  39  N.  W.  818,  1  L.  R.  A.  479; 
Stoddard  v.  Rowe,  74  Iowa,  670,  39 
N.  W.  84. 

JTy.— Howard  v.  Tenney,  87  Ky.  62, 
7  S.  W.  547,  10  Ky.  L.  Rep.  94; 
Truitt  V.  Curd,  13  Ky.  L.  Rep.  118, 
16  S.  W.  364. 

Ifiofc.— Buhl  V.  Peck,  70  Mich.  44, 
37  N.  W.  876. 

If o.—Bartlett  v.  Umfried,  94  Mo. 
680,  7  S.  W.  681. 

^e5.— Morse  ▼.  Raben,  27  Neb.  145, 
42  N.  W.  901 ;  Wood  v.  O'Hanlon,  26 
Neb.  627,  42  N.  W.  733;  Shortcl  ▼. 
Toung,  23  Neb.  408,  36  N.  W.  672. 

Pa.— Bollinger  v.  Gallagher,  170  Pa. 


St  84,  32  Atl.  669,  if  the  sureties  on 
and  payee  in  a  note  signed  by  tbfb 
husband  and  wife  for  property 
bought  trusted  to  the  respcmsibility 
of  the  wife  alone,  the  wife  could  hold 
the  property  against  her  husband's 
creditors. 

Tenn, — Cock  v.  Jones,  (Ch.  App. 
1897),  47  S.  W.  14,  where  property 
was  purchased  with  money  of  the  wife 
and  in  her  behalf  and  by  her  direc- 
tion title  was  taken  by  the  husband 
as  trustee  for  the  support  of  him- 
self and  children. 

Fa.— Scott  ▼.  Rowland,  82  Va.  484, 
4  S.  E.  695.  See  also  Separate  prop- 
erty or  estate  of  debtor's  wife;  Hus- 
band's curtsey  or  other  interest  in 
wife's  property,  chap.  IV,  §S  30,  37, 
infra;  Transacticms  between  hus- 
band and  wife,  chap.  VIII,  (  38, 
infra;  Cbnveyance  to  wife  from  third 
person,  chap.  IX,  §  6,  infra, 

66.  Rutherford  v.  Chapman,  59  Ga. 
177. 

66.  /Zl.— Bowman  ▼.  Ash,  143  III. 
649,  32  N.  E.  486. 

Ky, — ^Treadway  v.  Turner,  10  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  949,  10  S.  W.  816. 


40 


Fbai7diti£HT  Coktetascbb. 


§  7.  Purchase  of  personal  property  by  bosliaiid  in  name  o( 
wife* — Where  a  bill  of  sale  of  personal  property  is  taken  in  the 
name  of  the  wife  or  another  third  person,  bnt  the  purchase  money 
is  paid  by  the  husband,  in  the  abscaice  of  j^oof  that  the  money 
belonged  to  the  wife  or  other  third  person,  neither  the  title  of 
the  wife  or  other  third  person  nor  that  of  any  one  claiming  under 
them  will  defeat  the  lien  of  an  execution  against  the  husband.^ 

§  8.  Payment  of  liens;  loans;  improvements  on  lands  of 
another. — The  rules  and  principles  already  stated  which  apply 
to  the  purchase  of  property  by  a  debtor  in  the  name  of  another 
apply  where  a  debtor,  with  intent  to  defraud  his  creditors,  pays 
incumbrances  by  mortgage  or  other  lien  on  the  lands  of  his  wife 
or  another  third  person,  and  the  land  is  chargeable  in  equity  by 
the  husband's  creditors  to  the  extent  of  the  money  so  paid  but 
cannot  be  subjected  to  a  charge  for  a  greater  amount."  Likewise 
when  a  debtor  loans  his  money,  taking  a  bond  and  mortgage  as 
security  therefor  in  the  name  of  his  wife  or  another  with  the 
knowledge  of  his  wife  or  such  other  person,  to  hinder  creditors,  the 
transaction  cannot  be  upheld  as  a  gift,  but  is  fraudulent  as  against 
the  creditors  of  the  husband  who  have  liens  by  judgment  or  at- 
tachment." If  a  husband,  for  the  purpose  of  defrauding  his 
creditors,  expend  his  money  in  erecting  a  house  or  making  other 
improvements  upon  the  land  of  his  wife,  child,  or  other  third  per- 
son, and  the  owner  of  the  property  participates  in  or  has  knowl- 
edge of  such  intent,  it  can  be  followed  by  creditors  of  the  hus- 
band and  the  real  estate,  or  the  rents  and  profits  thereof,  sub- 


JTo.— PattoD  V.  Bragg,  113  Mo.  696, 
20  8.  W.  1059,  35  Am.  St.  Rep.  730. 

8.  X>.— Smith  ▼.  Tosini,  1  S.  D.  632, 
48  N.  W.  299. 

W.  7«.— Martin  v.  Warner,  34  W. 
Va.  182,  12  S.  E.  477;  Burt  v.  Tlm- 
mons,  29  W.  Va.  441,  2  S.  E.  780,  6 
Am.  St.  Rep.  664;  Rose  v.  Brown,  11 
W.  Va.  122. 

Contra, — Walters  v.  Brown  (Tenn. 
Oh.  App.  1898),  46  S.  W.  777. 


57.  Craig  v.  Gamble,  5  Fla.  430; 
Mercer  v.  Hooker,  5  Fla.  277;  Laird 
V.  DaTidson,  124  Ind.  412,  25  N.  E. 
7;  €k)dding  v.  Brackett,  34  Me.  27. 

58.  Reel  v.  Livingston,  34  Fla.  377, 
16  So.  284,  43  Am.  St.  Rep.  202;  Blair 
▼.  Smith,  114  Ind.  114,  15  N.  E.  817, 
5  Am.  St.  Rep.  593.  See  also  Fair  v. 
Hauenstein  (N.  J.  Ch.  1905),  62  AtL 
383. 

69.  ConoTer  ▼.  Ruckman,  36  N.  J. 
Eq.  493. 


NaTUBB  AKD  FoBM  of  TrA178F£B. 


41 


jected  to  the  satisfaction  of  their  claims  to  the  extent  of  the 
value  of  such  improvements.^  But  as  to  subsequent  creditors,  the 
rule  does  not  apply,  in  the  aibeence  of  an  intent  to  defraud  them 
known  to  or  participated  in  by  the  owner  of  the  property.*^  With 
some  qualifications  the  same  rule  applies  where  money  is  appro- 
priated by  a  debtor  to  the  payment  of  life  insumnee  premiums.** 


§  9.  Collusive  and  fraudulent  legal  proceedings. — ^Debtors  for 
the  purpose  of  defeating  the  rights  of  creditors  sometimes  resort 
to  collusive  and  fraudulent  legal  proceedings  to  cover  up  their 
property  and  shield  it  from  creditors.  Conveyances  or  transfers 
of  property,  although  by  means  of  attachment,  judgment,  execu- 
tion, sale,  or  other  judicial  proceeding,  if  the  result  of  collusive 
machination  between  the  debtor  and  others  to  defraud  creditors, 
or  to  give  one  creditor  a  preference  injurious  to  other  creditors, 
are  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  creditors,  and  will  be  revoked 
by  the  courts,  and  the  property  so  disposed  of,  real  or  personal, 
subjected  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  claims  of  creditors." 


60.  Isluuii  V.  Schafer,  00  Barb.  (N. 
T.)  317,  otherwiae,  as  to  his  personal 
servioes.  See  also  Improvements, 
rents  and  profits  of  real  estate,  chap. 
IV,  S  24,  infra. 

But  wbere  tlie  eoaTayaaoe 
was  Talid  in  ita  iaeeptioa» 
expenditures  by  a  parent  in  pay- 
ing off  incumbrances  and  improv- 
ing land  previously  voluntarily 
conveyed  to  his  children  by  way  of 
settlement  does  not  render  such 
prior  conveyance  invalid  as  against 
the  parent's  creditors.  Judson  v. 
Courier  Co.,  16  Fed.  541. 

61.  Robinson  v.  Huffman,  15  B. 
Hon.  (Ky.)  80,  61  Am.  Dec.  177; 
Caswell  V.  Hill,  47  N.  H.  407;  Sex- 
tan V.  Wheaton,  8  Wheat.  (U.  S.) 
229,  6  L.  Ed.  603. 

B2.  See  Payment  of  premiums  for 
life  insurance,  chap.  IV,  |  21,  infra. 


63.  U,  8. — James  v.  Milwaukee, 
etc.,  R.  Co.,  73  U.  8.  762,  18  L.  Ed. 
885,  collusive  sale  of  a  railroad  under 
mortgage. 

Ala. — Cartwright  v.  Bamberger,  90 
Ala.  405,  8  So.  264,  collusive  attach- 
ment. 

Ill — French  v.  Commercial  Nat. 
Bank,  199  111.  213,  65  N.  £.  252: 
Thomas  v.  Van  Meter,  62  111.  App. 
309,  assignment  of  a  beneficiary  of  a 
money  decree  for  the  purpose  of  de- 
feating an  intervening  creditor,  and 
sale  by  a  master  thereunder  without 
consideration  paid. 

/luf.— Wright  V.  Mack,  95  Ind.  332. 

/ouHx.^Milliman  v.  Eddie,  115 
Iowa,  530,  88  N.  W.  964,  a  judgment 
of  foreclosure  held  to  be  in  effect  a 
voluntary  confession  of  judgment. 

JTy.— Yoder  v.  Standiford,  7  T.  B. 
Mob.  478,  an  arrangement  between 


42 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


§  10.  Collusive  judgments. — ^A  judgment  at  law  and  a  salo 
of  a  debtor's  property  thereunder  will  be  set  aside  in  equity^  al- 
though founded  upon  a  just  debt,  if  procured  by  collusion  to  be 
used  as  a  cover  to  protect  his  property  from  other  creditors,  or  for 
the  purpose  of  giving  a  preference  to  one  creditor  or  a  part  of 
his  creditors  over  others,  or  otherwise  intended  to  defraud  credi* 
tors.^  A  creditor  may  show  in  a  collateral  proceeding  that  a 
judgment  was  procured  through  fitaud  of  the  debtor,  or  collusion 


the  debtor  and  the  parehaaer  of  his 
estate  at  sheriff's  sale  to  extend  the 
time  to  redeem,  contrived  to  defraud 
other  creditors,  will  not  be  construed 
as  a  mortgage  to  give  it  effect. 

La, — ^Newman  ▼.  Baer,  50  La.  Ann. 
323,  23  So.  279;  Haas  ▼.  Haas,  35 
La.  Ann.  885. 

Ma88, — Goddard  v.  DlvoU,  42  Mass. 
413,  collusive  judgment. 

Uiss, — ^Hyman  v.  Stadler,  63  Miss. 
362,  a  collusive  suit  is  one  in  which 
the  parties  who  occupy  ostensibly  ad- 
verse positions  are,  in  fact,  in  accord, 
and  whose  real  though  concealed  pur- 
pose is  to  accompUsh  the  same  re- 
sult. 

Eng, — ^Bateman  v.  Bamsay,  Sau.  & 
8c.  459. 

64.  y.  T.— Kingsley  v.  First  Nat. 
Bank,  31  Hun,  329,  insolvent  corpo- 
ration allowing  judgments  to  be 
entered  against  it  by  consent  before 
expiration  of  the  time  allowed  for 
answering;  Pitney  v.  Leonard,  1 
Paige,  461,  confessed  judgment  and 
pretended  purchase  under  it  held 
fraudulent  and  void. 

U.  fif.— Sowles  V.  Witters,  56  Fed. 
159,  judgment  by  consent  where  there 
was  no  liability. 

CoZ. — ^Anderson  v.  Lassen  County 
Bank,  140  Cal.  695,  74  Pac.  287. 

Oa. — ^Beach  v.  Atkinson,  87  Ga. 
288,  13  S.  £.  591. 


lU, — ^French  v.  Gommereial  Nat. 
Bank,  199  lU.  213,  65  N.  E.  252. 

/ii<I.~Phelps  V.  Smith,  116  Ind. 
387,  17  N.  E.  602,  19  N.  E.  156. 

Ky, — ^Wilson  v.  Snelling,  3  Bush. 
322. 

L<3k — ^Anheuser-Busch  Brew.  Assoc. 
V.  McGowan,  49  La.  Ann.  630»  21 
So.  766. 

Ma99, — Sartwell  v.  North,  144 
Mass.  188,  10  N.  R  824;  Lamb  v. 
Smith,  132  Mass.  574;  Pierce  v. 
Jackson,  6  Mass.  242;  Pierce  v. 
Partridge,  3  Mete.  44,  judgment  by 
default  for  amount  in  excess  of 
plaintiff's  claim. 

y.  J, — Squier  v.  Mechanics'  Nat. 
Bank,  35  N.  J.  Eq.  344;  Mechanics' 
Nat.  Bank  v.  H.  O.  Burnet  Mfg.  Co., 
33  N.  J.  Eq.  486;  Wandling  ▼. 
Thompson,  41  N.  J.  L.  309. 

Pa.— Kohl  V.  Sullivan,  140  Pa.  St. 
35,  21  Atl.  247;  Clark  v.  l>ouglass, 
62  Pa.  St.  408,  creditors  can  attack 
a  judgment  on  a  verdict  by  evidence 
that  it  was  taken  by  consent  or  de- 
fault, or  that  the  defence  set  up  was 
a  sham;  Hall  ▼.  Hamlin,  2  Watts, 
354;  Gilbert  v.  Hoffman,  2  Watts,  66, 
26  Am.  Dec.  103;  Foulk  ▼.  McFar- 
lane,  1  Watts  &  S.  297,  37  Am.  Dec. 
467;  OaskiU  v.  Benton,  14  Phila. 
487. 

Wis. — Bloodgood  V.  Meissner,  84 
Wis.  452,  54  N.  W.  772,  by  statute; 


Nature  and  Fobm  of  Tbansfeb. 


43 


of  both  parties^  ^ith  design  to  hinder^  delaj^  or  defraud  him.^ 
A  judgment  recovered  against  a  debtor  is  not  necessarily  shown 
to  be  collusive  and  frauduleoit  so  that  it  will  be  set  aside  as 
fraudulent  by  proof  that  the  defendant  voluntarily  appeared  and 
answered  in  the  action^^  or  that  he  did  not  defend  the  action," 
or  that  he  entered  appearance  and  confessed  the  indebtedness  or 
otherwise  facilitated  the  obtaining  of  the  judgment^^  or  that  he 
failed  to  plead  the  statute  of  limitations^  which  would  have  been 
a  bar,  and  suffered  judgment  by  default,^  or  that  he  admitted 


Xassauer  v.  Techner,  65  Wis.  388,  27 
N.  W.  40. 

Can. — king  ▼.  I>uiican,  29  Qrant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  113;  Knox  ▼.  Trayers, 
23  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  41;  McDonald 
V.  Boiee,  12  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  48; 
Dickson  v.  McMahon,  14  U.  C.  C.  P. 
£21,  judgment  and  execution  in  ex- 
cess  of  amount  due. 

Eng. — Edison  Gen.  Electric  Co.  ▼. 
Westminster,  etc.,  Tramway  Co.,  66 
I/.  J.  P.  C.  36,  A.  C.  193,  76  L.  T. 
Hep.  N.  8.  438,  4  Manson,  244. 

The  f  aet  tliAt  an  ezeentloa  la 
takem  out  with  a  view  to  hinder 
aaid  delaj  ereditora,  and  that  it 
has  such  effect,  does  not  render  the 
judgment  invalid  as  to  creditors, 
where  it  was  valid  at  its  inception. 
Wilder  v.  Winne,  6  Cow.  (N.  Y.) 
284. 

M.  Atlas  Nat.  Bank  v.  More,  152 
m.  528,  38  N.  E.  684,  43  Am.  St. 
Rep.  274;  Anheuser-Busch  Brewing 
Assoc.  V.  McGowan,  40  La.  Ann.  630, 
21  So.  766;  Hall  v.  Hamlin,  2  Watts 
(Pa.),  354;  Stevenson  v.  Nichols,  13 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  489;  Miners' 
Trust  Co.  Bank  v.  Roseberry,  81  Pa. 
St.  309;  In  re  Dougherty,  9  Watts  & 
8.  189,  42  Am.  Dec.  326;  Building 
Assoc.  V.  O'Connor,  3  Phila.  453. 

66.  McConihay  v.  Wright,  121  U. 
8.  201,  7  Sup.  Ct.  940,  30  L.  Ed.  932; 


McGoldrick  ▼.  Slevin,  43  Ind.  522; 
Bell  V.  Throop,  140  Pa.  St.  641,  21 
Atl.  408,  an  amicable  action  of  eject- 
ment. See  also  Wright  v.  Mack,  95 
Ind.  332;  Mathews  v.  Mack,  95  Ind. 
431,  where  there  was  also  other  evi- 
dence of  collusion.  Contra, — ^Bass  v. 
Woolf,  88  Ga.  427,  14  8.  £.  589, 
under  a  statute. 

67.  Snarr  v.  Waddell,  24  U.  C.  Q. 

B.  165,  although  he  defended  actions 
by  other  creditors  against  him. 
Contra. — ^Beavan  v.  Wheat,  14  U.  C. 

C.  P.  51,  where  there  were  also 
other  suspicious  circumstances. 

68.  Hardin  v.  Kelley,  114  Fed. 
353,  nor  can  the  judgment  be  im- 
peached when  it  is  based  upon  an 
actual  bona  fide  indebtedness,  be- 
cause of  an  agreement  by  the  plaintiff 
to  hold  the  property  obtained  by 
means  of  the  judgment  for  a  certain 
time  for  the  benefit  of  others  who 
would  contribute  to  the  payment  of 
the  debt  and  expense  of  procuring 
the  judgment. 

69.  Allen  v.  Smith,  129  U.  8.  465, 
9  Sup.  Ct.  338,  32  L.  Ed.  732,  espe- 
cially where  there  was  sufficient  in 
the  relations  of  the  parties  and  the 
circumstances  of  the  case  to  warrant 
him  in  permitting  judgment;  Sloan 
V.  Whalen,  15  U.  C.  C.  P.  319. 


44 


Feaudulknt  Conveyances. 


service  of  the  summons  as  of  a  date  prior  to  the  day  of  its  actual 
service,^  or  that  after  the  lecovering  of  the  judgment  he  released 
or  waived  his  right  of  appeal  or  review  for  it  consideration  paid 
to  him/^  or  that  he  waived  inquisition  or  stay  of  execution  for 
a  consideration,  in  order  to  hasten  the  collection  of  the  judgment" 
It  is  not  fraudulent  conduct  to  abandon  an  effort  to  deprive  an 
honest  creditor  of  the  whole  or  part  of  his  debt,  nor  is  one  credi- 
tor hindered  or  delayed  by  ending  an  effort  to  hinder  or  delay 
another.^ 


§  11.  Confession  of  judgment. — ^A  confession  of  judgment 
and  ezecution  thereon  not  made  for  the  legitimate  purpose  of  col- 
lecting a  debt,  but  designed  to  cover  up  the  leviable  property  of 
the  debtor  and  in  pursuance  of  a  collusive  purpose  between  the 
parties  to  hinder,  delay,  and  defraud  creditors,  will  be  set  aside 
as  fraudulent,^*  although  it  be  shown  that  the  debt  was  bona 


70.  Peck  T.  Richardson,  9  Him 
(N.  Y.),  567. 

71.  Inglehart  ▼.  Thousand  Island 
Hotel  Oo.,  109  N.  Y.  464,  17  N.  E. 
358;  Boylston  t.  Carver,  11  Mass. 
515;  Shibler  t.  Hartley,  201  Pa.  St. 
286,  60  Atl.  950,  88  Am.  St.  Rep. 
811. 

72.  Shibler  v.  Hartley,  9upra. 

73.  Inglehart  ▼.  Thousand  Island 
Hotel  Co.,  sttpro. 

74.  2f.  y.-Gall©  T.  Tode,  148  N. 
Y.  270,  42  N.  E.  673,  rev'g  on  other 
grounds  74  Hun,  542,  26  N.  Y.  Supp. 
633;  Hardt  v.  Schwab,  72  Hun,  109, 
26  N.  Y.  Supp.  402;  Wood  v. 
Mitchell,  53  Hun,  461,  6  N.  Y.  Supp. 
232,  17  CiT.  Proc.  R.  346,  confession 
of  judgment  in  favor  of  infants  as 
upon  contract,  for  a  cause  of  action 
in  tort,  without  the  appointment  of 
a  guardian  ad  litem;  Williams  ▼. 
Brown,  4  Johns.  Oh.  682;  Bums  v. 
Morse,  6  Paige,  108,  a  judgment  by 
confession  on  a  debt  not  yet  due  and 


amply  secured,  entered  for  the  pur- 
pose of  selling  the  judgment  debtor's 
property  thereon,  so  as  to  place  it 
beyond  the  reach  of  his  creditors,  is 
void  as  to  them;  Pitney  v.  Leonard, 
1  Paige,  461. 

U.  fif.— Sowles  V.  Witters,  55  Fed. 
169,  judgment  by  confession  for 
money  not  due;  Smith  v.  ^Schwed,  9 
Fed.  483. 

Ala. — ^Davidson  v.  Watts  Min.  Ckr 
Wheel  Co.,  121  Ala.  691,  25  So.  758, 
where  property  after  the  execution 
sale  was  to  be  turned  over  to  and 
used  by  the  debtor  company;  Wein- 
garten  v.  Marcus,  121  Ala.  187,  26 
So.  852. 

Cal. — Anderson  v.  Lassen  County 
Bank,  140  Cal.  695,  74  Pac.  287. 
judgment  for  more  than  is  due;  Wil- 
coxon  V.  Burton,  27  Cal.  228,  87  Am. 
Dec.  86. 

Del.— Newell  v.  Morgan,  2  Harr. 
226;  Taggart  ▼.  Phillips,  5  Del.  Ch. 
237. 


Natube  and  Fobm  of  Transfer. 


45 


/wk.     No  difference  exists  between  a  voluntary  conveyance  of  prop- 
erty for  fraudulent  purposes  and  suoh  an  alienation  di^uised  under 


iU. — ^French  v.  Commercial  Nat. 
Bank,  199  111.  213,  65  X.  E.  252; 
Argo  V.  Fox^  96  111.  App.  610;  Atlaa 
Nat.  Bank  ▼.  More,  40  111.  App.  336, 
aifd,  152  111.  528,  38  N.  £.  684,  43 
Am.  St.  Rep.  274. 

La. — ^Marx  v.  Meyer,  50  La.  Ann. 
1229,  23  So.  923. 

Md. — Citizens  F.,  etc.,  Ins.  Co.  v. 
Wallis,  23  Md.  173. 

Mo. — Benne  v.  Schnecko,  100  Mo. 
250,  13  S.  W.  82;  Field  v.  Liverman, 
17  Mo.  218;  Loth  ▼.  Faconesowich, 
22  Mo.  App.  68. 

Neh. — ^Pitkin  v.  Bumham,  62  Neb. 
385,  87  N.  W.  160,  89  Am.  St.  Rep. 
763,  55  L.  R.  A.  280,  judgment  not 
void,  but  voidable  only  in  a  proper 
proceeding  brought  by  the  parties 
attempted  to  be  defrauded. 

N.  J. — ShallcrosB  v.  Deats,  43  N. 
J.  L.  177;  Wandling  v.  Thompson, 
41  N.  J.  L.  309;  Metropolitan  Bank 
V.  Durant,  22  N.  J.  £q.  35;  Jones  v. 
Naughright,  10  N.  J.  £q.  298. 

N,  C— Rollins  v.  Henry,  78  N.  C. 
342,  a  consent  decree  in  action  to  re- 
cover land;  Leroy  v.  Didcinson,  11 
N.  C.  223. 

Ohio, — Bloomingdale  v.  Stein,  42 
Ohio  St.  168,  an  execution  on  a  pro- 
missory note  and  warrant  of  attor- 
ney, given  without  consideration  and 
when  the  maker  was  insolvent^  is 
void. 

Pa. — Clark  v.  Douglass,  62  Pa.  St. 
408;  Bunn  v.  Ahl,  29  Pa.  St.  387,  72 
Am.  Dec.  639,  the  giving  and  receiv- 
ing judgment  is  something  more  than 
a  fraudulent  intention;  it  is  some- 
thing done  in  pursuance  of  the  in- 
tention, and  it  is  voidable  by  any 
person  in  a  position  to  question  it; 
Serfoes  v.  Fisher,   10  Pa.   St.    184; 


Nusbaum  v.  Louchhdm,  1  Pa.*Cas. 
106,  1  Atl.  391;  Tocum  v.  Kehler,  1 
Walk.  84;  Campbell  v.  Kent,  3  Pen. 
A  W.  72;  Ditchbum  v.  Jermyn,  etc.. 
Co-operative  Assoc.,  3  Pa.  Dist,  635; 
GaskiU  v.  Benton,  14  Phila.  487; 
Building  Assoc,  v.  O'Connor,  3 
Phila.  453.  See  also  Taylor's  Ap- 
peal, 45  Pa.  St.  71,  judgment  notes 
given  by  a  firm  to  the  creditors  of  a 
third  person,  with  whom  it  was  in 
collusion  to  defraud  its  creditors, 
without  any  dealings  or  communica- 
tion with  the  creditors  of  suoh  third 
person,  are  fraudulent  as  to  the 
firm's  creditors. 

8.  C— Beattie  v.  Pool,  13  S.  C. 
379. 

Tenn, — ^Hickerson  v.  Blanton,  2 
Heisk.   160. 

TFm.— Bloodgood  v.  Meissner,  84 
Wis.  452,  54  N.  W.  772;  Naseauer  v. 
Techner,  65  Wis.  388,  27  N.  W.  40. 

Can, — ^Martin  v.  McAlpine,  8  Ont. 
App.  675;  McQee  v.  Baird,  3  Ont.  Pr. 
9;  Swayne  v.  Ruttan,  6  U.  C.  C.  P. 
399;  Servos  v.  Tobin,  2  U.  C.  Q.  B. 
530;  Knapp  v.  Forrest,  6  U.  C.  Q.  B. 
O.  S.  577,  gross  usury  in  taking  con- 
fession of  judgment;  Bergin  v.  Pin- 
dar, 3  U.  C.  Q.  B.  0.  S.  574,  fictitious 
debt. 

Eng, — ^Edison  Gen.  Electric  Co.  v 
Westminster  Tramway  Co.,  66  L.  J 
P.  C.  36,  A.  C.  193,  75  L.  T.  Rep.  N 
S.  438,  4  Manson  244,  if  the  fraudu 
lent  intent  is  proven,  it  is  imma 
terial  that  the  consent  to  the  judg 
ment  was  given  under  pressure; 
BatOTian  v.  Ramsey,  Sau.  &  Sc.  459 

JndsBiemt  oonfessed  to  em- 
dorsor. — Before  maturity  of  a  note 
held  by  a  bank  which  has  discounted 
it  for  the  maker,  there  is  nothing  due 


46 


FHAUDULBNT   CONVEYANCES. 


the  forms  of  a  confession  of  judgment.^*  The  fact  that  the  debt 
for  which  the  judgment  was  confessed  was  a  just  one,  owing 
from  the  judgment  debtor  to  the  judgment  creditor,  will  not  ex- 
onerate the  latter  from  refimding  any  sum  acquired  by  him  in 
the  attempt  to  place  the  debtor^s  property  boyond  the  reach  of  the 
other  creditors,  for  the  benefit  of  the  failing  debtor."  Such  a 
judgment  may  be  collaterally  attacked.'^  A  confession  of  judg- 
ment may  be  rendered  fraudulent  or  the  execution  thereon  rend- 
ered dormant  and  fraudulent,  as  against  subsequent  as  well  as 
existing  creditors,  by  the  acts  of  the  judgment  creditor.''*  A  con- 
fession of  judgment,  in  order  to  be  fraudulent  as  against  creditors 
must  be  either  voluntary  or  made  with  fraudulent  intent  partici- 
pated in  by  or  known  to  the  creditor  in  whose  favor  it  is  con- 
fessed, and,  in  the  absence  of  statutory  prohibition,  when  taken 
in  the  ordinary  course  of  business,  and  without  any  intent  that 
it  should  operate  as  a  preferential  assignment,  or  to  hinder  and 
delay  creditors,  although  its  effect  may  be  to  give  a  preference  and 
thereby  hinder  and  delay  other  creditors,  it  is  not  fraudulent  as 


from  the  maker  to  the  endorser,  and 
a  confession  of  judgment  on  the  note 
by  the  maker  in  favor  of  the  en- 
dorser will  be  set  aside  at  the  in- 
stance of  a  subsequent  judgment 
creditor  of  the  maker.  Forrester  v. 
Strauss,  18  N.  Y.  Supp.  41.  See  Con- 
sideration; contingent  liability,  chap. 
Vlll,  §  12,  infra. 

75.  Smith  v.  fichwed,  9  Fed.  483; 
Jones  V.  Naughright,  10  N.  J.  Eq. 
208 ;  Bunn  v.  Ahl,  29  Pa.  St.  387,  72 
Am.  Dee.  639;  Beattie  v.  Pool,  13  S. 
C.  379. 

76.  Muse  y.  Yarborough,  11  La. 
530. 

77.  Hardt  v.  Schwab,  72  Hun  (N. 
Y.)   109,  26  N.  Y.  Supp.  402. 

78.  See  Collusive  judgments,  chap. 
II,  §  10,  note  65,  9upra, 

An  aotioa  by  a  Judsmeat 
ereditor  to  aet  aside  ezeontlons 
issued  on  judgments  confessed  by  the 


debtor  before  the  recovery  of  plain- 
tiff's judgment  is  not  a  collateral  at- 
tack on  the  judgments  on  which  such 
executions  were  issued.  Forrester  v. 
Strauss,  18  N.  Y.  Supp.  41. 

70.  Field  v.  Liverman,  17  Mo.  218, 
if  the  judgment  creditor  direct  the 
sheriff  to  hold  up  his  execution,  and 
not  to  sell  or  proceed  to  make  the 
money  until  he  shall  give  further 
orders  and  until  he  shall  find 
younger  executions  crowding  in; 
Serfoes  ▼.  Fisher,  10  Pa.  St.  184,  a 
voluntary  judgment  confessed  by  one 
who  is  not  indebted,  with  design  to 
defeat  a  supposed  liability  which  did 
not  exist,  is  rendered  fraudulent  as 
to  subsequent  creditors  by  reviving 
it  by  scire  facias  and  issuing  an  exe- 
cution thereon;  Campbell  v.  Kent,  3 
Penr.  &  W.  (Pa.)  72. 

A  Jndsmeat  aot«  given  by  a 
merchant    in    contemplation    of    in- 


NaTUKB  and  FoSM  of  TsANSFEiB. 


47 


to  creditors.*®    Judgment  creditors  of  a  corporation,  in  the  absence 
of  fraud,  cannot  question  the  right  of  an  attorney  to  enter  a  judg* 


solvency,  without  consideration,  is 
fraudulent,  not  wily  as  to  creditors 
of  the  maker  existing  at  the  time  of 
its  execution,  but  also  as  to  those 
^yiRfcing  at  the  time  of  its  intended 
enforcement.  Chronister  v.  Ander- 
son, 73  lU.  App.  524. 

SO,  2^,   r.— Rutherford  v.  Schatt- 

man,  119  N.  Y.  604,  23  N.  E.  440; 
Barker  v.  Franklin,  8  Am.  B.  R. 
468,  37  Misc.  Rep.  292,  76  N.  Y. 
Supp.  305,  where  creditors  of  an  in- 
solvent, without  taking  any  action 
themselves,  accept  the  advantage 
which  he  gives  them  by  conveyance 
of  his  property  as  a  part  of  a  fraudu- 
lent scheme,  the  oonv^ance  will  be 

set  aside. 

U.  flf.— Hardin  v.  Kelley,  144  Fed. 

353. 

Ala. — ^McBroom  v.  Rives,  1  Stew. 
72,  the  owner  of  a  deed  of  trust  may, 
on  discovering  a  defect  therein,  take 
judgment  by  confession  against  his 
debtor,  and  sell  the  property  on  exe 
cution. 

Cal, — Pond  v.  Davenport,  44  Cal. 

481. 

/a.— Weigley  v.  Matson,  125  111, 
64,  16  N.  B.  881,  8  Am.  St.  Rep. 
335,  aifg.  24  Dl.  App.  178,  a  provision 
in  a  warrant  of  attorney  to  confess 
judgment,  for  including  therein  the 
creditor's  attorney's  fees,  is  not 
fraudulent. 

La.— Ellis  V.  Fisher,  10  La.  Ann. 

482. 

Jf tfin.— Atwater  v.  Manchester  Sav. 
Bank,  45  Minn.  341,  48  N.  W.  187, 
12  L.  R.  A.  741. 

Jfo.— Hard  v.  Foster,  98  Mo.  297, 

11  S.  W.  760. 
y,  /.—- Vanderveere  v.  Gaston,  25 


N.  J.  L.  615;   Jones  v.  Naughright, 
10  N.  J.  Eq.  298. 

N.  C. — Merchante'  Nat.  Bank  v, 
Newton  Cbtton  Mills,  115  N.  C.  507, 
20  S.  E.  765;  Rollins  v.  Henry,  78 
N.  G.  432,  consent  decree  in  an  action 
to  recover  land;  Finley  v.  Smith,  24 
N.  C.  225. 

Pa. — Page  v.  Williamsport  Suspen- 
der Co.,  191  Pa.  St.  511,  43  Atl.  345; 
Lowery  v.  Coulter,  9  Pa.  St.  349, 
confession  of  judgment  without  the 
intervention  of  the  creditor  and  an 
immediate  issue  of  execution  at  the 
creditor's  request;  Kline  v.  O'Don- 
nell,  11  Pa.  Co.  Ct.  38;  Ballon  v. 
Minard,  2  Brewst.  560,  giving  of  a 
judgment  note. 

8.  C— Drake  v.  Steadman,  46  S.  C. 
474,  24  S.  E.  458. 

Wm.— Pirie  v.  Stem,  97  Wis.  150, 
72  N.  W.  370,  65  Am.  St.  Rep.  103, 
provision  for  creditor's  attorney's  fee 
in  a  warrant  of  attorney  to  confess 
judgment. 
Eng. — ^Meux  v.  Howell,  4  East,  1. 
A   Jndgmemt   eonfessed    for    a 
boma  fide  debt  should  not  be  set 
aside  on  the  mere  suspicion  that  ite 
confession  was  produced  by  the  same 
fraudulent  intent  as  the  confession  of 
other  judgmente   and  a  general   as- 
signment, which  was  also  set  aside 
for  fraud,  where  the  judgment,  and 
the  proofs  relating  to  it,  are  not  con- 
nected with  the  other  judgmente,  or 
with  any  other  part  of  the  litigation, 
but  are  separate  and  distinct.     Illi- 
nois Wateh  Co.  V.  Payne,  11  N.  Y. 
Supp.  408,  aff'd  132  N.  Y.  597,  30  N. 
E.   1151.     See  also  Effect  of  fraud- 
ulent   conveyance — Several     transae* 
tions,  chap.  Ill,  §  3,  infra. 


48 


FBA.UDUUSNT   GONVEYANOBS. 


ment  bj  confession  against  the  corporation,  in  ipnrBuanoe  of  a 
warrant  of  attorney  in  a  judgment  note.^ 


§  12.  Statutory  requirements  as  to  confessions  of  ji 
— ^In  some  of  the  states  the  statutes  pfrovide  that  a  oonf  ession  of 
judgment  shall  bo  attended  with  certain  formalities,  such  as  an 
affidavit  or  statement  of  the  indebtedness,  the  particulaxfi  of  the 
indebtedness,  the  facts  and  circumstances  out  of  which  it  arose, 
good  faith,  and  so  forth.  TJnder  these  statutes  the  failure  to 
make  all  the  disclosures  required  by  the  statute  has  been  held 
in  some  cases  to  render  the  judgment  prima  faciei  and  in  others- 
conclusively,^  fraudulent  and  void  both  as  against  eodsting  and 
subsequent  creditors.  For  example,  a  confession  of  judgment 
will  be  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors,  unless  the  statement 
contains  such  a  recital  of  facts  out  of  which  the  debt  arose  as  to 
identify  the  transaction  and  enable  inquiries  to  be  made;"  if  the 


Prefereaoe  not  fravdvleiit  la 

law. — ^A  judgment  confessed  by  an 
insolvent  to  secure  a  bona  fide  credi- 
tor, although  it  be  intended,  and  has 
the  effect,  to  give  him  a  preference 
over  other  creditors,  is  not  fraudu- 
lent in  laTV.  Braden  v  O'Neil,  183 
Pa.  St.  462,  38  Atl.  1023,  63  Am.  St 
Rep.  761.  See  Preferences,  chap.  XI, 
infra.  Nor  is  it  fraudulent  be- 
cause the  amount  is  sufficient  to  cover 
the  debtor's  contingent  liability  on 
endorsements  as  well  as  his  actual 
indebtedness.  Id.  See  also  Executory 
or  contingent  considerations,  chap. 
VIH,  §§  7-12,  infra.  Potter  v.  Pickle, 
2  Ont.  Pr.  301;  Swayne  v.  Ruttan,  6 
U.  C.  C.  P.  399. 

81.  Chicago  Tip,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Chi- 
cago Nat.  Bank,  74  111.  App.  439. 

Sit,  Pond  v.  Davenport,  44  Cal. 
481;  Richards  v.  McMillan,  6  CaL 
419,  65  Am.  Dec.  521. 

83.  See  cases  cited  in  following 
notes  to  this  section. 


84.  v.  Y, — ^Neusbaum  v.  Eeim,  24 
N.  Y.  325;  Lanning  v.  Carpenter,  20 
N.  Y.  447,  it  is  not  necessary  to  re- 
cite that  the  sum  confessed  ia  justly 
due  or  to  become  due;  Dunham  v. 
Waterman,  17  N.  Y.  9,  72  Am.  Dec. 
406;  Flour  City  Nat.  Bank  v.  Doty, 
41  Hun,  76;  Butts  v.  Schieffelin,  5 
Civ.  Proc.  R.  415;  Acker  v.  Acker,  1 
Abb.  Dec.  1,  1  Eeyes,  291;  McKee  v. 
Tyson,  10  Abb.  Pr.  392;  aaflin  v. 
Sanger,  31  Barb.  36,  11  Abb.  Pr.  338; 
Clements  v.  Gerow.  30  Barb.  325; 
Bonnell  v.  Henry,  13  How.  Pr.  142; 
Purdy  V.  Upton,  10  How.  Pr.  494; 
Seaving  v.  Brinkerhoff,  6  Johns.  Ch. 
329,  judgment  by  confession  on  war- 
rant of  attorney;  Bank  of  Kinderhook 
V.  Jenison,  15  How.  Pr.  41;  Thomp- 
son V.  Van  Vechten,  5  Abb.  Pr,  458; 
Marks  v.  Reynolds,  12  Abb.  Pr.  403, 
20  How.  Pr.  338. 

Cal. — Pond  v.  Davenport,  44  Cal. 
481,  45  Cal.  225;  Wilcoxson  v.  Bur- 
ton, 27  Cal.  228,  87  Am.  Dec.  66;  Cor- 
dier  v.  Schloes,  12  Cal.  143,  18  CaL 


Nature  abd  Fobm  of  T&ansfeb. 


4» 


fitatement  as  to  the  indebtedness  is  defective  or  insufficient;" 
where  it  merely  sets  out  a  promissory  note  as  the  consideration 
for  the  indebtedness;"  where  it  recites  merely  that  it  is  based 
upon  a  promissory  note  given  for  goods  sold  ;*^  or  a  drafts  setting 
out  a  copy  thereof;"  or  where  the  affidavit  is  insufficient;"  ox 
where  there  is  no  statement^"  or  affidavit.*^  But  a  confession  of 
judgment  is  not  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors  because  the 
statement  does  not  enumerate  each  item  of  ^e  account  consti- 
tuting the  indebtedness  as  in  a  specific  hill  of  particulars;"  or 
where  a  discrepancy  in  an  item  is  the  result  of  a  clerical  error ;" 
or  where  the  statement  does  not  contain  a  minute  description  of , 
the  goods  sold^  or  time  and  place  and  terms  of  sale  of  each  par* 
ticular  parcel.^    A  statement  that  the  consideration  of  the  judg- 


676;  Rieliards  v.  McMillan,  6  Cal.  419, 
65  Am.  Dec.  521. 

Jawa. — ^Miller  y.  Clarke,  37  Iowa, 
325. 

if tiifi.— Atwater  y,  Manchester  Sav. 
Bank»  45  Minn.  341,  48  N.  W.  187, 
12  L.  R.  A.  741 ;  WelU  ▼.  Giesdce,  27 
Minn.  478,  8  N.  W.  380,  judgment  will 
be  void  as  to  those  liabilities  insuffi- 
ciently stated,  but  valid  as  to  the 
others. 

Mo. — Teasdale  Commission  Co.  t. 
Van  Hardenberg,  55  Mo.  App.  326; 
Stem  Y.  Mayer,  19  Mo.  App.  511; 
McHenry  y.  Shepard,  2  Mo.  App.  378. 

Wash, — ^Puget  Sound  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Levy,  10  Wash.  499,  39  Pac.  142,  45 
Am.  St.  Rep.  803. 

WU, — ^Thompson  t.  Hintgen,  11 
Wis.  112. 

85.  N,  7.— Winnebrenner  ▼.  Ed- 
gerton,' 30  Barb.  185;  Van  Beck  v. 
Shuman,  13  How.  Pr.  472. 

Cal. — ^Pond  v.  Davenport,  45  Cal. 
225. 

lowi. — Kennedy  v.  Lowe,  9  Iowa, 
580. 

86.  y.  7.— Chappel  v.  Chappel,  12 
N.  T.  215,  64  Am.  Dec.  496;  Hoppock 

4 


V.   Donaldson,    12   How.   Prac.    141; 
Mann  v.  Brooks,  7  How.  Pr.  449. 

Mo, — ^How  V.  Dorsoheimer,  31  Mb. 
340. 

87.  N,  7.— Claflin  v.  Songer,  11 
Abb.  Pr.  338;  Moody  v.  Townsend,  3 
Abb.  Pr.  375. 

lotoa. — ^Bernard  v.  Douglass,  10 
Iowa,  370. 

ifo.— Bryan  v.  MiUer,  28  Mo.  32, 
75  Am.  Dec.  107,  the  statement  may 
be  amended  but  not  so  as  to  inter- 
fere with  the  existing  rights  of  other 
judgment  creditors. 

88.  Davidson  v.  Alexander,  84  N. 
C.  621. 

80.  Ingram  v.  Bobbins,  33  N.  T. 
409,  88  Am.  Dec.  393;  Sheppard  v. 
Sheppard,  10  N.  J.  L.  250. 

00.  Bacon  v.  Raybould,  4  Utah, 
357,  10  Pac.  481. 

01.  Cliver  v.  Applegate,  5  N.  J.  L. 
479,  551. 

02.  Vanfleet  v.  Phillips,  11  Iowa, 
558. 

03.  Hard  v.  Foster,  98  Mo.  297,  11 
S.  W.  760. 

04.  Gandall  v.  Finn,  33  How.  Pr. 


50 


FEAUDUi^BurT  Conveyances. 


ment  is  borrowed  money  and  that  tibere  is  now  due  a  certain 
sum  ;^  or  that  the  indebtedness  is  evidenced  by  a  note  given  for 
borrowed  money^  describing  the  note,  though  failing  to  state  thai 
the  debt  is  justly  due  or  to  become  due,^  has  beeni  held  to  be 
sufficient 


§  13.  Foreclosure  of  m^ortgages  and  deeds  of  trust. — A  col* 
lusive  and  fraudulent  sale  under  foreclosure  of  a  mortgage  or 
under  a  deed  of  trust  of  real  or  personal  property,  either  imder 
a  power  contained  therein  or  by  legal  proceedings,  will  be  set 
aside  at  the  suit  of  creditors  of  the  mortgagor  or  grantor  as  fraudu- 
lent as  against  them.  Sales  of  this  character  where  the  facts 
dearly  established  collusion  and  fraud  are  referred  to  in  the  note 
below.^    Lands  so  fraudulently  conveyed  may  be  sold  on  execution 


(N.  T.)  444,  2  Abb.  Dec.  232,  1  Keyes, 
217. 

05.  Miller  v.  Clarke,  37  Iowa,  326. 

06.  Claflin  ▼.  Dodson,  111  Mo.  106, 
19  S.  W.  711. 

07.  y,  y.— Matter  of  Puller,  35 
Hun,  162)  where  it  is  reasonably  ap- 
parent that  an  assignment  and  for<>- 
closure  of  a  mortgage  was  to  cut  off 
liens  to  the  prejudice  of  the  mortga- 
gor's creditors,  a  creditor  may  procure 
the  setting  aside  of  the  foreclosure, 
if  intervening  rights  can  be  protected. 

III. — ^Laflln  Y.  Central  Pub.  House, 
52  m.  432,  a  statute  rendering  liable 
to  attachment  property  sold  with  in- 
tent to  hinder  and  delay  creditors,  in- 
cludes mortgaged  chattels,  so  sold  by 
fraudulent  collusion  between  the 
mortgagor  and  mortgagee  as  to  pre- 
vent any  surplus  proceeds  from  aris- 
ing, although  there  was  no  fraud  in 
making  the  mortgage. 

7tt<f.— Wright  V.  Mack,  96  Ind.  332, 
mortgages  given  shortly  before  a  vol- 
untary assignment  and  soon  there- 
after foreclosed  under  circumstances 
showing    collusion    justify    creditors 


suing  for  the  conversion  of  the  prop- 
erty. 

/ou?a.-*MilIiman  v.  Eddie,  11& 
Iowa,  530,  88  N.  W.  964,  a  judgment 
of  foreclosure  of  a  mortgage,  which 
had  been  paid  but  assigned  to  the 
mortgagor's  children  for  the  purpose 
of  hindering  and  delaying  creditors, 
is  in  effect  a  voluntary  confession  of 
judgment,  and  fraudulent  and  void 
as  against  the  mortgagor's  creditors. 

Mo. — ^Woodard  v.  Mastin,  106  Mo. 
324,  17  S.  W.  308,  the  fact  that  a  trust 
deed  was  valid  and  made  in  good 
faith  will  not  protect  a  purchaser 
thereunder,  as  against  the  grantor's 
ci^editors,  where  the  sale  and  purchase 
were  coUusively  and  fraudulently 
made  for  the  purpose  of  covering  up 
the  grantor's  equity.  * 

U.  fir.— Watson  v.  Bonflls,  116  Fed. 
157,  53  C.  C.  A.  535,  sheriff's  deed 
and  conveyance  made  in  pursuance 
of  a  bank's  scheme  devised  to  carry 
the  title  of  all  real  estate  on  which  it 
had  foreclosed  mortgages  into  a  realty 
corporation,  whose  stock  it  held,  and 
to  carry  the  notes  and  mortgages  of 


Nature  and  Form  of  Tbansfbb. 


51 


of  a  creditor  as  though  the  conveyance  had  not  been  made;  and 
the  purchaser  upon  proof  of  the  fraud^  is  ntitled  to  a  decree 
vesting  the  title  in  him,  and  the  fraudulent  grantee  will  be  de- 
clared trustee  for  him.^  But  it  has  been  held  that  a  creditor  for 
whose  benefit  land  has  been  conveyed  by  a  trust  deed  in  the  nature 
of  a  mortjgage,  and  whose  claim  is  three  times  greater  than  the 
value  of  the  land,  may  cause  it  to  be  conveyed  as  a  gift  to  the 
debtor's  children  without  affording  to  other  creditors  ground  oii 
complaint.^  And  where  an  equity  of  redemption  is  attached,  it 
has  been  held  that  the  debtor  may  lawfully  remain  passive,  and 
suffer  the  foreclosure  to  be  consummated,  and  may  even  persuade 
another  creditor  to  take  his  interest  as  security,  and  assign  it  to 
him,  and  that  such  an  arrangement  is  not  a  fraud  on  the  attaching 
creditor,  although  the  assignee  knew  of  the  existence  of  the  at- 
tachment; and  that  it  is  not  a  fraud  on  the  attaching  creditor,  if 
the  assignee  makes  an  agreement  with  the  mortgagee  that  the  latter 
shall  hold  the  mortgage  until  the  time  for  redemption  has  expired, 
and  then  convey  the  land  to  the  assignee,  on  being  paid  by  him  the 
amount  secured  by  the  mortgage.^  Other  cases  wherein  the  courts 
have  held  that  the  facts  proven  did  not  establiA  collusion  or  fraud 
are  cited  in  the  note  below.' 


tlie  latter,  representing  the  amounts 
due  by  the  former  mortgagors,  at  par 
among  its  assets,  held  to  be  voidable 
at  the  election  of  the  bank's  creditors; 
James  v.  Milwaukee,  etc.,  R.  Co.,  0 
Wall.  752,  18  L.  Ed.  885,  sale  of  a 
railroad  under  mortgage  to  secure 
bonds  was  fraudulent  as  against  the 
company's  creditors  where  the  notice 
of  sale  grossly  misstated  the  amount 
due. 

Can, — ^King  t.  Duncan,  29  Qrant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  113,  fictitious  breach  of 
chattel  mortgage  and  judgment  be- 
fore expiration  of  period  of  credit; 
Watson  ▼.  McCarthy,  10  Grant  Ch. 
(U.  C.)  416,  a  sale  under  the  power 
in  a  mortgage  set  aside  as  collusivo 


and  tending  to  delay  creditors,  within 
13  Eliz.,  chap.  5. 

08.  Woodard  v.  Mastin,  106  Mo. 
324,  17  S.  W.  308. 

90.  Van  Riswick  v.  Spalding,  117 
U.  S.  370,  6  Sup.  Ct.  788,  29  L.  Ed. 
913. 

1.  Danforth  v.  Roberts,  20  Me.  307. 

2,  MicK—tieeyes  v.  Miller,  121 
Mich.  311,  80  N.  W.  19,  creditors  can- 
not reach  land  which  their  .debtor 
owned,  where  one  having  a  mortgage 
thereon  foreclosed  it,  without  any 
fraudulent  design,  and  after  expira- 
tion of  the  time  to  redeem,  sold  it  to 
a  third  person,  although  the  mortga- 
gee bid  in  the  property  for  a  9nm 
much  below  its   value,  and  sold  it 


52. 


Fbaubulent  Conveyances. 


§  14.  Execution  and  other  judicial  sales. — ^The  statates  of 
frauds  reach  fraudulent  executions  as  well  as  fraudulent  judg- 
ments.^  Fraud  pollutes  public  as  well  as  private  sales,  and  credi- 
tors  may  attack  and  set  aside  as  fraudulent  a  oonvejance  by  a 
debtor  through  the  medium  of  a  levy  under  a  collusive  and  f raudu- 
lent  execution  and  a  judicial  sale  thereunder,  or  other  collusive  and 
fraudulent  judicial  sale,  with  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud 
creditors  of  the  judgment  or  execution  debtor  by  covering  his 
property  or  placing  it  in  another^s  name,  or  securing  it  or  any 
part  of  it  for  the  benefit  of  the  debtor  or  his  family,  and  thus 
shielding  it  from  creditors.^    The  fact  that  the  sale  of  the  prop* 


cheap,  and  although  the  purchaser 
from  him  bought  at  the  suggestion  of 
the  debtor,  and  advanced  him  money 
to  carry  on  business  there,  it  not  ap- 
pearing the  debtor  contributed  any- 
thing to  the  purchase,  or  was  prom- 
ised any  interest  in  the  property  or 
its  proceeds. 

8,  C. — ^Magruder  v.  Clayton,  29  S. 
C.  407,  7  S.  E.  844,  where,  in  a  suit 
to  set  aside  as  fraudulent  sales  of 
chattels  made  under  a  lien  and  a 
mortgage,  all  the  parties  connected 
with  the  sales  testify  that  they  were 
entirely  fair,  and  it  appears  that  the 
Hen  sale  was  made  by  the  sheriff,  and 
that  both  were  regularly  advertised, 
a  finding  that  they  were  not  fraudu- 
lent is  not  clearly  against  the  weight 
of  evidence,  though  the  sales  were 
made  hastily,  and  without  proper  at- 
tention to  detail,  and  the  property 
was  not  immediately  removed.  Bick- 
ley  V.  Norris,  2  Brev.  252,  where  ne- 
groes were  mortgaged  and  sold  by 
virtue  of  the  mortgage,  and  the  mort- 
gagee permitted  a  friend  with  money 
to  purchase  them  in  his  own  name, 
as  a  trustee  for  the  mortgagor's  chil- 
dren, and  the  trustee  accoraingly  pur- 
chased and  took  a  conveyance  to  him- 


self absolutely,  subject  to  the  secret 
trust,  the  conveyance,  if  horta  fide, 
was  good,  and  not  within  the  statute 
of  Elizabeth. 

3.  Wilder  v.  Fond^,  4  Wend.  (N. 
Y.)    100. 

4.  N,  y.— Decker  v.  Decker,  108  N. 
Y.  128,  15  N.  E.  307;  Chraiy  v. 
Sprague,  12  Wend.  41,  27  Am.  Dec. 
110;  Wilder  v.  Fondey,  4  Wend.  100; 
Bumell  V.  Johnson,  0  Johns.  343. 

U,  £f. —Johnson  v.  Waters,  111  U. 
S.  640,  4  Sup.  Ct.  610,  28  L.  Ed.  547. 

Ala, — ^Forrest  v.  Camp,  16  Ala. 
642. 

Ar/p.— Miller  v.  Fraley,  21  Ark.  22, 
where  upon  a  sale  of  real  estate  to 
satisfy  an  execution  the  purchase 
was  made  at  the  request  and  with 
the  means  of  the  judgment  debtor, 
and  the  purchaser  received  a  deed, 
agreeing  to  hold  for  the  judgment 
debtor's  benefit,  the  sale  was  fraudu- 
lent and  void  as  against  creditors  of 
the  judgment  debtor,  and  the  pur- 
chaser held,  in  equity,  in  trust  for 
their  benefit,  and  a  grantee  of  such 
purchaser,  with  notice  of  the  fraud, 
did  not  get  a  valid  title. 

Del — Purington  v.  Chandler,  5 
Harr.  394. 


Nature  and  Foem  of  Tbansfes. 


53 


erty  on  execnition  was  under  a  valid  and  unsatisfied  judgment 
regularly  and  lawfully  enforced  does  not  alter  the  character  oi 
the  transaction,  if  it  was  done  with  intent  to  defraud  creditors  of 
the  judgment  debtor.^  The  sale  of  property  on  execution  for  the 
full  amount  of  a  bona  fide  judgment,  where  the  whole  or  a  jmrt 
of  the  judgment  is  satisfied,*  or  a  sale  on  execution  where  the 
debtor  pays  the  whole  or  a  part  of  the  purchase  money/  or  where 
the  debtor  procures  the  sale  to  a  purchaser  at  a  grossly  inadequate 


Ga.— Smith  v.  Dobbins,  87  Ga.  303, 
33  S.  E.  496. 

Ind,— Buck  v.  Voreis,  89  Ind.  116. 

JTy.— Yoder  v.  Standiford,  7  T.  B. 
Mem.  478,  an  arrangement  between 
the  debtor  and  the  purchaser  at 
sheriff's  sale  to  extend  the  time  to 
redeem. 

La. — Lee  v.  Whitehead,  8  La.  Ann. 
81;  Lawrence  v.  Young,  1  La.  Ann. 
297,  consent  of  debtor  to  a  sale  with- 
out formalities  of  law. 

Jfw.— White  V.  Trotter,  14  Sm.  A 
M.  30,  53  Am.  Dec.  112;  StovaU  v. 
Farmers',  etc.,  Bank,  8  Sm.  &  M.  305, 
47  Am.  Dec.  85. 

Mo. — Morrison  v.  Herrington,  120 
Mo.  665,  25  S.  W.  560;  Dallam  v. 
Renshaw,  26  Mo.  533,  the  creditors 
may  treat  the  execution  sale  and  the 
sheriff's  deed  as  nullities;  Carter  v. 
Shotwell,  42  Mo.  App.  663. 

N.  C— Den  v.  Erwin,  18  N.  C. 
569,  other  judgment  creditors  may 
treat  the  sale  and  deed  as  nullities 
and  subject  the  property  at  law  to 
the  satisfaction  of  their  debts. 

Ohio, — Edgington  v.  Williams, 
Wright,  439. 

Pa.— Hall  v.  Hamlin,  2  Watts, 
364;  MitcheU  v.  Gendell,  7  Phila. 
107. 

Tea?.— Smith  v.  Boquet,  27  Tex. 
507,  property  bid  in  by  the  debtor 
through  an  agent  in  trust  for  him- 
self or  family. 


TFm.— Reynolds  v.  Vilas,  8  Wis. 
471,  76  Am.  Dec.  238. 

Can. — Servos  v.  Tobin,  2  U.  C.  Q. 

B.  530;  Doe  v.  Van  Koughnet,  5  U, 

C.  Q.  B.  0.  S.  246. 

A  fraudulent  Tendee  caiiM  no 
title  to  the  land  by  a  sheriff's  sale, 
nor  interest  in  it,  notwithstanding; 
as  innocent  creditor  may,  by  that 
very  sale,  obtain  a  good  title  to  the 
money.  Foulk  v.  McFarlane,  1  Watts 
^  S.   (Pa.)   297,  37  Am.  Dec.  467. 

A  sale  ba  ezeeutioa  to  the 
mdministrator  of  the  Jndgmemt 
debtor,  who  paid  no  money,  but  pur- 
chased in  trust  for  the  creditors  and 
heirs,  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors. 
Hays  V.  Heidelberg,  9  Pa.  St.  203. 

A  aale  hj  aa  admiaiatratov  to 

a  trustee,  for  the  benefit  of  the  heira 
and  creditors  is  fraudulent  and  void* 
Piatt  V.  St.  aair,  6  Ohio,  227» 
Wright,  261. 

5.  Decker  v.  Decker,  108  N.  Y.  128, 
15  N.  E.  307;  Crary  v.  Sprague,  12 
Wend.   (N.  Y.)  41,  27  Am.  Dec.  110. 

6.  Wilder  v.  Fondey,  4  Wend.  (N. 
Y.)  100;  Booth  v.  Moret,  1  Brev. 
(8.  C.)  216. 

7.  Dawson  v.  Holbert,  4  La.  Ann. 
36;  Burke  v.  Murphy,  27  Miss.  167, 
and  a  purchaser  would  not  be  pro- 
tected though  he  repaid  the  debtor 
the  amount  furnished'  by  the  latter; 
D«  V.  Erwin,  18  N.  C.  569. 


54: 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


price  or  a  price  much  below  its  real  value,'  is  fraudulent  and  void 
as  to  creditors.  The  use  of  sheriff's  deeds  and  other  legal  instru- 
ments to  effect  a  fraudulent  conveyance  of  property  is  no  bar  to 
its  avoidance.*  Preventing  competitive  bidding  at  an  execution  or 
other  judicial  sale,  whereby  the  purchaser  is  enabled  to  buy  the 
property  at  a  reduced  price  or  for  less  than  he  otheHwise  would, 
may  render  the  sale  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  other  credi- 
tors.^^  A  sheriff's  sale  cannot,  however,  be  considered  a  mere 
simulation  and  be  set  aside  as  fraudulent  as  against  creditors 
where  there  is  no  evidence  of  any  participancy  by  the  seizing 
creditor  or  purchaser  in  any  fraudulent  purpose  of  the  judgment 
debtor,  or  showing  that  the  purchase  was  made  with  other  than 
honest  intent^^  In  the  absence  of  actual  fraud,  a  sale  is  not 
fraudulent  as  to  the  creditors  of  the  judgment  debtor,  although 
the  purchaser  subsequently  convey,  or  cause  the  sheriff  to  convey, 
the  property  to  the  debtor  or  his  wife  or  children,  or  in  trust  for 
them."  A  sale  on  execution  is  not  per  se  fraudulent  as  against  the 
debtor's  creditors  because  of  an  agreement  between  the  judgment 


8.  Lawrence  y.  Toung,  1  La.  Ann. 
297 ;  Worthy  v.  Caddell,  76  N.  C.  82. 

9.  Watson  v.  Bonfils,  116  Fed.  157, 
53  C.  C.  A.  535;  Forrest  ▼.  Camp,  16 
Ala.  642;  Buck  v.  Voreis,  89  Ind.  116. 

10.  Johnson  v.  Waters,  111  U.  S. 
640,  4  Sup.  a.  619,  28  L.  Ed.  547, 
executor's  sale  of  real  estate  under 
orders  of  the  probate  court;  Saxton 
▼.  Seiberling,  48  Ohio  St  554,  29  N. 
E.  179;  Simonton  ▼.  Davis,  4  Strob. 
Eq.  (S.  C.)  133;  Carson  ▼.  Law,  2 
Kich.  Eq.  (S.  C.)  296,  although  the 
motive  for  so  doing  was  one  of 
benevolence  towards  the  debtor's 
family. 

11.  H.  B.  Claflin  Co.  v.  Lass,  17 
Colo.  App.  156,  67  Pac.  910;  Holmes 
y.  Barbin,  15  La.  Ann.  553.  The  tak- 
ing out  of  an  execution  is  not  ren- 
dered fraudulent  as  to  creditors 
merely  because  it  is  taken  with  a 


view  to  hinder  and  delay  them,  if  the 
judgment  was  valid  in  its  inception. 
Wilder  v.  Winne,  6  Oow.  (N.  Y.) 
284. 

A  pnrohaae,  liy  max  attormej»  of 
kis  elieat's  Uuid  at  ezetnatiom 
sale  in  the  proceedings  in  which  the 
attorney  is  employed,  is  not  pre- 
sumptively fraudulent  as  to  the 
client's  creditors.  Fisher  v.  Mc- 
Inemey,  137  Cal.  38,  69  Pac.  622, 
907,  92  Am.  St.  Rep.  68. 

12.  McLaughlin  v.  McLaughlin,  91 
Pa.  St.  462;  McMahan  v.  Dawkins, 
22  S.  C.  314.   • 

Tlio  Judciaemt  debtor**  ad* 
Taaeins  xaoney  to  a  third  per- 
■01&,  to  enable  him  to  purchase  and 
take  an  assignment  of  the  certificate 
of  sale,  and  thus  keep  it  in  force,  is 
not,  if  no  fraud  is  practiced,  invalid 
as     against     subsequent     creditors. 


Natubs  Ain>  FoBM  of  Taansfeb. 


55 


debtor  and  the  purchaser  to  the  advanta^  of  the  former,  where 
the  debtor's  means  were  not  used  in  procuring  it^  But  a  sale  is 
prima  facie  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  where  the  property  is  left 
by  the  vendee  in  the  possession  of  the  defendant  in  the  execution 
for  a  long  time.^^ 

§  15.  Collusive  attachment. — The  law  recognizes  no  distinc- 
tion between  a  voluntary  conveyance  of  property  in  fraud  of 
creditors  and  such  an  alienation  disguised  imder  the  forms  of 
judicial  proceedings,  and  the  court  will  declare  fraudulent  and 
void  and  set  aside  a  collusive  or  fraudulent  attachment  or  sale 
thereunder,  at  the  suit  of  creditors  of  the  atachment  defendant 
who  are  hindered,  delayed,  or  defrauded  thereby.^  But  where  the 
claim  is  just  and  the  attachment  is  in  good  faith,  and  there  is 
nothing  to  impeach  it  but  unusual  and  suspicious  circumstances, 
the  courts  have  refused  to  set  it  aside."  Compromising  a  suit, 
after  obtaining  an  attachment,  for  less  than  was  alleged  to  be 
due,  is  no  evidence  that  the  prosecutian  of  the  attachment  wa9 


Rankin  v.  Arndt,  44  »Barb.    (N.  Y.) 
251. 

13.  Smith  V.  Dobbins,  87  6a.  303, 
14  S.  £.  496,  where  the  purchaser 
gave  the  debtor  a  year's  time  to  re- 
fund the  purchase  money  with  inter- 
est, and  agreed  on  his  doing  so  to 
convey  the  land  to  him,  the  plaintiff 
in  fieri  facias  not  participating  in 
the  agreement,  the  sale  is  not  fraudu- 
lent; nor  because  of  a  stipulation 
that  the  debtor  should  have  the  crop 
then  upon  the  land  without  paying 
for  it,  or  that  the  succeeding  year's 
crop  should  be  the  property  of  the 
purchaser  in  case  the  debtor  failed 
to  take  the  land,  nor  the  fact  that 
the  purchaser  afterwards  paid  the 
debtor  or  his  assign  for  a  release 
from  the  agreement;  Chicago,  etc., 
R.  Co.  V.  Watson,  113  111.  195;  Par- 
sons V.  Black,  2  Grant  Cas.  (Pa.) 
330. 


14.  Buck  V.  Voreis,  89  Ind.  116; 
Stovall  V.  Farmers',  etc.,  Bank,  8 
Sm.  &  M.  (Miss.)  305,  47  Am.  Dec. 
85,  for  two  years  or  more.  See  Re- 
tention of  possession  or  apparent 
title,  chap.  XII,  infra, 

15.  La. — ^Newman  v.  Baer,  50  La. 
Ann.  323,  23  So.  279;  Haas  v.  Haas, 
35  La.  Ann.  885. 

Mass, — Pierce  v.  Jackson,  6  Mass. 
242. 

Mi88, — ^Henderson  v.  Thornton,  37 
Miss.  448,  75  Am.  Dec.  70. 

Jfo. — ^Norton  v.  Thiebes  Stierling 
Music  Co.,  82  Mo.  App.  216,  but  an 
attachment  does  not  hinder  or  delay 
creditors  where  the  debtor  has  no 
property  that  can  be  attached. 

Tex. — Zadik  v.  Schafer,  77  Tex. 
601,  14  S.  W.  163. 

16.  Cartwright  v.  Bamberger,  99 
Ala.  622,  14  So.  477 ;  Hyman  v.  Stad- 
ler,  63  Miss.  362. 


56 


Feaudclent  Cohvetances. 


0 

fraudulent  as  to  other  creditors  of  the  debtor."  A  writ  of  at- 
tachment issued  collusively  between  a  creditor  and  a  debtor^  in- 
solvent or  not,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  a  prohibited  preference 
which  is  injurious  to  other  creditors,  or  with  iatent  tx)  effect  a 
fraudulent  transfer  of  the  debtor's  property,  is  a  void  suit  or 
proceeding  within  the  meaning  of  a  statute,  declaring  void  a  ^^  suit 
commenced ''  with  intent  to  defraud  creditors."  And  the  in-- 
efiPectual  resort  to  such  judicial  machinery  with  the  collusive  pur- 
pose of  transferring  the  debtor's  property  is  an  attempt  to  mako 
a  fraudulent  transfer  within  the  meaning  of  the  statute.^  That 
an  attachment  is  sued  out  without  just  ground  therefor  is  a  wrong 
against  the  debtor,  but  such  attachment  is  not  vulnerable  to  attack 
on  that  ground  by  ordinary  creditors'  bill  by  other  creditors."  But 
if  a  party  not  a  creditor  makes  an  attachment  which  is  invalid, 
but  which  is  not  objected  to  by  the  debtor,  the  other  creditors  can 
have  relief  in  equity  by  a  bill  to  annul  the  judgment" 

§  16.  Fraudulent  organization  of  corporation. — A  transfer  or 
conveyance  of  property  by  a  debtor,  although  carried  out  by  the 
device  of  a  corporation  organized  with  all  the  forms  and  re- 
quirements of  law,  if  made  with  the  design  of  defrauding  credi-* 
tors,  is  vitiated  by  such  fraud  and  rendered  void,  and  the  property 
transferred  may  be  taken  in  execution  as  that  of  the  debtor." 
Where  a  corporation  is  organized  and  the  property  or  business  of 
a  debtor  is  transferred  to  it  in  exchange  for  stock  and  without 


17.  Alexander  v.  Hemrich,  4  Wash. 
727,  31  Pac.  21. 

18.  Under  Ala.  Code,  §  2156.  But- 
ler V.  Feeder,  130  Ala.  604,  31  So. 
799;  Stem  v.  Butler,  123  Ala.  606, 
26  So.  359,  82  Am.  St.  Rep.  146; 
First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Acme  White 
Lead,  etc.,  Co.,  123  Ala.  344,  26  So. 
354;  Rice  v.  Eiseman,  122  Ala.  343, 
25  So.  214;  Collier  t.  Wertheimer- 
Schwartz  Shoe  Co.,  122  Ala.  320,  25 
So.  191;  Gassenheimer  v.  Kellogg, 
121  Ala.   109,  26  So.  29;   Comer  y. 


Heidelbach,  109  Ala.  220,  19  So. 
719;  Rice  v.  Less,  105  Ala.  298,'  16 
So.  917,  attachments  obtained  by 
relatives  of  an  insolvent;  Oartwright 
V.  Bamberger,  90  Ala.  405,  8  Sp.  264. 
10.  Comer  v.  Heidelbach,  9upra; 
Cartwright  v.  Bamberger,  aupra, 

20.  Meyrovitz  v.  Glaser,  132  Ala. 
103,  31  So.  360. 

21.  Henderson    v.    Thornton,    37 
Miss.  448,  76  Am.  Dee.  70. 

22.  Booth  V.  Bunce,  33  N.  T.  13», 
88  Am.  Dee.  372. 


[ 


Natube  and  Fobm  of  Tbansfbs. 


67 


other  consideration  and  the  business  is  thereafter  carried  on  hj 
it,  or  where  the  members  of  a  corporation  form  a  new  corpoiution 
or  oonsolidate  wi-tb  other  corporations,  to  whom  the  assets  of  the 
fonner  corporation  are  transferred,  and  stock  is  received  therefor 
to  the  amount  of  the  agreed  value  of  such  assets,  for  the  purpose 
of  defeating  existing  creditors,  the  transaction  is  fraudulent  and 
void  in  law  as  to  such  creditors,  and  the  property  so  transferred 
or  the  stock  representing  it  may  be  reached  and  subjected  by 
oreditors  to  the  satisfaction  of  their  claims,**  provided  the  title  has 


23.  y.  T. — ^Booth  V.  Bunoe,  Bupra; 
Third  Nat  Bank  ▼.  Keeffe,  30  Misc. 
Bep.  400,  63  Supp.  1049;  Persee,  etc., 
Paper  Works  v.  WiUett,  24  N.  Y. 
Super.  Ct  131,  19  Abb.  Prac.  416. 

JJ.  8. — ^Hibemia  Ins.  Co.  ▼.  St. 
Louis,  etc.,  Transp.  Co.,  13  Fed.  616. 

Afo.— Hetcalf  v.  Arnold,  110  Ala. 
180,  20  So.  301,  132  Ala.  74,  32  So. 
763,  where  all  the  property  of  the 
judgment  debtors  was  turned  over  to 
a  corporation  for  stock  of  the  corpo- 
ration issued  to  them  and  their 
wives. 

Colo. — Colorado  Trading,  etc.,  Co. 
V.  Acres  Commission  Co.,  18  Colo. 
App.  253,  70  Pac.  954,  a  creditor  de- 
frauded may  proceed  against  the 
property  by  attachment. 

D.  C.T-Clark  v.  Walter  T.  Bradley 
Coal,  etc.,  Co.,  6  App.  Cas.  437. 

Ga. — ^Buckwalter  v.  Whipple,  115 
Ga.  484,  41  S.  E.  1010,  reorganiza- 
tion of  corporation;  Planters',  etc., 
Bk.  V.  Willeo  Cotton  Mills,  60  6a.  168. 

/».— Hinkley  v.  Beed,  182  HI.  440, 
55  N.  E.  337,  where  a  partnership 
made  a  fraudulent  transfer  of  its 
property  to  a  corporation  in  ex- 
change for  stock,  the  subsequent  as- 
signments for  the  benefit  of  ered- 
tors  by  the  partners  of  the  stodc, 
and  by  the  corporation  of  all  its  as- 
sets, were  void. 


lotoa, — Shumaker  v.  Davidson,  116 
Iowa,  569,  87  N.  W.  441. 

Kan, — ^Kellogg  v.  Douglass  County 
Bank,  58  Kan.  43,  48  Pac.  587,  62 
Am.  St.  Bep.  596,  an  attachment  of 
the  property  conveyed  to  the  corpo- 
ration sustained. 

Md, — Chatterton  v.  Mason,  86  Md^ 
236,  37  Atl.  960. 

Mass. — ^Allen  v.  French,  178  Mass. 
539,  60  X.  E.  125. 

Mich. — Plant  v.  Billings-Drew  Co., 
127  Mich.  11,  86  N.  W.  399,  creditors 
cannot  attack  the  corporation  as  gar- 
nishee, since  the  property  in  its  new 
form  of  stock  is  still  subject  to  levy 
and  sale  to  satisfy  the  debt  owing 
the  creditors. 

Minn. — Benton  v.  Minneapolis 
Tailoring,  etc.,  Co.,  73  Minn.  498,  7& 
N.  W.  265. 

N.  J. — ^Mulford  V.  Doremus  (Ch. 
1900),  45  Atl.  688;  Terhune  v.  Skin- 
ner, 45  N.  J.  Eq.  344,  19  Atl.  377; 
Van  Campen  v.  Ingram  (Ch.),  12 
Atl.  537. 

O^to.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  F.  C/ 
Trebein  Co.,  59  Ohio  St.  316,  52  N. 
E.  834. 

Or.— Bennett  v.  Minott,  28  Or.  339, 
39  Pac.  997,  44  Pac.  288. 

Pa. — ^^fontgomery  Web  Oo.  v.  Die^ 
nelt,  133  Pa.  St  585w 


58 


Fkaudulent  Conveyances. 


not  been  acquired  by  a  bona  fide  purchaser^  but  they  cannot  take 
both  the  property  and  the  consideration  therefor.^  The  right  of 
creditors  to  seize  as  their  debtor's  property  transferred  by  him 
under  an  arrangement  void  as  to  them  is  not  affeoted  by  the 
fact  that  the  property  has  been  conveyed  to  a  corporation  organized 
for  the  purpose  of  purchasing  it,  and  continuing  the  debtor's  busi^ 
ness,  especially  'where  it  has  paid  nothing  but  its  own  stock,  which 
had  no  value  aside  from  the  property  acquired.*^  A  corporation 
fraudulently  organized  by  persons  for  their  own  benefit,  and  to 
which  they  fraudulently  transfer  their  property  for  the  purpose 
of  defrauding  their  creditors,  and  whose  stock  is  wholly  owned 
or  controlled  by  them,  cannot  be  regarded  as  an  innocent  pur- 
chaser of  that  property  for  value.^  Such  transactions  are  not, 
however,  per  se  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.  There  must  be  evi- 
dence of  intent  to  defraud."    Under  a  statute  providing  that  a 


Tenn, — Bristol  Bank,  etc.,  Co.  v. 
Jonesboro  Banking  Trust  Co.,  101 
Tenn.  546,  48  S.  W.  228. 

Wis, — Densmore  Commission  Co.  v. 
Shong,  98  Wia.  380,  74  N.  W.  114. 

Can.— RieUe  v.  Beid,  26  Ont.  App. 
54,  applying  Salomon  v.  Salomon,  A. 
C.  22,  66  L.  J.  Ch.  35,  75  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  426,  4  Manson,  89,  45  Wkly. 
Bep.  193. 

24.  Shumaker  v.  Davidson,  116 
Iowa,  669,  87  N.  W.  441 ;  Kellogg  v. 
Douglass  County  Bank,  58  Kan.  43, 
48  Pac.  687,  62  Am.  St.  Bep.  596. 

25.  Pennsylvania  Knitting  Co.  v. 
Bibb  Mfg.  Co.,  21  Pa.  Co.  Ct.  537. 

26.  Clark  v.  Walter  T.  Bradley 
Coal,  etc.,  Co.,  6  App.  D.  C.  437;  and 
other  cases  in  note  23,  9upra, 

27.  N.  Y, — Kessler  v.  Levy,  11 
Miss.  Rep.  275,  32  N.  Y.  Supp.  260, 
where  a  firm  formed  a  corporation 
to  which  they  transferred  all  the 
firm  assets  in  consideration  of  all 
the  stock  except  a  smaU  amount  is- 
sued for  cash  paid  the  company,  and 


offered  the  stock  of  the  company  to 
their  creditors,  the  transfer  was  not 
fraudulent;  Persse,  etc.,  Paper 
Works  Co.  V.  Willett^  «upra. 

U.  8. — In  re  A.  L.  Robertshaw 
Mfg.  Co.,  133  Fed.  556. 

Ala. — ^Henderson  v.  Perryman,  114 
Ala.  647,  22  So.  24. 

Oa. — ^Planters',  etc.,  Bank  ▼.  Wil- 
leo  Cotton  Mills,  60  Ga.  168. 

Ill, — ^Kingman  &  Co.  v.  Mowry, 
182  111.  256,  55  X.  £.  330,  74  Am.  St 
Rep.  169,  where  a  debtor,  after 
notice  to  all  his  creditors  and  with 
the  consent  of  most  of  them  except 
complainant^  in  pursuance  of  a  plan 
therefor  previously  outlined  to  his 
creditors,  formed  a  corporation,  and 
conveyed  to  it  all  his  property,  and 
received  in  consideration  therefor 
shares  of  stock,  which  he  pledged  to 
secure  money  with  which  to  settle 
his  debts,  the  transaction  was  neither 
fraudulent  in  law  nor  in  fact,  so  as 
to  support  a  bill  by  a  judgment  cred- 
itor to  compel  the  application  of  the 


Natuss  and  Form  of  T&ansfeb. 


69 


debtor  may  pay  one  creditor  in  preference  to  another^  a  debton 
has  a  rig^t  to  organize  a  corporation^  transfer  his  property  to  it 
for  stocky  and  transfer  the  stock  to  a  creditor  in  payment  of  the 
debty  so  long  as  such  transfers  are  not  made  with  intent  to  de- 
fraud." 

§  17'.  Waste  or  loss  through  debtor's  negligence. — ^A  credi- 
tor's bill  to  set  aside  a  conveyance  alleged  to  be  fraudulent  cannot 
be  maintained  on  the  ground  of  fraud  on  the  part  of  others  prac- 
ticed on  the  debtor  whereby  he  was  wronged  out  of  his  property, 
or  on  the  ground  that  the  debtor  has  wasted  hb  property  or  other- 


property  so  ooiiTeyed  to  the  satisfac- 
tion of  his  judgment. 

Iowa. — Shmnaker  v.  Davidson,  116 
Iowa,  569.  87  N.  W.  441,  whore  a 
debtor  organised  a  corporation  to 
take,  title  to  land,  the  fact  that 
others  inyested  money  therein,  and 
transferred  property  in  consideration 
of  stock  received,  was  sufficient  to 
show  that  the  scheme  was  not  one  to 
defraud  creditors,  and  the  mere  fact 
that  assignments  of  stock  were  made 
to  such  debtor's  relatives  was  not 
alone  sufficient  to  show  that  the 
transaction  was  fraudulent. 

Pa.— Coaldale  Coal  Co.  v.  State 
Bank,  142  Pa.  St.  288,  21  Atl.  811, 
where  a  solvent  mercantile  firm  trans- 
ferred its  business  and  all  its  prop- 
erty to  a  corporation  of  which  the 
members  of  the  firm  constituted  the 
stockholders,  and  the  partners  after- 
wards pledged  most  of  their  stock  to 
secure  certain  creditors,  the  transac- 
tions were  not  in  fraud  of  the  unse- 
cured creditors;  Lasher  v.  Medical 
Press  Co.,  3  Pa.  Super.  Ct.  671,  40 
Wkly.  Notes  Cas.  19,  organization  of 
corporation  after  confession  of  judg- 
ment by  a  limited  company  and  sale 
of  its  property  thereunder. 

Tenn. — ^Bristol   Bank,   etc.,    Co.   v. 


Jonesboro  Banking  Trust  Co.,  101 
Tenn.  546,  48  8.  W.  228,  the  fact  that 
a  corporation  name  was  almost  iden- 
tical with  a  prior  partnership  name 
was  not  conclusive  of  a  device  to  de- 
fraud partnership  creditors  by  in- 
corporating. 

Tew. — Sayers  ▼.  Texas  Land,  etc., 
Co.,  78  Tex.  244,  14  S.  W.  678,  the 
members  of  a  firm  having  formed  a 
corporation,  and  transferred  to  it  all 
the  property  of  the  firm,  each  receiv- 
ing stock  in  proportion  to  his  inter- 
est, the  transfer  is  not  voluntary  and 
fraudulent  in  law  as  against  the  cred- 
itors of  the  firm. 
• 

Wis, — ^Densmore  CommissioiT  Co.  v. 
Shong,  98  Wis.  380,  74  N.  W.  114,  the 
mere  fact  that  the  debts  of  a  partner- 
ship, where  partners  organized  a  cor- 
poration and  transferred  the  property 
and  business  to  it  for  stock,  were  not 
provided  for  was  not  sufficient  to  im- 
peach the  bona  fides  of  the  transac- 
tion. 

28.  Fisher  v.  Campbell,  101  Fed. 
166,  41  C.  C.  A.  256;  Scripps  v.  Craw- 
ford, 123  Mich.  173,  81  N.  W.  1098; 
Gardner  v.  Haines  (S.  D.),  104  N.  W. 
244;  Troy  v.  Morse,  22  Wash.  280,  60 
Pac  648. 


60 


Jj'eaudulent  Convbyances. 


wise  negligentlj  allowed  it  to  pass  into  the  hands  of  others,  and 
thus  diminished  or  defesFted  his  creditors'  chances  of  securing  pay- 
ment of  their  claims.^ 

§  18.  Payment  of  deot  before  it  is  due. — The  statute  against 
fraudulent  convejances^  agreements^  etc,  does  not  apply  to  the 
case  of  a  payment  of  a  debt  before  it  is  due,  made  by  the  debtor 
to  the  creditor,  in  order  to  prevent  the  creditors  of  the  latter  from 
attaching  the  debt  by  trustee  prooess.^^ 

§  19.  Cancellation  or  release  of  debt  or  claim. — The  cancel- 
lation or  release,  by  a  debtor,  of  a  debt  or  claim,  without  consid- 
eration or  with  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  his  creditors, 
is  a  gift  and  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  contrary  to  the  common 
law,  whereby  the  property  must  have  been  such  as  could  have 
been  taken  on  execution.^^  This  rule  prevails  in  all  jurisdictions 
where  under  the  statute  choses  in  action  are  subject  to  the  claims 
of  creditors.** 

§  20.  Rescission  of  contracts  and  neglect  or  failure  to  take 
conveyance. — If  a  contract  for  the  >ale  of  land  is  entered  into 


29.  Johns  y.  Jordan,  59  Kan.  771, 
51  Pae.  889;  Parker  v.  Roberts,  116 
Mo.  657,  22  S.  W.  914,  conYe3rance 
made  by  debtor  while  under  the  influ- 
ence of  morphine.  See  also  Fraud 
directed  against  debtor,  chap.  IT,  §  26, 
infra* 

30.  Chamberlin  v.  Pillsbury,  35  Vt. 
16. 

31.  Ind, — Johnson  y.  Jones,  79  Ind. 
141,  a  surrender  of  notes  and  mort- 
gage- 

Mas8. — Martin   v.  Root,   17   Mass. 

222,  discharge  of  promissory  note 
given  in  payment  for  certain  property. 
M'88. — Wright  V.  Petrie,  Sm.  &  M. 
Ch.  282,  voluntary  release  of  securi- 
ties by  a  corporntion  to  its  debtor; 
but  where  it  appears  that  such  re- 


lease was  made  on  a  settlement  of 
conflicting  claims,  although  more  is 
allowed  by  the  corporation  than  is 
strictly  just,  it  is  not  a  fraud,  unless 
the  allowance  appears  to  have  been  a 
device  to  injure  others,  or  is  grossly 
extravagant  or  wasteful,  so  as  to 
amount  to  fraud. 

iV.  if  .^Everett  v.  Read,  3  N.  H.  55, 
cancellation  of  note. 

Can, — ^Upper  Canada  Bank  v. 
Shickluna,  10  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  157. 

Eng. — Sibthorp  v.  Moxom,  3  Atk. 
580,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  1134,  1  Ves. 
49,  27  Eng.  Reprint  883,  cancellaBon 
of  debt  by  will. 

See  Rights  or  choses  in  action, 
chap.  IVy  §  7,  infra, 

92.  See  chap.  IV,  §  7,  infrm. 


I 


Natube  and  Form  of  Tbaitsfeb.  61 

and  thereafter  said  oontract  is  rescinded  by  the  parties  either  in 
writing  or  by  parol,  if  the  rescission  of  the  contract  was  prompted 
by  a  motive  to  benefit  the  vendee,  or  injure  his  creditors,  it  would 
be  a  fraud  upon  the  creditors,  and  would  not  affect  them,  and 
they  might  proceed  against  the  land  for  the  satisfaction  of  their 
claims.  Otherwise,  if  it  was  made  to  save  the  vendor."  An 
agreement  by  one  entitled  to  a  conveyance  that  the  grantor  shall 
remain  in  possession  and  shall  not  convey,  in  order  to  cover  the 
land  from  the  grantee's  creditors,  amounts  to  a  conveyance  to  de- 
fraud creditors  under  the  statute  against  fraudulent  conveyances.*^ 
But  where  land  is  conveyed  in  consideration  that  the  grantee  sup- 
port the  grantor  for  life,  a  reconveyance  by  the  grantee  at  the  re* 
quest  of  the  grantor,  the  grantee  having  become  indebted,  a  proper 
allowance  being  made  for  the  support  already  furnished,  is  not 
fraudulent  in  law  as  to  the  grantee's  creditors,  though  the  land  is 
then  conveyed  to  the  wife  of  the  first  grantee  under  a  similar 
agreement.^  It  is  not  a  fraud  on  creditors  for  the  debtor  to  sur- 
render the  contract  for  the  purchase  of  his  homestead  to  the 
vendor,  who  thereupon  leases  the  homestead  to  the  debtor's  wife 
for  the  debtor's  benefit,  though  the  debtor  thereby  intended  to 
defraud  his  creditors.'*  So  a  debtor  may,  without  fraud  as  to  his 
creditors,  surrender  or  transfer  an  oral  bargain  for  the  purchase  of 
an  unexpired  lease  under  which  he  has  not  entered  into  possession, 
since  he  has  no  interest  therein  whiish  can  be  taken  in  execution.'' 
For  a  debtor  to  rescind  the  contract  of  sale  of  personal  property 
and  take  the  property  back  in  settlement  of  the  purdiase  money 
note  is  not  a  fraud  on  another  creditor  of  the  debtor.** 

§  21.  Conducting  business  in  the  name   of  another. — One 

33.  Maloney  v.  Bewley,  10  Heisk.  35.  R.  P.  Gustin  Co.  v.  Arm,  107 
(Tenn.)    642;   Flemiog  v.  Martin,  2      Mich.  231,  65  N.  W.  112. 

Head.  (Tcnn.)  43.  36.  KveUo  v.  Taylor,  6  K  D.  76, 

34.  Pennington  v.  Clifton,  11  Ind.      63  N.  W.  889. 

162,  and  the  creditor  entitled  to  take  3^   ^.j,^^  ^    ^  ^^   p^    ^^ 

the  land  on  execution  may  settle  the 

title  himself  or  it  may  be  settled  hy 

a  purchaser  from  him  at  the  levy  and  38.  Baker  v.  I>rake  (Ala.),  41  So. 

gije.  845,  sale  of  a  horse. 


62 


Fbahdui^ent  Convbyances. 


cannot^  hy  doing  businees  in  the  name  of  anodier^  defraud  his 
creditors.'*  Where  an  insolvent  or  failing  debtor,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  placing  his  property  beyond  the  reach  of  his  creditors, 
conducts  business  in  the  name  of  his  wife,  child,  or  other  third 
person,  but  the  business  is  carried  on  or  managed  by  him  alone 
and  is  in  fact  his  own,  the  transaction  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors, 
4U]d  the  property  used  or  accumulated  in  such  business  and  the 
profits  of  the  business  are  liable  for  and  may  be  subjected  to  his 
debts.^  But  if  a  debtor  carry  on  a  business  in  the  name  and 
upon  the  credit  of  another,  neither  the  property  used  nor  that 
acquired  in  the  business  belongs  to  the  debtor  or  can  be  reached 
by  his  creditors,  and  if  allowed  to  so  carry  on  a  business  for 
his  sole  benefit,  only  the  property  acquired  by  him  in  the  business 
could  be  reached  by  his  creditors,  and  not  the  property  which 
llie  debtor  was  allowed  to  use.^  One  may  allow  the  use  of  his 
name  and  capital  to  another  to  carry  on  a  business,  giving  the 
whole  profits  to  the  latter  for  his  labor  and  attenticm,  without  any 


39.  Fass  T.  Rice,  30  La.  Ann.  1278. 

40.  Ark, — ^Kiekle  v.  Emerson  Mer- 
cantile, ete..  Go.,  13  S.  W.  78. 

III. — Robinson  t.  Brems,  90  111. 
351;  Moran  v.  Lilley,  10  HI.  App. 
103. 

lotoa. — ^Hamill  y.  Angastine,  81 
Iowa,  302,  46  N.  W.  1113;  Hamilton 
V.  Ligbtner,  53  Iowa,  470,  5  N.  W. 
003,  where  accumulated  property  had 
been  conveyed  to  the  wife. 

La.-— Oppenheim  v.  Looris,  9  La. 
Ann.  261,  a  simulated  partnership, 
entered  into  by  a  debtor  to  protect 
his  prc^rty,  will  not  prevent  a  credi- 
tor from  seizing  the  partnership  stock 
to  the  amount  pretended  to  have  been 
contributed. 

V.  F.— Levy  v.  Woodcock,  63  N.  H. 
413. 

y.  J.— National  Bank  of  Metropolis 
V.  Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13,  where  a 


husband,  acting  under  a  power  of  at- 
torney from  his  wife,  who  had  no  sep- 
arate property,  formed  a  copartner- 
ship in  the  name  of  his  wife  with  an- 
other and  conducted  a  hotel  business. 
Pa.— Cadbury  v.  Brown,  5  Phila. 
43,  where  a  failing  debtor  took  his 
children  into  partnership  without 
other  consideration  than  services  to 
be  rendered  by  them  in  the  business, 
the  arrangement  is  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors  by  limiting  their  remedy  by 
execution  sale  to  a  disposal  of  the 
debtor's  interest  in  the  firm,  under 
which  the  purchaser  would  get  noth- 
ing but  a  suit  in  equity  for  an  ac- 
counting. 

TTttf.— Ansorge  v.  Barth,  88  Wis. 
553,  60  N.  W.  1055,  43  Am.  St.  Rep. 
928. 

41.  Smith  V.  Van  Olinda,  48  N.  T. 
169. 


Katubb  and  Fobh  of  Tranbfeb.         68 

« 

injury  to  the  creditors  of  the  latter,  and  such  an  agreement  ia 
not  fraudulent  as  to  the  creditors  of  the  latter.^ 

§  22.  Keeping  mortgage  in  force  after  payment. — ^If  a  mort- 
gage is  in  fact  paid,  but,  instead  of  being  discharged,  is  fraudu- 
lently assigned  with  intent  to  defraud  creditors,  it  is  not  a  valid 
lien,  and  those  who  have  received  a  grant  of  property  from  the 
mortgagor's  assignee  in  bankruptcy,  subject  to  valid  incumbrances, 
are  entitled  to  have  the  mortgage  declared  paid,  and  the  fraudulent 
assignment  adjudged  void.^ 

§  23.  Keeping  judgment  open  after  payment. — ^A  judgment 
will  not  avail  against  creditors  where  the  proofs  show  that  it 
was  fraudulently  kept  open  after  it  had  been  in  fact  paid;  nor 
will  a  sale  by  the  sheriff  under  such  a  judgment  give  a  good  title 
to  a  purchaser  who  was  cognizant  of,  and  a  party  to,  the 
fraud.** 

§  24.  Keepmg  certificate  of  execution  sale  in  force. — Where 
a  judgment  debtor  whose  land  has  been  sold  upon  execution  ad- 
vances money  to  a  third  person  to  purchase  an  assigmnent  of 
the  sheriff's  certificate  of  sale,  and  thus  keep  the  certificate  in  force, 
subsequent  creditors  cannot  object  to  an  assignment  so  procured/^ 

§  25.  Antedated  note. — ^A  note  bearing  interest,  which  the 
payee  antedates  so  as  to  secure  to  himself  money  not  justly  due 
to  him  from  his  insolvent  debtor,  is  within  the  terms  of  the 
statute  against  fraudulent  conveyances.**  But  where  one  has  given 
an  extension,  trusting  to  the  debtor's  representations  of  solvency, 
and,  finds  them  false,  to  take  measures  to  put  himself  in  the  same 
position  as  if  there  had  been  no  otherwise  binding  extension,  as 

42.  Smith  t.  Van  Olinda,  Mipra;         45.  Rankin  v.  Arndt,  44'  Barb.  (N. 
Albert  v.  Lindau,  46  Md.  334.  T.)  251. 

43.  McMasters  t.  CampbeU,  41  46.  McKentiy  ▼.  Gladwin,  10  Gal. 
Mich.  513,  2  N.  W.  836.  227. 

44.  Booth  ▼.  Moret^  1  Brer.  (S.  C.) 
216. 


«4 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


by  obtaining  and  attadiing  on  an  antedated  note,  is  not  oonetruc- 
tive  fraud  against  otheor  creditors/^  Where  a  oonvejance  of  lands 
has  been  made,  and  before  it  can  be  recorded  defendant  attaches 
the  land  to  secure  a  note  signed  by  the  grantor  on  the  day  follow- 
ing the  execution  of  the  conveyance,  but  which  was  antedated  so 
as  to  create  a  present  debt,  such  antedating  was  a  fraud  upon  the 
grantee,  and  he  will  not  be  disturbed  under  the  conveyance  by 
virtue  of  such  attachment^ 


§  26.  Fraud  directed  against  debtor. — ^Fraud  which  is  di- 
rected against  the  debtor,  and  not  against  his  creditorSi  is  not 
within  the  statutes  ss  to  fraudulent  conveyances,  and  does  not 
render  a  transfer  or  conveyance  by  the  debtor  vulnerable  to  attack 
by  creditors.**  The  statutes  confine  their  redress  to  fraud  aimed 
against  creditors,  and  the  fraud  which  will  authorize  a  creditor  to 
impeach  a  transfer  or  conveyance  by  the  debtor  must  be  fraud 
against  the  creditor.^  That  the  execution  of  a  mortgage  or  other 
transfer  of  property  in  favor  of  a  creditor  was  induced  by  fraud, 
or  by  fraud  amounting  to  duress,  will  not  avoid  it  in  favor  of 
other  creditors  of  the  mortgagor  or  transferrer.    The  debtor  only 


47.  Brewster  v.  Bours,  8  Cal.  501. 

48.  Briggs  v,  French,  Fed.  Caa.  No. 
1,871,  2  Sumn.  (U.  6.)  251. 

49.  Ala.— MeyroYitE  v.  Glaser,  132 
Ala.  103,  31  So.  360;  Savage  v.  John- 
son, 125  Ala.  673,  28  So.  547 ;  Heniy 
y.  Murphy,  54  Ala.  246. 

Iowa. — Sprague  y.  Benson,  101 
Iowa,  678,  70  N.  W.  731,  payment  by 
debtor  of  ten  per  cent,  interest  on  a 
valid  debt  to  his  wife  under  an  oral 
agreement  under  which  she  could  only 
enforce  six  per  cent,  under  the  sta- 
tute. 

Kan. — Jqhns  y.  Jordan,  69  Kan. 
771,  61  Pac.  889,  where  the  mort- 
gagee, who  became  the  purchaser,  de- 
ceived the  court  in  the  foreclosure 
suit,  alleging  a  balance  due  him 
when  he  had  taken  possession  of  suf- 


ficient personal  property  to  satisfy 
the  entire  claini. 

JIfo. — Golbem  v.  Robinson,  80  Mo. 
641. 

N.  J. — Garretson  v.  Kane,  27  N.  J. 
L.  208. 

Wyo, — ^Metz  v.  Blackburn,  9  Wyo. 
481,  66  Pac.  867. 

50.  Ind. — ^McAlpine  v.  Sweetzer,  76 
Ind.  78,  a  mere  over-reaching  of  the 
debtor  in  the  litigation  wherein  a 
creditor  obtains  judgment  is  not  a 
fraud  against  other  creditors  which 
will  authorize  them  to  impeach  the 
judgment  obtained.  There  must  be 
collusion. 

Mich, — ^Lewis  v.  Rice,  61  Mich.  97, 
27  N.  W.  867. 

Pa. — ^In  re  Dougherty,  9  Watte  ft 
S.  (Pa.)  189,  42  Am.  Dec.  326. 


Natube  and  Fobsc  of  Transfer. 


65 


can  take  advantage  of  audi  a  wrong.  And  the  intention  on  the 
part  of  the  creditor  in  taking  such  a  mortgage  or  transfer  to  de- 
fraud other  creditors  of  the  debtor  is  not  sufficient  to  avoid  it,  if 
the  mortgagor  or  transferrer  did  not  have  a  like  intent  in  exe- 
cuting the  mortgage  or  transfer.^ 


U.  Parker  ▼.  Roberts,  116  Mo.  657,      ▼.  EUis,  63  Mo.  App.  17;  Eaton  v. 
22  8.  W.  914;  Marion  DiBtilling  Co.      Perry,  29  Mo.  96. 


66 


FSAUDULSNT    CoNVSYANOXB. 


CHAPTER  IIL 

The  Effect  of  Fbaudulbnt  Conveyance. 

Sectkm    1.  The  effect  of  fraudulent  canv^ance  in  general. 

2.  Tranflactions  fraudulent  in  part. 

3.  Fraud  in  one  or  more  of  several  transactiona. 

4.  Effect  of  prior  fraudulent  transaction  on  subsequent  valid  transfer. 

5.  Effect  of  subsequent  fraudulent  transaction  on  prior  valid  transfer. 
0.  Conveyance  must  be  fraudulent  when  made. 

7.  Purging  conveyance  of  fraud  by  matter  ex  post  facto, 

8.  Conveyance  validated  by  assent  or  affirmance  of  crediton. 

9.  Prejudice  to  rights  of  creditors. 
10.  Conflict  of  laws — What  law  governs. 

Se(9tiozi!  1.  The  effect  of  fraudulent  conveyance  in  generiL — 

The  effect  of  a  fraudulent  conveyance  of  property,  under  the 
statutes  of  13  and  27  Elizsibeth  and  under  most  of  the  statutes 
in  the  United  States  which  are  based  on  the  English  statutes,  is 
to  render  the  conveyance,  while  the  fraudulent  grantee  holds  the 
title,  absolutely  void  and  a  nullity,  as  against  existing  and  sub- 
sequent creditors  and  subsequent  hona  fide  purchasers, 
both  in  equity  and  at  law,  and  they  have  the  same 
rights  against  the  property  embraced  in  the  conveyance 
as  thougji  it  had  never  been  made,  and  the  creditor  may 
pursue  his  process  for  satisfaction  as  though  the  title  were  un- 
embarrassed by  the  fraudulent  deed.^    Many  of  the  cases,  however, 


1.  y.  y.— Smith  V.  Reid,  134  N.  Y. 
568;  31  N.  E.  1082;  Bergen  v.  Car- 
man, 79  N.  Y.  146;  Rinchey  v.  Stry- 
ker,  28  N.  Y.  46,  84  Am.  Dec.  324. 
26  How.  Pr.  75,  31  N.  Y.  140. 

U.  8. — ^Thompson  v.  Baker,  141  U. 
S.  648,  12  Sup.  Ct.  80,  35  L.  Ed.  889; 
Beadle  v.  Beadle,  40  Fed.  316,  2  Mc- 
Crary,  586;  Lenox  v.  Notrebe,  15  Fed. 
Gas.  No.  8,246c,  Hempst.  251. 

Ala. — Nelson  v.  Warren,  93  Ala. 
408,  8  So.  413;  Henry  v.  Murphy,  54 
AU.  246;  High  v.  Neims,  14  Ala.  360, 


48  Am.  Dec.  103;  Carville  v.  Stout, 
10  Ala.  796. 

Ark, — ^Norton  v.  McNutt,  55  Ark. 
59,  17  S.  W.  362;  Hershy  v.  Latham, 
42  Ark.  305. 

Oal, — ^Nixon  v.  Goodwin  (App. 
1906),  85  Pac.  169;  Mason  v.  Vestal, 
88  Gal.  396,  26  Pac.  213,  22  Am.  St. 
Rep.  310;  Judson  v.  Lyford,  84  CaU 
505,  24  Pac.  286. 

Conn, — ^Price  v.  Heubler,  68  Conn. 
374,  28  Atl.  524;  Owen  v.  Dixon,  17 
Conn.  492;   Starr  v.  Tracy,  2  Root. 


Th*  Effect  of  Fraudulent  Conveyance, 


67 


bold  that  a  conveyance  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  is  not  absolutelj 
void,  but  is  voidable  only,  and  may  be  affirmed  or  avoided  by  them 


52S;  Pniden  v.  Leavensworth,  2  Rooty 
129. 

D.  C — ^Hayes  v.  Johnaon,  6  D.  C. 
174. 

6a. — Qormerlj  v.  Chapman,  51  Ga. 
421;  Feagan  ▼.  Cureion,  19  Ga.  404. 

/Z2.— Willard  v.  Masterson,  160  lU. 
443,  43  N.  E.  771 ;  McKinney  v.  Farm- 
en'  Nat.  Bank,  104  111.  180 ;  Gould  ▼. 
Steinburg,  84  111.  170;  Ward  v.  End- 
era,  29  111.  519;  Getder  ▼.  Saroni,  18 
HI.  511. 

Ind, — Steyena  v.  Worka,  81  Ind. 
445. 

iowa. — Brainard  v.  Van  Knran,  22 
Iowa,  261. 

Ky.—Scott  y.  Scott,  85  Ky.  385,  3 
8.  W.  598,  5  S.  W.  423,  9  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  363;  Worland  v.  Outten,  3  Dana, 
477;  Snapp  v.  Orr,  4  Ky,  L.  Rep. 
355. 

La. — ^Vickera  y.  Block,  31  La.  Ann. 
672;  Mora  y.  Ayery,  212  La.  Ann. 
417;  Southern  Bank  y.  Wood,  14  La. 
Ann.  554,  74  Am.  Dec.  446;  Ems- 
wiler  y.  Burham,  6  La.  Ann.  710; 
Marwell  y.  Mallard,  5  La.  Ann.  702; 
Hughea  y.  Winfrey,  5  La.  Ann.  668; 
Meeker  y.  Haya,  18  La.  19;  Price  y. 
Bradford,  4  La.  35;  Kimble  y.  Kim- 
ble, 1  Mart.  N.  S.  633. 

Me. — ^Wyman  y.  Pox,  59  Me.  100; 
Brown  y.  Snell,  46  Me.  490;  Froat  y. 
Goddard,  25  Me.  414. 

Ifd. — Cooke  y.  Cooke,  43  Md.  522; 

Spindler  y.  Atkinaon,  3  Md.  409,  56 
Am.  Dee.  755. 

Mass. — Sherman     y.     Dayia,     137 

Maaa.  132;  Edwarda  y.  Mitchell,  1 
Gray,  241. 

Mieh. — ^Michigan  Truat  Co.  y. 
Chapin,  106  Mich.  384,  64  N.  W.  334, 
58  Am.  St.  Rep.  490;  Pierce  y.  Hill, 


35  Mich.  194,  24  Am.  Rep.  541;  Traak 
▼.  Green,  9  Mich.  358. 

Minn. — Jackaon  y.  Holbrook,  36 
Minn.  494,  32  N.  W.  852,  1  Am.  St. 
Rep.  683;  Campbell  y.  Jonea,  25  Minn. 
155. 

Miss. — ^Thomaaon  y.  Neeley,  50 
Miaa.  310. 

JIfo. — Woodard  y.  Maatin,  106  Mo. 
324,  17  8.  W.  308;  Ryland  y.  Calliaon, 
64  Mo.  513;  Potter  y.  Steyena,  40 
Mo.  229;  Kinealy  y.  Macklln,  2  Mo. 
App.  241. 

V,  J. — ^Mulford  y.  Peteraon,  35  K. 
J.  L.  127. 

V,  C— Flynn  y.  Williama,  29  N.  C. 
32;  Burgin  y.  Burgin,  23  N.  C.  160; 
Henderaon  y.  Hoke,  21  N.  C.  119; 
Hoke  y.  Henderaon,  14  N.  C.  12; 
Weat  V.  Dubberly,  4  N.  C.  478. 

Ohio. — Fowler  y.  Trebein,  16  Ohio 
St.  493,  91  Am.  Dec.  95. 

Pa. — Janney  y.  Howard,  150  Pa. 
St.  339,  24  Atl.  740;  Stewart  y. 
Coder,  11  Pa.  St.  90;  Haya  y.  Heidd- 
berg,  9  Pa.  St.  203;  Kimmel  y.  Mc- 
Right,  2  Pa.  St.  38;  McKee  y.  Gil- 
christ, 3  Watto,  230;  Patrick  y. 
Smith,  2  Pa.  Super.  Ct  113. 

8.  C— Paria  y.  Du  Pre,  17  S.  C. 
282;  Jonea  y.  Crawford,  1  McMuU. 
373;  Lowry  y.  Pinaon,  2  Bailey,  324, 
23  Am.  Dec.  140;  Abrahama  y.  Cole, 
5  Rich.  Eq.  335. 

Tenfi.— Jaoobl  v.  Schloaa,  7  Coldw. 
385. 

Te*.— Lynn  y.  Le  Gierae,  48  Tex. 
138. 

Fa.— Wilaon  y.  Buchanan,  7  Gratt 
334. 

Bng.-^Twyn^B  Caae,  3  Coke,  80a, 
1  Smith  Lead.  Om.  L 
See  also  Remediea,  chap.  XV,  m 


68 


Fraudulent  CoNVfiYANCJis. 


as  they  see  fit'  A  conveyance  made  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud 
creditors  is  only  voidable,  it  is  held,  so  far  as  to  enable  creditors 
who  are  prejudiced  by  it  to  enforce  their  demands  against  the 
grantor,'  and  will  only  be  regarded  as  invalid  at  the  instance  of 
creditors  proceeding  in  the  mode  prescribed  by  law  to  subject 
the  property  involved  to  their  debts.*  When  a  conveyance  is  said 
to  be  void  against  creditors  the  reference  is  to  such  parties  when 
clothed  with  their  judgments  and  executions,,  or  such  other  titles 
as  the  law  has  provided  for  the  collection  of  debta.^  A  fraudulent 
transfer  of  property,  if  executed,  passes  the  title,  and  the  trans- 
feree has  a  good  title  until  the  same  is  impeached  by  a  creditor 
in  an  action  brought  for  that  purpose.*  The  judgment  creditor 
may,  but  he  is  not  bound  to,  file  a  creditors'  bill  to  set  aside  the 
conveyance,^  or  he  may  sell  the  land  under  execution  upon  his 
judgment,  and  the  purchaser  may  impeach  the  conveyance  in  an 
action  at  law  to  recover  possession,  or  if  he  gain  possession  defend 


2.  Ark. — ^Doster  y.  National  Bank, 
67  Ark.  325,  56  S.  W.  137,  77  Am. 
St.  Rep.  116,  48  L.  R.  A.  339. 

(?a.— Moore  y.  Mobley,  123  Ga.  424, 
51  S.  £.  351. 

Mass. — Oriental  Bank  v.  Haskinsb 
44  Mass.  332,  37  Am.  Dec.  140. 

Minn. — ^Hathaway  y.  Brown,  22 
Minn.  214. 

N.  K.— Hill  V.  Pine  River  Bank,  45 
N.  H.  300,  it  is  good  until  avoided 
by  creditors;  they  cannot  ignore  it. 

y.  C— Boyd  y.  Turpin,  94  N.  C. 
137,  56  Am.  Rep.  597,  though  void 
as  to  a  creditor  who  is  pursuing 
legal  process  to  reach  the  property, 
it  is  yalid  as  against  inactive  cred- 
itors when  collaterally  drtiwn  in 
question. 

Ofcto.— Brown  y.  Webb,  20  Ohio, 
389,  3  Ohio  St.  246. 

Pa.— Appeal  of  Byrod,  31  Pa.  St. 
241. 

8,  0.— Kid  V.  Mitchell,  1  Nott  & 
M  334,  9  Am.  Dec.  702. 


Wash.  —  Preston  -  Parton  Milling 
Co.  y.  Horton,  22  Wash.  236,  60  Pac. 
412,  79  Am.  St.  Rep.  928. 

3.  Collinson  y.  Jackson,  14  Fed. 
305,  8  Sawy.  357. 

4.  In  re  Estes,  5  Fed.  60,  it  is 
only  yoidable  at  the  election  of  the 
creditor;  Parrott  y.  Crawford 
(Ind.  T.  1904),  82  S.  W.  688; 
Webb  y.  Brown,  3  Ohio  St.  246; 
Rutherford  y.  Carr  (Tex.  Ciy.  App. 
1905),  84  S.  W.  659;  French  Lum- 
bering Co.  V.  Theriault,  107  Wis. 
627,  83  N.  W.  927,  81  Am.  St.  Rep. 
866,  51  L.  R.  A.  910. 

6.  Van  Heusen  y.  Raddiff,  17  N. 
T.  580,  72  Am.  Dec.  480. 

6.  Gibson  y.  National  Park  Bank, 
98  N.  Y.  97;  Harding  y.  Elliott,  12 
Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)  521,  33  K.  Y. 
Supp.   1095. 

7.  Smith  y.  Reid,  134  N.  Y.  568, 
31  N.  E.  1082;  Bergen  y.  Oarman,  79 
N.  Y.  146;  Erickson  y.  Quinn,  15 
Abb.  Pr.  N.  8.   (N.  Y.)    168. 


Thjb  Effect  of  Fhaudulent  CoxvEYAjfCB. 


69 


the  title  thus  acquired  against  the  fraudulent  grantee  or  those 
claiming  under  him.^  If  the  creditor  condones  the  fraud  and 
takes  no  steps  to  avoid  the  convejance,  it  stands  forever  as  a 
divestiture  of  the  title  of  the  debtor.^  But  a  transfer  of  prop- 
erty made  to  defraud  creditors,  although  thus  void  or  voidable  as 
to  creditors  and  purchasers,  is  good  inter  partes  and  valid  and 
binding  as  between  the  parties  and  their  heirs  and  representa- 
tives, and  the  fraudulent  grantee  may  convey  a  good  title  to  a 
b(ma  fide  purchaser.^^    A  conveyance  fraudulent  as  to  one  creditor 


8.  Smith  V.  Reid,  supra;  "Bergen  v. 
Carman,  supra;  Chautauqua  Go. 
Bank  v.  Risley,  19  N.  V.  369,  76  Am. 
Dec.  347. 

9.  Parrott  v.  Crawford  (Ind.  T. 
1904),  S2  S.  W.  6S8.  See  Purging 
conveTanoe  by  matter  eco  post  facto, 
chap.  Ill,  §  7,  infra, 

10.  V.  T. — Smith  v.  Reid,  supra; 
Moore  v.  Livingston,  14  How.  IPr.  1; 
Jackson  v.  Cadwell,  1  Cow.  622;  Os- 
borne y.  Moss,  7  Johns.  161,  5  Am. 
Dec.  252. 

U.  8, — ^Lenox  v.  Notrebc,  16  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  8,246c,  Hempst.  251. 

Ala. — Nelson  v.  Warren^  93  Ala. 
408,  8  So.  413. 

Ark. — ^Norton  v.  McNutt^  66  Ark. 
59,  17  8.  W.  362;  King  v.  Citij,  34 
Ark.  291. 

Cal.— Brown  v.  Cline,  109  Cal.  156, 
41  Pac.  862. 

Conn. — Bouton  v.  Beers,  78  Conn. 
414,  62  Atl.  619;  Chapin  v.  Pease,  10 
Oonn.  69,  25  Am.  Dec.  56. 

Oa. — Fouche  v.  Brower,  74  Ga. 
251;  Anderson  v.  Brown,  72  Ga.  713. 

lU. — ^Harmon  v.  Harmon^  63  111. 
512. 

Ind. — ^Henry  t.  Stevens,  108  Ind. 
281,  9  N.  E.  356;  Anderson  ▼.  Etter, 
102  Ind.  115,  26  N.  E.  218;  Etter  t. 
Anderson,  84  Ind.  333. 

lowa. — ^Mellen  v.  Ames,  39  Iowa, 
283. 


iSTy.— Jones  ▼.  Hill,  9  Bush.  692; 
Anderson  v.  Bradford,  5  J.  J.  Marsh, 
69. 

La. — Keane  v.  Goldsmith,  14  I^. 
Ann.  349. 

If «.— Hatch  V.  Bates,  54  Me.  136; 
Thompson  v.  Moore,  36  Me.  47; 
Woodman  v.  Bodfish,  25  Me.  317. 

Ifd.— Atkinson  v.  Phillips,  1  Md. 
Ch.  507. 

Mass. — Stiliings  v.  Turner,  153 
Mass.  534,  27  N.  E.  671;  Edwards  v. 
Mitchell,  1  Gray,  239;  Perry  v.  Hay- 
ward,  12  Cush.  344. 

aficfc.— Wheeler  v.  Wallace.  53 
Mich.  364,   19  N.   W.  33. 

Minn. — Piper  v.  Johnston,  12 
Minn.  60;  Lemay  v.  Bibeau,  2  Minn. 
291. 

Miss. — Whitney  v.  Freeland,  26 
Minn.  481. 

Mo, — McLaughlin  v.  McLaughlin, 
16  Mo.  242. 

^eft.— Baldwin  v.  Burt,  43  Neb. 
245,  61  N.  W.  601. 

3^.  J.^Evans  v.  Herring,  27  N.  J. 
L.  243. 

N.  C. — ^Powell  V.  Inman,  53  N.  C. 
436,  82  Am.  Dec.  426. 

Ohio. — Douglass  v.  Dunlap,  10 
Ohio,  162. 

Pa. — Janney  v.  Howard,  160  Pa. 
St.  339,  24  Atl.  740;  Bonested  y. 
Sullivan,  104  Pa.  St.  9. 


70 


Fraudulent  Convsyangeb. 


is  void  as  to  all  creditors."  Where  a  debtor  pays  the  purchase  money 
of  land  and  takes  the  conveyance  to  a  third  person^  the  rule  that 
a  fraudulent  conveyance  is  absolutely  void  and  that  tiie  property 
can  be  seized  under  execution  against  the  grantor  is  generally 
held  not  to  apply,  and  such  property  is  not  the  subject  of  levy 
and  sale  under  execution  by  his  creditors,  even  though  the  trans- 
action was  fraudulent  and  intended  to  protect  the  land  from  the 
claims  of  creditors,  since  the  statute  of  Elizabeth  and  similar 
statutes  in  the  United  States  apply  only  to  conveyances  by  the 
debtor.^'  But,  under  the  statutes  of  some  of  the  states,  the  rule 
is  held  to  apply  even  in  such  cases  and  such  property  may  be  seiJsed 
and  sold  in  execution  on  the  creditors'  judgments.^' 


R,  /.—Hudson  v.  White,  17  R.  I. 
619,  23  Atl.  67. 

8.  O. — Swanzy  v.  Hunt,  2  Nott  & 
M.  211;  Kid  v.  Mitchell,  1  Nott  &  M. 
334,  9  Am.  Dec.  702. 

Tenn. — Bayless  t.  Elcan,  1  Coldw. 
06;  Williams  v.  Lowe,  4  Humph.  62. 

Tew.—'Wilaon  v.  Trawick,  10  Tex. 
428;  Texarkana  Nat.  Bank  v.  Hall 
(Civ.  App.  1896),  30  S.  W.  73. 

Wis, — Norton  v.  Kearney,  10  Wis. 
443;  Schettler  v.  Brunette,  7  Wis. 
197.  See  Rights  and  liabilities  of 
parties,  chap.  XIV,  infra. 

11.  Hoke  y.  Henderson,  14  N.  C. 
12.  See  also  Intent  to  defraud  one 
creditor,  chap.  XIII,  §  2,  infra.  But 
see  Blair  v.  Brown,  116  N.  C.  631,  21 
S.  E.  434,  a  deed  of  assignment  is 
not  necessarily  fraudulent  and  void 
as  to  all  the  creditors  of  the  as^ 
signor  because  fraudulent  as  to  one 
of  them;  Solomon  v.  Wright  (Tex. 
Civ.  App.),  28  S.  W.  414,  fraud  in 
part  of  the  debts  secured  by  a  deed 
of  trust,  participated  in  by  the  trus^ 
tee  and  the  grantor,  does  not  invali- 
date the  instrument  as  to  an  honest 
and  valid  debt  of  an  innocent 
bolder. 


12.  v.  r. — Brewster  r.  Power,  10 
Paige,  562. 

Mass, — Hamilton  v.  Cone,  09  Ifaas. 
478;  Howe  v.  Bishop,  44  Mass.  26. 

Mioh, — ^Maynard  v.  Hoskins,  9 
Mich.  485;  Trask  v.  Greene,  9  Mich. 
358. 

Miss. — Ferguson  v.  Bobo,  54  Miss. 
121;  Carlisle  v.  Tindkll,  49  Mies. 
229. 

N.  J. — ^Haggerty  v.  Nixon,  26  N.  J. 
Eq.  42. 

N.  C— Everett  v.  Raby,  104  N.  C. 
479,  10  S.  E.  526,  17  Am.  St.  Rep. 
685;  Gentry  v.  Harper,  55  N.  C. 
177;  Gowing  v.  Rich,  23  N.  C.  553. 

8,  C — Bauskett  v.  Holsonback,  2 
Rich.  L.  624.    . 

Tenn. — Smith  v.  Hioson,  51  Tenn. 
260. 

F#.— Buck  V.  Gilson,  37  Vt.  663. 

13.  /nA— Tevis  v.  Doe,  3  Ind.  129. 
Mass. — Clark    v.    Chamberlain,    95 

Mass.  257. 

Mo. — ^Dunnica  v.  Coy,  28  Mo.  525, 
76  Am.  Dec.  133;  Herrington  v.  Her^ 
rington,  27  Mo.  660;  Dunnica  v. 
Coy,  24  Mo.  167,  69  Am.  Dec.  420; 
Eddy  V.  Baldwin,  23  Mo.  688;  Ran- 
kin V.  Harper,  23  Mo.  579. 


Thb  Effect  of  Fbauduubnt  Conveyance. 


71 


§  2.  Transactions  fraudulent  in  part. — ^Where  a  conveyance 
is  actually  fraudulent  in  part  and  the  fraud  is  participated  in  or 
knoi?ni  to  the  grantee,  it  is  fraudulent  in  toto  and  void  as  to  the 
whole  of  the  property  conveyed  by  it,  as  to  the  creditors  of  the 
party  conveying,  and  cannot  stand  to  any  extent  as  security  or 
indemnity.^^     But  where  two  distinct  parcels  of  land  are  con* 


Pa.—- Appeal  of  Winch,  61  Pa.  8t. 
424. 

14.  V,  y.—Baldwin  v.  Short,  125 
N.  Y.  663,  26  N.  E.  928;  Billings  v. 
Kussell,  101  N.  Y.  226,  4  N.  E.  631 ; 
Dewey  v.  Moycr,  72  N.  Y.  70;  Spies 
V.  Boyd,  1  E.  D,  Smith,  446;  John- 
son V.  Phillips,  2  N.  Y.  Supp.  432, 
transfers  and  mortgages  given  partly 
for  valid  debts,  but  including  ficti- 
tious liabilities,  are  invalid  tn  ioio 
and  cannot  stand  as  security  even  for 
the  actual  indebtedness;  Marks  v 
Reynolds,  12  Abb.  Pr.  403;  Austin  v 
Bell,  20  Johns.  442,  11  Am.  Dec.  297 
Hyslop  V.  Clarke,  14  Johns.  468 
Goodrich  v.  Downs,  6  Hill,  438 
Wakeman  v.  Grover,  4  Paige,  23; 
Mackie  v.  Cairns,  6  Cow.  647,  16 
Am.  Dec  477,  an  assignment  for  the 
benefit  of  creditors,  bad  in  part  as 
against  the  provision  of  a  statute,  is 
void  i»  ioto;  Boyd  v.  Dunlap,  1 
Johns.  Ch.  478. 

Ala. — ^Tatum  v.  Hunter,  14  Ala. 
557 ;  Tickner  v.  Wiswall,  9  Ala.  306. 
/».— Fabian  v.  Traeger,  117  111. 
App.  176,  a/fd  215  HI.  220,  74  N.  E. 
131,  a  purchase  which  is  colorable 
and  fraudulent  in  part  is,  as  to  other 
creditors  of  the  seller,  void  as  to  the 
whole  of  the  property  conveyed; 
Biggins  V.  Lambert,  213  HI.  626,  73 
N.  E.  371,  104  Am.  St.  Rep.  238. 
conveyance  of  land  fraudulently  con- 
veyed at  a  Slim  much  less  than  its 
value  set  amde  in  its  entirety  and  not 
sustained  as  to  a  porticm  equal  to  the 


actual  value  paid;  Oakford  v.  Dun- 
lap,  63  111.  App.  498,  where  part  of 
property  was  taken  in  payment  of 
debts  and  part  for  caslk  or  valuable 
consideration  paid  or  agreed  to  be 
paid. 

/nd. — ^Reagan  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
167  lud.  623,  61  N.  E.  676,  62  N.  E. 
701,  where  an  insolvent  corporation 
executed  a  mortgage  in  favor  of  cred- 
itors who  accepted  the  same,  and 
the  mortgage  was  invalid  as  to  pref- 
erences therein  granted  to  stock- 
holders over  unsecured  creditors,  the 
mortgage  will  be  deemed  inseverable 
and  invalid  as  a  whole. 

Kan, — ^Miami  County  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Barkalow,  63  Kan.  68,  36  Pac.  796, 
the  inclusion  in  a  mortgage  from  a 
failing  firm  of  a  debt  due  from  one 
not  a  member  of  the  firm  vitiates 
the  mortgage  as  to  creditors  of  the 
firm;  Wallach  v.  Wylie,  28  Kan.  138. 
chattel  mortgage  to  secure  a  sum 
which  was  partly  &Ofia  fide  indebted- 
ness and  partly  fraudulent  is  void 
tn  toto;  Harley  v.  Adsit,  3  Kan.  App. 
122,  42  Pac.  836. 

Jfd.—Albert  v.  Wynn,  7  Gill,  446, 
although  no  fraud  is  intended  a  con- 
veyance good  in  part  and  in  part 
void  as  contrary  to  statute  is  void 
in  ioio, 

Ua9», — Lynde  v.  McGregor,  96 
Mass.  172,  90  Am.  Dee.  188. 

Jficfc.— Clarke  v.  Lee,  78  Midi. 
221,  44  N.  W.  260;  Pierson  v.  Man- 


72 


Fbaudulbnt  Conveyances. 


veyed,  the  conveyance  of  one  being  bona  fide  and  that  of  the  other 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  it  may  be  avoided  by  creditors  as  to 
the  latter,  and  be  valid  as  to  the  former.^^  And  where  a  con- 
veyance is  only  constructively  fraudulent  in  part  it  is  not  thereby 
necessarily  rendered  invalid,  in  the  absence  of  actual  fraud.^*     As 


ning,  2  Mich.  446;  Kirby  v.  Inger- 
soU,  Harr.  172. 

Miss. — Burke  v.  Murphy,  27  Miss. 
167. 

lfo.--Boland  v.  Ross,  120  Mo.  208, 
25  S.  W.  524,  where  part  of  indebted- 
ness for  which  a  mortgage  is  given  is 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  it  will 
avoid  the  entire  mortgage;  Hanna  v. 
Finley,  33  Mo.  App.  646,  where  a 
creditor  took  more  of  a  debtor's  as- 
sets than  were  reasonably  necessary 
to  pay  his  claim,  agreeing  to  cancel 
the  surplus  for  a  time  and  then  ac- 
count for  it,  the  entire  transaction 
was  void;  State  v.  Excelsior  Distil- 
ling Co.,  20  Mo.  App.  21 ;  McNichols 
V.  Riohter,  13  Mo.  App.  515. 

ye6.---Switz  V.  Bruce,  16  Neb.  463, 
20  N.  W.  639. 

y.  C. — Johnson  v.  Murchison,  60 
N.  C.  286;  Stove  v.  MarshaU,  52  N. 
C.  300;  Hafner  v.  Irwin,  23  N.  C. 
400,  where  part  of  the  consideration 
is  feigned  or  fraudulent,  the  whole 
deed  is  void. 

Pa. — Gates  v.  Johnston,  3  Pa.  St. 
52 ;  McClurg  v.  Lecky,  3  Penr.  &  W. 
83,  23  Am.  Dec.  64,  assignment  for 
benefit  of  creditors;  Thomas  v. 
Jenks,  5  Rawle,  221,  assignment  of 
partnership  property,  containing  pro- 
vision for  release  of  partners  from 
individual  indebtedness,  void  where 
partners  had  separate  property; 
Whiting  V.  Johnson,  11  Serg.  &  R. 
328,  14  Am.  Dec.  633,  bond  taken 
fraudulently  for  more  than  real 
debt. 

Tenn. — Simpson     v.     Mitchell,     8 


Yerg.  417;  Sommerville  v.  Horton,  4 
Yerg.  541,  26  Am.  Dec  242;  Young 
V.  Pate,  4  Yerg.  164;  Darwin  v. 
Handley,  3  Yerg.   502. 

Tex. — Brasher  v.  Jamison,  75  Tex. 
139,  12  S.  W.  809,  part  of  considera- 
tion for  deed  unreal  or  fictitious; 
Lambeth  v.  McClinton,  65  Tex.  108, 
where  the  transaction  which  results 
in  the  transfer  of  goods  is  single  and 
indivisible,  it  must  stand  or  fall  as  a 
whole. 

Va. — Garland  v.  Rives,  4  Rand. 
282,  15  Am.  Dec.  756. 

W.  Fa.— Kanawha  Valley  Bank  v. 
Wilson,  25  W.  Va.  242;  Livesay  v. 
Beard,  22  W.  Va.  585. 

Can. — Cameron  v.  Perrin.  14  On(. 
App.  565. 

Fravdnlent  irndsmeat* — A  judg- 
ment fraudulent  in  part  must  stand 
or  fall  as  a  whole  and  is  void,  not  to 
the  extent  of  the  fraud,  but  abso- 
lutely. Simons  v.  Goldbach,  56  Hun 
(N.  Y.)  204,  9  N.  Y.  Supp.  359; 
Marks  v.  Reynolds,  12  Abb.  Pr.  (N. 
Y.)  403;  Hardt.  v.  Heidweyer,  152 
U.  S.  547,  14  Sup.  Ct.  671,  38  L.  Ed. 
548 ;  Taaffe  v.  Josephson,  7  Clal.  352 : 
Gates  V.  Johnston,  3  Pa.  St.  52. 

An  ezecvtioa  aale,  partly  color- 
able, is  void.  Floyd  v.  Goodwin,  8 
Yerg.  (Tenn.)  484,  29  Am.  Dec.  130. 
See  Execution  and  other  judicial 
sales,  chap.  II,  §  14,  supra. 

15.  Chase  v.  Walker,  26  Me.  555. 

16.  Rogers  v.  Munnerlyn,  36  Fla. 
591,  18  So.  669.  a  mortgage  covering 
merchandise  and  real  estate,  which  i.s 
constructively  void  as  to  the  goods. 


Tub  £ff2ct  of  Filiuduuent  Conveyance. 


a  general  rule  where  a  part  of  the  consideration  for  a  conveyance 
or  transfer  is  fictitious  or  fraudulent  the  conveyance  is  void  in 
toioy  thou^  the  rest  of  the  consideration  be  valid/^  But  a  con^ 
veyance  or  transfer  of  property  to  two  or  more  creditors  or  pur- 
diasers  may  be  valid  as  to  one  and  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the 
other,  pailicularly  where  one  creditor  or  purchaser  participated 
in  or  kneiw  of  the  fraudulent  purpose  and  the  other  was  innocent 
thereof;  the  fact  that  the  transfer  was  as  to  one  of  them  in  fraud 
of  creditors  will  not  necessarily  render  it  fraudulent  as  to  the 
other." 


because  of  the  mortgagee's  permission 
to  sell  them  in  the  usual  course  of 
trade  without  accounting  for  the 
proceeds,  is  not  thereby  rendered  in- 
valid as  to  the  real  estate. 

See  Reimbursement,  indemnity 
and  subrogation,  consideration  and 
expenditures,  chap.  XIV,  §§  40,  41, 

taffo. 

17.  Marks  v.  Reynolds,  12  Abb. 
Prac.  (N.  Y.)  403,  but  a  confession 
of  judgment  may  be  sustained  as  to 
some  of  the  amounts  acknowledged, 
though  held  void  as  to  others  for 
indefiniteness;  Tatura  v.  Hunter,  14 
Ala.  557;  Gates  v.  Johnston,  3  Pa.  St. 
52,  a  judgment  fraudulent  in  part  is 
void  in  the  whole  as  to  creditors.  See 
Partial  invalidity  or  illegality  of  con- 
sideration, chap.  VIII,  S  30,  infra, 

18.  A.  r.— Conunercial  Bank  v. 
Sherwood,  162  N.  Y.  310,  56  N.  E. 
834,  a  transfer  of  property  by  an  in- 
solvent to  two  of  his  creditors,  in 
payment  of  a  distinct  indebtedness 
owing  to  each,  gives  each  of  them  an 
undivided  one-half  interest  in  the 
property,  and  may  be  sustained  as  to 
one  of  them,  although  the  transfer  as 
to  the  other  is  invalid  as  in  fraud  of 
creditors. 

V.  flf.— Tefft  V.  Stern,  73  Fed.  691, 
21  C.  C.  A.  67,  certain  creditors  se- 


cured by  a  mortgage,  having  knowl- 
edge of  a  fraudulent  purpose,  and 
others  not  having  such  knowledge; 
Crawford  v.  Neal,  144  U.  S.  586,  12 
Sup.  Ct.  769,  36  L.  Ed.  662,  separate 
conveyances  of  different  property  for 
separate  considerations. 

Ala, — Robert  Graves  Co.  v.  McDade, 
108  Ala.  420,  19  So.  86,  where  but 
one  knew  of  the  fraud. 

Mass. — Prince  v.  Shepard,  26  Mass. 
176,  where  one  of  the  assignees  was 
innocent  of  the  fraud. 

Mich. — Kock  V.  Bostwick,  113 
Mich.  302,  71  N.  W.  473,  the  fraudu- 
lent character  of  a  chattel  mortgage 
given  by  a  corporation  as  against  it-^ 
creditors  does  not  invalidate  a  para- 
mount mortgage  on  the  same  prop- 
erty to  a  bona  fide  creditor,  although 
the  two  mortgages  were  executed  on 
the  same  day,  and  were  authorized  at 
the  same  meeting  of  the  board  of  di- 
rectors. 

V.  J.— Parrel  v.  Colwell,  30  N.  J. 
L.  123,  where  one  of  the  partners 
who  made  the  purchase  did  so  in 
fraud  of  creditors  and  the  other  was 
a  "bona  fide  vendee. 

Tenn. — ^Troustine  v.  Lask,  4  Baxt. 
162,  trust  deed  may  be  valid  as  to 
some  of  its  beneficiaries,  and  void  ti^ 


74 


Tbaudxtlest  Cofystahcsb. 


§  3.  Fraud  in  one  or  more  of  several  transactioos. — Wliere 
several  ecmvejanoeB  of  property  are  made  by  a  debtor  to  one 
grantee  at  or  about  the  same  time  or  at  different  times,  the  fact 
that  one  of  them  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors,  or  is 
otherwise  invalid,  will  not  render  the  others  void,  if  they  axe 
separate  and  distinct  transactions;"  but,  if  the  several  acts  form 


to  others  who  concur  in  a  fraadalent 
puipose  of  the  grantor. 

Tew. — Sonnentheil  v.  Texas  Guar- 
anty, etc.,  Co.,  10  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  274, 
30  8.  W.  945;  Willis  ft  Bro.  ▼.  Mur- 
phy (Ciy.  App.),  28  S.  W.  362;  Kraus 
V.  Haas,  6  Tex.  Civ.  App.  666,  25  8. 
W.  1025,  trust  deeds  held  Toid  as  to 
beneficiaries  who  participated  in  the 
fraud  and  valid  as  to  others  who  had 
no  knowledge  thereof. 

W.  Fo.— Livesay  v.  Beard,  22  W. 
Va.  586,  a  fraudulent  deed  to  several 
grantees  jointly  will  stand  as  secu- 
rity for  those  who  had  no  knowledge 
of  the  fraud. 

Centra.  —  Minn.  —  Thompson  ▼. 
Johnson,  65  Minn.  515,  57  N.  W.  223, 
where  a  preference  is  given  by  trans- 
ferring property  to  a  creditor,  and  to 
others  who  pay  part  of  the  agreed 
price  in  mon^,  the  transfer  will  be 
invalid  as  to  the  latter  if  they  knew 
its  purpose  was  to  give  a  preference 
to  the  creditor. 

19.  N.  r.— Maass  v.  Palk,  146  N. 
Y.  34,  40  N.  E.  504;  Friedman  v. 
Rose,  83  Hun,  642,  31  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1040;  Kinghom  v.  Wright,  45  N.  Y. 
Super.  Ct.  615;  Nicholson  v.  Leavitt, 
4  Sandf.  252;  Wise  v.  Rider,  34  K. 
Y.  Rupp.  782;  Books  v.  Wilson,  53 
Hun.  173,  6  N.  Y.  Supp.  116,  where 
the  grantee  in  a  conveyance  made  to 
defraud  the  grantor's  creditors,  at 
the  request  of  the  grantor,  mortgages 
the  property  conveyed  to  secure  a 
debt  owing    by    the    grantor  to  the 


mortgagee,  the  latter  has  the  same 
rights  as  if  the  mortgage  had  been 
made  before  the  fraudulent  convey- 
ance. 

D.  iSr.^Stewart  v.  Dunham,  116  U. 
8.  61,  5  Sup.  Ct.  1163,  29  L.  Ed«  329; 
Hunter  v.  Marlboro,  12  Fed.  Gas.  No. 
6,908,  2  Woodb.  ft  M.  168,  where  a 
trust  made  to  defraud  creditors  ia  ex- 
ecuted by  the  trustee,  who  eciuveye 
the  property  to  a  third  person  to  se- 
cure a  loan  to  the  cestui  que  trust, 
whose  rights  the  grantee  distinctly 
recognizes,  the  trust  created  by  such 
conveyance  between  the  grantee  and 
the  cestui  que  trust  is  enforceable. 

Ala. — ^Nelms  v.  Steiner,  113  Ala. 
662,  22  So.  436,  where  goods  were 
sold  to  plaintiff  and  afterwards  the 
seller  gave  plaintiff  mortgages  which 
were  wholly  disconnected  from  the 
sale,  fraud  as  to  creditors  in  the 
mortgages  would  not  affect  the  sale, 
if  that  in  itself  was  free  from  fraud. 

CaZ.— Gray  v.  Oalpin,  98  Cal.  033, 
33  Pac.  725. 

Conn. — ^Lucas  v.  Birdsey,  41  Conn. 
357. 

/U.^Rutt  V.  Shuler,  49  HI.  App. 
656. 

Ind. — ^Keen  v.  Preston,  24  Ind.  395, 
a  sale  of  chattels  to  a  creditor  in  part 
satisfaction  of  a  debt,  and  a  transfer 
of  collateral  security  to  him  for  the 
balance  of  the  debt,  although  made 
in  pursuance  of  the  same  agvee- 
ment,  are  separate  transactions,  so 
that  a  fraudulent  transfer  of  the  ool- 


The  Effect  of  YnAXJDxnuEST  CowvBYAjffCB. 


76 


parts  of  one  transaction,  they  will  be  considered  together  m  a 
proceeding  to  set  them  aside,  and,  if  one  of  them  is  fraudulent, 
all  of  them  will  be  void  as  to  creditors,*^  And  where  several  con- 
veyances of  property  are  made  by  a  debtor  to  several  different 
grantees  with  a  common  purpose  on  the  part  of  the  grantor  and 
the  grantees  to  defraud  creditors  of  the  grantor,  the  several  con- 


lateralB  would  not  contaminate  the 
sale,  if  the  latter  was  bona  fide. 

/ouw.— Mnir  v.  Miller,  108  Iowa, 
127,  72  N.  W.  400,  the  fact  that  one 
note  in* controversy  was  ohteined  hy 
the  garnishee,  wife  of  defendant,  from 
her  husband  without  consideration  and 
in  fraud  of  creditors,  raised  no  pre- 
sunvption  against  the  validity  of  the 
transfer  of  another  note  between  the 
same  parties. 

Xan.— Bowling  v.  Armourdale 
Bank,  67  Kan.  174,  46  Pac.  684. 

jBTy.— Ford    v.    Williams,    42    Ky. 

650. 

i#«.— Matthews    v.    Buck,    43    Me. 

266. 

JfoM.— Boyd  V.   Brown,   34  Mass. 

463. 

ificfc.— Kock  V.  Bostwick,  113  Mich, 

302,  71  N.  W.  473. 

i#o.— St.  Louis  Mut.  L.  Ins.  Co.  v. 
Cravens,  69  Mo.  72. 

Ne6.— Bierbower  v.  Polk,   17  Neb. 

268,  22  N.  W.  698. 

y,  H.— Pettee  v.  Dustin,  68  N.  H. 

309. 

N.  J.— Stillman  v.  Stillman,  21  N. 

J.  Eq.  126. 

2v.  (7.— Winbome  v.  Lassiter,  89  N. 

C.  1. 
Ohio.— O'ConneW      v.      Cruise,      1 

Handy,  164,  12  Ohio  Dec.   (Reprint) 

81. 

Tenn, — ^Robinson    v.    Baugh     (Ch. 

App.),61  S.  W.  98. 

Wm.—- Kickbush  v.  Corwith,  108 
Wis.  634,  86  N.  W.  148;  Hoey  v.  Pier- 


ron,  67  Wis.  262,  30  N.  W.  692,  the 
fact  that  several  chattel  mortgages 
are  executed  at  the  same  time  does 
not  make  them  all  of  one  transaction, 
so  that  the  invalidity  of  one  for  lack 
of  sufficient  consideration  attaches  to 
all. 

20.  U.  fir.— Burdick  v.  Gill,  7  Fed. 
668,  2  McCrary,  486. 

CaU — Chenery  v.  Palmer,  6  Cal. 
119,  65  Am.  Dec.  493. 

Colo, — ^Anders  v.  Barton,  3  Colo. 
App.  324,  33  Pac.  142. 

/otoa. — Snouffer  v.  Kinley,  96  Iowa, 
102,  64  N.  W.  770. 

MiU9. — ^Lynde  v.  McGregor,  95 
Mass.  182,  90  Am.  Dec.  188. 

Iftcfc.— Hubbard  v.  Taylor,  6  Mich. 

166. 

Ifo.— State  V.  Excelsior  Distilling 
Co.,  20  Mo.  App.  21. 

Neb,—SwitL  V.  Bruce,  16  Neb.  463, 
20  N.  W.  639. 

8,  o.— Bates  v.  Cobb,  29  S.  C.  395, 
7  S.  E.  743,  13  Am.  St.  Rep.  742; 
McSween  v.  McCown,  23  S.  C.  342; 
Hipp  V.  Sawyer,  1  Rich.  Eq.  Cas. 
410,  conveyance  by  husband  of  per- 
sonal property  in  trust  for  his  wife 
and  at  the  same  time  conveyance  of 
real  estate  to  the  same  trustee  for 
the  latter's  own  use. 

Tex, — Baylor  v.  Brown,  3  Tex.  Civ. 
App.  177,  21  S.  W.  73,  conveyance  by 
debtor  of  his  entire  stock  of  goods, 
fixtures,  fete.,  followed  on  the  same 
day  by  a  transfer  of  all  his  notes  and 
outstanding  accounts. 


76 


FKATJDU1.BNT    CoKVBYANCKB. 


veyanoes,  whether  made  at  different  times  or  at  or  about  the  same 
time,  ami  although  made  to  different  persons,  will  be  considered 
as  component  parts  of  one  scheme  or  transaction,  with  the  same 
intent  pervading  the  whole,  and  if  a  fraudulent  intent  be  shown 
as  to  any  one  of  the  conveyances,  it  will  vitiate  and  invalidate 
all.'^  Where,  however,  the  conveyances  are  separate  and  inde^ 
pendent  transactions,  and  one  is  not  tainted  with  the  same  fraudu- 
lent  intent  as  the  others,  it  will  not  be  rendered  fraudulent  and 
invalidated  by  the  fact  that  the  others  are  fraudulent  and  void 
as  to  creditors."  Where  a  debtor  made  a  conveyance  fraudulent 
as  to  his  creditors,  and  took  from  the  grantee  a  mortgage  to  se- 
cure trust  funds  in  the  grantor's  hands,  it  was  held  that  equity, 
while  setting  aside  the  conveyance,  would  recognize  the  validity 
of  the  mortgage." 

§  4.  Effect  of  prior  fraudulent  transaction  on  subsequent 
valid  transfer* — A  conveyance  of  property  by  a  debtor  which 


J^l.  N.  7.— niinois  Watch  Go.  v. 
Payne,  11  N.  Y.  Supp.  408,  affd  132 
N.  Y.  597,  30  N.  E.  1151,  fraudulent 
confessions  of  judgments  and  as- 
signment. 

Ala, — ^Russell  y.  Dayis,  133  Ala. 
647,  31  So.  514,  91  Am.  St.  Rep.  56. 

Ifo. — ^Benne  ▼.  Schnecko,  100  Mo. 
250,  13  S.  W.  82. 

8.  O. — ^Younger  v.  Massey,  39  S.  0. 
115,  17  S.  B.  711;  Hipp  v.  Sawyer, 
1  Rich.  Eq.  Gas.  410. 

Tenn. — Summers  v.  Howland,  2 
Baxt.  407. 

Te(9.^Hnghes  ▼.  Roper,  42  Tex.  116^ 
a  deed  from  a  father  to  some  of  his 
children  to  whom  he  was  indebted, 
and  from  them  to  others,  as  to  whom 
no  indebtedness  existed,  may  be  con- 
sidered as  one  transaction,  and  as  a 
deed  of  gift  to  the  extent  of  the  sec- 
ond transfer. 

W.  Va.— Livesay  ▼.  Beard,  22  W. 
Va.  586. 


22.  N,  r.— Illinois  Watch  Co.  v. 
Payne,  11  N.  Y.  Supp.  408,  affd  132 
N.  Y.  597,  30  N.  E.  1151. 

U.  «.— Crawford  v.  Neal,  144  U.  S. 
585,  12  Sup.  a.  759,  36  L.  Ed.  652, 
affg  36  Fed.  29. 

/n.— Rutt  ▼.  Shnler,  49  III.  App. 
655. 

TTy.— Ford  ▼.  Williams,  3  6.  Mon. 
650. 

Mioh, — Sheldon  v.  Mann,  86  Mich. 
265,  48  N.  W.  673. 

^06.— -Bierbower  ▼.  Polk,  17  Neb. 
268,  22  N.  W.  698. 

N,  J.--Stmman  ▼.  Stillman,  21  N. 
J.  Eq.  126. 

Tenn, — Summers  ▼.  Howland,  2 
Baxt.  407. 

Wt«.— Hoey  ▼.  Picrron,  67  Wis.  262, 
30  N.  W.  692. 

23.  First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Cummins, 
39  N.  J.  Eq.  677. 


Thb  Effect  of  Feaudulent  Cojjvbyajjce, 


77 


was  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  at  tlie  time  it  was  made  can- 
not be  rendered  fraudulent  by  prior  aots  or  conduct  of  the  par- 
ties, or  by  previous  separate  and  distinct  fraudulent  transactions, 
made  at  or  a>bout  the  same  time  or  at  a  different  tima^  Bu^ 
prior  fraudulent  transactions  may  not  only  be  a  badge  of  fraud- 
tdent  intent,  but  may  in  themselves  be  sufficient  evidence  that 
a  conveyance  was  in  fact  fraudulent^  The  fact  that  a  mort- 
gage on  a  stock  of  goods  is  void,  as  to  otiier  creditors  of  tihe 
mortgagor,  because  it  authorizes  the  mortgagor  to  sell  the  prop- 
erty and  use  the  proceeds  in.  his  business,  does  not  affect  the 
right  of  the  mortgagor  to  give  another  mortgage  to  seoure  the 
debt,  free  from  such  infirmity.^ 

§  5.  Effect  of  subsequent  fraudulent  transaction  on  prior 
valid  transfer. — .A  conveyance  of  property  by  a  debtov  valid  in 
its  inception  and  made  in  good  faith  and  without  intent  to  hinder, 
delay,  or  defraud  creditors  is  not  invalidated  by  the  subsequent 
acts  or  conduct  of  the  parties,  or  by  a  subsequent  and  independent 
transaction  made  at  or  about  the  same  time  or  at  a  different  time 
which  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors."    But  subsequent  fraudulent 


24t,  y.  y.— -Wise  V.  Rider,  88  Hun, 
620,  34  N.  Y.  Supp.  782. 

U.  8, — Stewart  v.  Dunham,  115  U. 
S.  61,  5  Sup.  Ct.  1163,  29  L.  Ed.  329. 

Ala. — ^Thornton  v.  Cook,  97  Ala. 
630,  12  So.  403. 

Conn. — Lucas  v.  Birdsey,  41  Conn. 
357;  Cook  v.  Swan,  5  Conn.  140. 

Me. — ^Matthews  v.  Buck,  43  Me. 
265. 

Jftei^— Krolik  t.  Root,  63  Mich. 
562,  30  N.  W.  339. 

Mo. — St.  Louis  Mut.  L.  Ins.  Co.  v. 
Cravens,  69  Mo.  72. 

N.  H. — Pettee  v.  Dustin,  58  N.  H. 
309. 

2V.  C— White  v.  White,  35  N.  C. 
265;  King  v.  Cantrel,  26  N.  C.  251. 

Ohio. — O'Connell  v.  Cruise,  1 
Handy,  164, 12  Ohio  Dec.  (Reprint) ,81. 


86.  Mo. — ^Benne  v.  Sehneeko,  100 
Mo.  250,  13  S.  W..  82. 

8.  C. — ^McSween  v.  McCown,  23  S. 
C.  342. 

W.  Fa.— Livesay  v.  Beard,  22  W. 
Va,  585. 

26.  Wise  V.  Rider,  88  Hun,  620,  34 
N.  Y.  Supp.  782. 

27.  N.  T.— Maass  v.  Falk,  146  N. 
Y.  34,  40  N.  £.  504,  the  fact  that,  on 
the  day  after  the  transfer  of  prop- 
erty to  secure  certain  creditors,  the 
debtor  made  a  general  assignment, 
does  not  of  itself  raise  a  presumption 
that  the  transfer  was  fraudulent; 
Friedman  v.  Rose,  83  Hun,  542,  31 
N.  Y.  Supp.  1040,  the  fact  that  a  biU 
of  sale  taken  n9  additional  security 
to  a  chattel  mortgage  is  void  because 
it  was  not  filed,  and  there  was  no 


78 


Fraudulent  Convetancsb. 


transactions  may  not  only  furnish  proof  of  fraudulent  intent^  but 
may  in  themsdves  be  su£Scient  evidence  that  a  conveyance  wa9 


ehflxige  of  poaaegaioB,  does  not  render 
the  diattel  mortgage  also  void ;  King- 
horn  ▼.  Wright,  45  N.  Y.  Super.  Ct. 
615,  although  the  proceeds  of  the 
prior  conveyance  may  be  connected 
with  the  consideration  of  the  subse- 
quent transfer;  Nicholson  v.  Leavitt, 
4  Sandf.  252;  Weller  ▼.  Wayland,  17 
Johns.  102,  a  bill  of  sale  valid  at  the 
time  of  execution  is  not  rendered  in- 
valid by  allowing  part  of  tke  goods 
included  therein  to  remain  in  pos- 
session of  the  vendor. 

17.  fif.— Schreyer  v.  Scott,  134  U.  8. 
405,  10  Sup.  Ct.  579,  33  L.  Ed.  955; 
Judson  V.  Courier  Go.,  15  Fed.  541,  a 
voluntary  conveyance  from  a  parent 
to  his  children  by  way  of  settlement, 
when  otherwise  valid  as  to  creditors, 
is  not  rendered  invalid  by  subsequent 
contributions  by  the  parent  of  money 
to  pay  off  incumbrances  and  improve 
the  property. 

Ala, — ^Buford  v.  Shannon,  95  Ala. 
205,  10  So.  263;  Warren  v.  Jones, 
68  Ala.  449;  Stokes  v.  Jones,  18  Ala. 
734. 

Ark. — Cornish  v.  Dews,  18  Ark. 
172;  Hempstead  v.  Johnson,  18  Ark. 
123,  65  Am.  Dec.  458. 

Cal.— <}ray  v.  Oalpin,  98  Cal.  633, 
33  Pac.  725. 

Conn. — Clark  v.  Johnson,  5  Day, 
373. 

Ga.— Scott  V.  Winship,  20  Ga.  429, 
the  fact  that  a  judgment  debtor 
fraudulently  conceals  property  sup- 
posed to  be  subject  to  his  debts  will 
not  render  a  prior  convejrance  fraud- 
ulent as  to  creditors,  unless  the 
grantee  was  privy  to  the  act. 

/ll.— Butt  V.  Shuler,  49  111.  App. 
655. 


/fid.— -Rose  V.  Colter,  76  Ind.  590, 
subsequent  insolvency  of  vendor;  Bay 
V.  Simons,  76  Ind.  150. 

Kan. — ^Bowling  v.  Armourdale 
Bank,  57  Kan.  174,  45  Pac.  684,  the 
taking  of  a  second  and  separate  mort- 
gage by  a  creditor,  even  if  invalid, 
does  not  necessarily  defeat  a  first 
valid  mortgage. 

ITy.— United  States  Bank  v.  Huth, 
4  B.  Mon.  423. 

if ««».— Hatch  V.  Smith,  6  Mass.  42. 

lftcA.~SheIdon  v.  Mann,  85  Mich. 
265,  48  N.  W.  573;  Paige  v.  Ken- 
drick,  10  Mich.  300. 

If  o.— Krueger  v.  Vorhauer,  164  Mo. 
156,  63  S.  W.  1098,  schemes  to  de- 
fraud existing  and  subsequent  cred- 
itors entered  into  by  a  debtor,  after 
making  a  deed  of  trust,  cannot  affect 
the  validity  of  such  deed;  Page  v. 
Dixon,  59  Mo.  43;  Gates  v.  Labeaume, 
19  Mo.  17,  an  assignment  for  the  bene- 
fit of  creditors,  valid  in  its  creation, 
is  not  vitiated  by  subsequent  fraudu- 
lent or  illegal  acts  of  the  assignor. 

?^e5.— Bierbower  v.  Polk,  17  N«b. 
268,  22  N.  W.  698. 

2V.  J.— Owen  v.  Arvis,  26  N.  J.  L. 
22;  Stillman  v.  Stillman,  21  N.  J. 
Eq.  126. 

N.  C— Winbome  v.  Lassiter,  89  N. 
C.  1. 

Tew. — Cleveland  v.  Empire  Mills,  6 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  479,  25  S.  W.  1056, 
subsequent  conduct  of  d^tor  and 
trustee  in  conveyance  for  benefit  of 
preferred  creditors  not  acquiesced  in 
by  the  beneficiaries. 

Ft.— Bracket  v.  Waite,  4  Vt  389. 

Va. — Clayton  v.  Anthony,  6  Rand. 
285,  a  deed  of  trust,  if  fairly  executed 
to  secure  a  just  debt,  cannot  be  im- 


Thb  Effect  of  Fra.udul£Nt  Convbyahcb. 


79 


in  fact  fraudulent.^  Fraud  will  be  presumed  where  a  voluntary 
conveyance  to  a  wife  is  followed  within  a  short  time  by  the  fraud- 
ulent disposition  of  the  remaining  estate  of  the  grantor.^  A 
conveyance  which  is  constructively  fraudulent,  but  is  made  to 
cure  the  defects  in  a  prior  valid  conveyance,  will  not,  however, 
affect  the  validity  of  such  prior  conveyance.^  A  conveyance  not 
fraudulent  at  first  may  become  so  afterwards  by  being  concealed, 
or  not  pursued,  by  means  of  which  creditors  have  been  induced  to 
give  credit,'^  or  by  being  subsequently  made  use  of  for  the  pur- 
pose of  covering  up  the  grantor's  interest  in  the  property  or 
otherwise  defrauding  his  creditors."  And  when  put  to  a  fraudu- 
lent use  as  to  subsequent  creditors,  the  fraud  may  be  carried  back 
to  the  date  of  the  conveyance,  so  as  to  invalidate  it  as  to  such 
creditors."  If  a  judgment  be  valid  in  its  inception,  it  is  not 
rendered  invalid  because  execution  is  taken  out  thereon  with  a 
view  to  hinder  and  delay  creditors,  and  has  such  effect.^  The 
fact  that,  after  eompletion  of  an  absolute  and  valid  sale  and 
delivery  of  property,  promises  are  made  to  the  seller  to  give  him 
the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  the  property  in  excess  of  a  certain 
amount,  does  not  operate  retroactively  on  the  sale,  and  avoid  it 
in  favor  of  a  creditor  of  the  seller."    A  voluntary  conveyance,  if 


peaehed  on  the  ground  of  fraud  for 
anj  matter  e»  post  facto, 

WoM.— Sanders  ▼.  Main,  12  Wash. 
666,  42  Pftc.  122. 

W.  Fa.— Harden  ▼.  Wagner,  22  W. 
Va.  356. 

Sng. — Stone  ▼.  Oriebham,  2  Bulst. 

217. 

B4«it7  may  oMnpel  ezecutiom 
•f  ike  tnut  immedlAtely*  where  a 
eonvegrance  valid  in  its  inception, 
made  for  the  security  of  creditors,  be- 
comes by  subsequent  events  oppres- 
siTe  and  injurious  to  other  creditors. 
Pope  ▼.  Wilson,  7  Ala.  690. 

2S.  U.  H.— Burdick  ▼.  QUI,  7  Fed. 
•68,  2  MeCraiy,  486. 


Ala. — Constantine  ▼.  Twelves,  29 
Ala.  607. 

Man. — ^Lynde  ▼.  McGregor,  96 
Mass.  182,  90  Am.  Dec.  188. 

20.  Burdick  v.  Oill,  7  Fed.  668,  2 
McCrary,  486. 

30.  Warren  ▼.  Jones,  68  Ala.  449. 

31.  Lamont  v.  Regan,  96  111.  App. 
369. 

32.  Woodard  ▼.  Mastin,  106  Mo. 
324,  17  S.  W.  308;  Bauer  Grocery  Co. 
y.  Smith,  1  Mo.  App.  Bepr.  439. 

83.  Carter  ▼.  Grimshaw,  49  N.  H. 
100. 

34.  Wilder  y.  Winne,  6  Cow.  (N. 
Y.)   284. 

35.  EJemm  y.  Bishop,  56  lU.  App. 
613. 


80  'FiuLxmmxssr  Cohveyahcbb. 

▼alid  at  the  time  of  its  execution,  because  of  liie  abeenoe  of 
fraudulent  intent  and  of  the  grantor's  retaining  sufficient  prop- 
erty to  meet  all  his  debts^  is  not  rendered  fraudulent  as  against 
subsequent  creditors  or  purehasars  by  subsequent  enbarrassments 
of  the  grantor.* 

§  6.  Conveyance  must  be  fraudulent  when  made.. — A  eonrey- 
ance  is  not  necessarily  void  because  its  effect  is  to  hinder  and 
delay  ^editors  of  the  grantor,  but  such  must  be  its  object,  and  it 
must  be  a  fraudul^it  contrivance  for  that  purpose;  and  the  par^ 
to  be  benefited  by  the  conveyance  must  be  privy  to  the  fraudulent 
design."  The  intention  of  the  party  making  the  conveyance 
gives  it  its  character  and  ivhether  or  not  the  fraudulent  intention 
existed  is  to  be  ascertained  from  the  circumstances  existing  at 
the  time^  and  not  from  subsequent  events  having  no  actual  oon- 
neetion  with  the  transaction.'*  The  legality  of  a  conveyance  is 
determined  at  the  moment  of  its  execution,  thou^  the  disposition 
of  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  may  be  material  to  show  the  legality  or 
illegality  of  the  intention  of  the  parties.**  But  a  conveyance  whidi 
when  drawn  was  intended  by  the  grantor  to  put  his  proper^ 
out  of  the  reach  of  his  creditors  will  not  be  set  aside  as  fraudu- 
lent iiy  at  the  time  of  its  delivery  and  acceptance  by  the  grantee, 
the  sole  object  of  both  the  parties  to  the  instrument  was  that  it 
should  be  held  by  the  grantee  as  a  security  for  a  debt  due  from 
the  grantor  to  a  third  person.^ 

§  7.  Purging  conveyance  of  fraud  by  matter  ex  post  facto. — 
It  is  a  well  settled  principle  that  a  conveyance  in  fraud  of  credi- 
tors^  and  voidable  by  a  purchaser^  may  be  purged  of  the  fraud 
and  become  good  by  matter  ex  post  facio.^^    Where  there  is  a 

36.  Brackett  ▼.  Waite,  4  Vt  389.  41.  17.    fif.— Stewart    t.    Doaliun. 

87.  Hempstead    ▼.    Johnston,    18  115  U.  S.  61,  5  Sup.  Ct  1163,  29  L. 
Ark.  123.  Ed.  329,  where  a  debtor  in  order  to 

88.  Ray  ▼.  Simons,  76  Ind.  160.  secure  a  creditor,  assigned  to  a  tn»- 

39.  Owen  v.  Onris,  26  N.  J.  L.  22.      tee^    mesntime   retaining  the  goods 

40.  Stewart  v.  Mannington  Exch.      for  sale,  which  assignment  was  Toid 
Bank,  55  N.  J.  £q.  795,  38  Atl.  952.      for  irregularities  under  the  laws  of 


The  Effect  of  Fraudulent  Conveyance. 


81 


conveyaiioe  fraudtdent  as  to  creditors,  the  parties  may  subse* 
quently  rescind  it,  and  if  the  illegal  agreement  be  azmnlled  or 
abrogated  and  the  fraudulent  purpose  wholly  abandoned,  and 
another  conveyance  or  contract  be  made  in  good  faith  and  free 
from  fraud,  before  the  rights  of  creditors  or  purchasers  have 
intervened  and  become  fixed  or  they  have  taken  any  action  to 
disaffirm  it  or  to  obtain  any  lien,  or  before  liens  have  attached 
upon  the  property,  or  in  the  case  of  a  conveyance  which  is  fraudu- 
lent because  it  is  voluntary  and  without  consideration,  if  a  con- 
sideration is  afterwards  paid,  this  may  purge  the  fraud  and  give 
validity  to  the  transaction.^    But  where  a  conveyance  expressly 


the  State  where  made,  a  subsequent 
deed  by  him,  in  which  the  trustee 
joins,  in  favor  of  the  creditor,  and  a 
bill  of  sale  of  the  property  by  him 
to  the  creditor,  in  the  absence  of 
fraud,  were  valid;  Sumner  ▼.  Hicks, 
2  Black,  532,  17  L.  Ed.  365,  if  the 
debtor  makes  an  assignment  which  is 
void,  and  afterwards,  but  before  any 
creditor  has  acquired  a  lien,  makes 
another  which  is  free  from  objection, 
the  latter  assignment  is  valid. 

M%8». — ^Agpricultural  Bank  ▼.  Dor- 
sey,  1  Freem.  Ch.  338,  as  if  it  be 
transferred  in  payment  of  a  debt  of 
the  grantor,  or,  if  a  portion  only  of 
the  property  be  conveyed  and  applied 
by  the  fraudulent  grantee,  the  con- 
veyance will  be  valid  to  that  extent. 

N.  ff.— Smyth  ▼.  Carlisle,  17  N.  H. 
417. 

42.  N.  r.— Hurd  v.  New  York, 
etc..  Steam  Laundry  Co.,  52  App. 
Div.  467,  65  N.  Y.  Supp.  125,  rev'g 
29  Misc.  183,  6e  N.  Y.  Supp.  813, 
where  a  corporation  of  which  R.  was 
president  transferred  a  portion  of  its 
property  to  another  corporation,  re- 
ceiving stodc  In  payment,  the  fact 
that  the  stock  was  issued  to  the  wife 
of  R.  would  not  invalidate  the 
previous  sale,  if  that  were  valid,  if 

6 


such  act  vras  done  mistakenly,  and 
subsequently  corrected  by  a  recon- 
veyance by  her  to  the  corporation, 
and  no  one  was  prejudiced  by  the 
act;  Hardt  v.  Deutsch,  30  App.  Div. 
689,  52  N.  Y.  Supp.  335,  where  a 
creditor  holds  a  chattel  mortgage 
upon  the  property  of  his  debtor, 
which  is  voidable  by  other  creditors 
on  account  of  an  illegal  verbal  agree- 
ment, but,  before  their  rights  have 
become  fixed  or  they  have  taken  any 
action  to  disaffirm  it  or  obtain  any 
lien  the  illegal  agreement  is  an- 
nulled, and  the  debtor  voluntarily 
transfers  possession  of  the  property 
to  the  mortgagee  as  security  for  the 
indebtedness,  this  latter  transfer  is 
not  invalidated  by  the  originally 
voidable  character  of  the  mortgage; 
Bowdish  V.  Page,  153  N.  Y.  108,  47 
N.  E.  45;  Wise  v.  Rider,  34  N.  Y. 
Supp.  782,  the  fact  that  a  mortgage 
on  a  stock  of  goods  is  void,  as  to 
other  creditors  ot  the  mortgagor,  be- 
cause it  authorises  the  mortgagor  to 
sell  the  property  and  use  the  pro- 
ceeds in  his  business,  does  not  affect 
the  right  of  the  mortgagor  to  give 
another  mortgage  to  secure  the  debt, 
free  from  such  infirmity;  Brooks  v. 
Wilson,  53  Hun,  173,  6  N.  Y.  Supp. 


82 


FkAUDTJLENT    CoNVliYANCB». 


and  intentionally  fraudulent  has  been  made,  no  subsequent  act 
of  the  grantor  nor  subsequmt  payment  or  advance  by  the  grantee 
will  purge  it  of  fraud  and  give  validity  to  the  transaction.  If 
any  part  of  the  original  purpose  is  fraudulent,  the  whole  may  be 
avoided,  though  made  upon  sufficient  consideration.  In  like  man- 
ner, if  any  part  of  the  fraudulent  purpose  remain,  it  vitiates  the 
whola^    No  rights  can  be  lost  or  acquired  by  a  fraudulent  twms- 


116,  where  the  grantee  in  a  convey- 
anoe  made  to  defraud  the  gprantor's 
creditors,  at  the  request  of  the 
grantor,  mortgages  the  property  con- 
veyed to  secure  a  debt  owing  by  the 
grantor  to  the  mortgagee,  the  latter 
has  the  same  rights  as  if  the  mort^ 
gage  had  been  made  before  the  fraud- 
ulent conveyance. 

Ala. — ^Borland    v.    Mayo,    8     Ala. 

104. 

/fui.— Langsdale  v.  Woollen,  99 
Ind.  676,  a  conveyance  originally 
made  on  a  secret  trust  in  fraud  of 
creditors  may  become  valid  by  so 
modifying  the  terms  of  the  trust  as 
to  give  to  creditors  their  rights  in 
the  proceeds  of  the  sale  to  be  made 
by  the  trustee. 

La.— Boussel  v.  Dukeylus  Syndics, 

4  Mart  240. 

Me.— Matthews    ▼.    Buck,    43    Me. 

266. 

Maes. — ^Lynde  v.  McGregor.  95 
Mass.  182,  90  Am.  Dec.  188 ;  Oriental 
Bank  v.  Haskins,  3  Mete.  332,  37 
Am.  Dec.  140;  Boyd  v.  Brown,  34 
Mass.  463;  Blchards  v.  Allen,  25 
Mass.  406,  an  absolute  conveyance  in- 
tended as  security  for  future  ad- 
vances, if  it  could  be  avoided  by 
creditors,  is  rendered  valid  by  a 
bcHid,  given  after  the  advances  have 
been  made,  to  recover  upon  the  pay- 
ment of  the  money  so  advanced. 

N,  C— White  v.  White,  36  N.  C. 
266;  King  v.  Cantrel,  26  N.  C.  261. 


Tite  f  raudnleaey  of  a  eoBTey- 
aaee  of  attaohed  veal  property 

from  a  judgment  debtor  to  his  wife 
pending  an  attachment  suit  does  not 
affect  the  validity  of  his  title  derived 
under  a  purchase  at  an  execution 
sale  in  pursuance  of  the  attachment 
and  a  subsequent  foredosnre  sale 
under  a  mortgage  executed  by  her. 
Dimock  v.  Ridgway,  169  Mass.  526, 
48  N.  E.  338. 

Delivery  of  possession  after  sale 
or  mortgage^  see  chap.  XII,  SS  3,  27, 
infra, 

43.  If,  y.— Bailey  v.  Burton.  8 
Wend.  339. 

/U.— Head  v.  Harding,  166  Ul.  363, 
46  N.  £.  890. 

Ky. — ^Poague  v.  Boyoe,  6  J.  J. 
Mairsh.  70. 

ifd.— Moore  v.  Blondheim,  19  Md. 
172. 

Mass. — ^Lynde  v.  McGregor,  96 
Mass.  182,  90  Am.  Dec.  188. 

Ifo.— Gentry  v.  Field,  143  Mo.  399, 
45  S.  W.  286;  Martin  v.  Rice,  24 
Mo.  581 ;  Lawrence  v.  Barker,  82  Mo. 
App.  126,  where  no  abandonment  of 
a  previous  mortgage  was  shown,  so 
as  to  purge  the  transaction  from 
fraud  and  entitle  plaintiff  to  the 
rights  of  a  bona  fide  purchaser  under 
a  bill  of  sale  executed  on  the  same 
day  the  property  was  attached  by  the 
mortgagor's  creditors. 

Pa.— Bunn  v.  Ahl,  29  Pa.  8t  387. 
72  Am.  Dec.  639. 


Thb  Effect  of  Fraudulent  Convbyanob. 


88 


fer  of  property  which  is  retransferred  before  the  fraudulent  pur- 
pose is  effected^  so  that  the  conditions  existing  prior  to  sucli 
transfer  are  restored,**  Where  property  is  fraudulently  con- 
veyed by  a  debtor  to  avoid  attachment,  and  is  subsequently  trans- 
ferred by  the  holder  to  a  creditor  of  such  debtor,  and  at  his  re- 
quest, such  creditor  will  hold  the  property  by  a  good  title.*^ 
Where  the  object  of  a  grantor  in  making  a  conveyance  is  to  hinder 
or  delay  his  creditors,  the  instrument  is  not  purged  of  the  fraud 
because  he  also  had  some  other  purpose  in  view  in  making  it** 

§  8.  Conveyance  vjalidated  by  assent  or  afiirmance  by  credi- 
tors.— A  conveyance  which  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  may  be 
rendered  valid  by  the  subsequent  assent  thereto  or  affirmance 
thereof,  express  or  implied,  of  the  creditors  entitled  to  avoid  the 
same.*^  Express  assent  may  be  by  a  formal  authenticated  act 
recogni2ing  the  title  of  the  grantee.*^  The  assent  or  affirmance 
of  a  creditor  may  be  implied  from  his  having  dealt  with  the  par- 
ties to  the  conveyance  as  if  it  were  valid  ;**  or  from  his  accepting 
a  benefit  under  it,  with  full  knowledge  of  all  the  vitiating  cir- 


8.  O. — ^McSween  v.  McCown,  23  S. 
0.  342. 

A  svbseqiieat  pvrchase  at 
the  land  at  mat  ezeeutioii  sale  by 

the  fraudulent  purchaser  at  a  trus- 
tee'e  sale  does  not  validate  his  title, 
as  against  a  bona  fide  judgment  cred- 
itor of  the  grantor.  Woodard  v. 
Mastin,  106  Mo.  324,  17  S.  W. 
308. 

44.  N.  y.— Cramer  t.  Blood,  48  N. 
Y.  684,  a/fV  67  Barb.  166,  671,  prop- 
erty conveyed,  returned  or  paid  out 
before  recovery  of  judgment. 

Ind, — Second  Nat.  Bank  v.  Brady, 
96  Ind.  498,  reconveyance  pursuant 
to  agreement. 

Iowa. — ^Davidson  v.  Dwyer,  62 
Iowa,  332,  17  N.  W.  676. 

JCcMi. — ^McCord,  etc..  Mercantile  Go. 
V.  Burson,  38  Kan.  278,  16  Pac.  664, 


where  a  fraudulent  sale  was  revoked 
by  consent. 

ire.--Matthews  v.  Buck,  43  Me. 
266,  contract  rescinded  before  the 
rights  of  creditors  or  purchasers  in- 
tervened. 

N,  J.— Wheeler  v.  Kirkland,  23  N. 
J.  Eq.  13,  where  voluntary  gifts  were 
returned. 

Tenn, — Stanton  v.  Shaw,  3  Baxt. 
12,  land  reoonveyed  by  third  party. 

45.  Boyd  v.  Brown,  34  Mass.  463. 

46.  Hansoi  v.  Dennison,  7  111. 
App.  73;  Reed  v.  Nozon,  48  III.  323. 

47.  Hatchett  v.  Blanton,  72  Ala. 
423 ;  Zuver  v.  Clark,  104  Pa.  St.  222 ; 
Oeisse  v.  Beall,  3  Wis.  367. 

48.  Theriot  v.  Michel,  12  La.  Ann. 
107. 

49.  Bennick  v.  Bank  oi  Chilli* 
oothe,  8  Ohio,  630. 


84 


FBAUDnUEBTT   CoHTETAH'CTB. 


cnmntanfttt  ;**  or  fran  the  receipt  by  him  of  the  pmchaae  money 
or  a  part  thereof  frmi  the  grantor  or  the  grantee;*^  or  from  the 
reoeipt  1>y  him  of  the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  the  jMoperty  or  a 
dividend  under  an  assignment  or  deed  of  trost;"  or  from  his 
proceeding  against  the  grantee  for  the  pnrehase  prioei"  The  re- 
ceiver of  the  judgment  debtor  -who  has  elected  to  take  a  personal 
judgment  against  one  to  whom  the  debtor  had  assigned  property 
cannot  have  the  assignments  set  aside  on  the  ground  that  they 
were  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.^ 


§  9.  Prejudice  to  rights  of  creditors. — In  order  that  a  eon- 
veyance,  transfer,  or  transaction  may  be  attadked  as  being  fraudu- 
lent and  void  as  against  creditors,  prejudice  to  the  ri^ts  of 


M.  Outswmer  v.  Jjukumn,  23 
Mo.  108. 

61.  AIo.— Butler  v.  O'Brien,  5  Ala. 
316,  note  given  for  purehue  of  goods 
reoeived  by  creditor  from  grantor. 

Ark, — Bowden  ▼.  Spellman,  69 
Ark.  261,  27  S.  W.  602,  promisMny 
notes  given  by  the  purchaeer  and  as- 
signed by  the  debtor  to  the  creditor; 
Millington  v.  Hill,  47  Ark.  301,  1  8. 
W.  647,  creditor  elected  to  take  from 
the  grantee  the  agreed  price. 

/nd.— Kitts  V.  Willaon,  140  Ind. 
604,  39  N.  K  313,  judgment  paid  by 
grantee. 

/otoa.— Heaton  v.  Ainley  (1898), 
74  N.  W.  766,  title  of  fraudulent 
grantee  cannot  be  attacked  by  a 
creditor  who  has  taken  a  mortgage 
from  hiuL 

Minn. — Lemay  ▼.  Bibeau,  2  Minn. 
291,  judgment  creditor  received,  on 
account  of  his  judgment,  a  portion 
of  the  purchase  price  of  certain  lands 
conveyed. 

Tenn, — Cunningham  v.  Campbell,  3 
Tenn.  Ch.  708. 

7ed9.— Larkin  v.  Wilsford  (Civ. 
App.),  29  8.  W.  640. 


Wts. — Shawano  County  Bank  v. 
Koeppen,  78  Wis.  533,  47  N.  W.  723, 
where  creditor's  claim  was  seenred 
in  part  by  a  mortgage  on  the  prop- 
erty. 

Can.— Wood  v.  Beesw,  22  Oat. 
App.  67. 

62.  FZa.--Simon  v.  Levy,  36  fla. 
438,  18  8o.  777,  where  creditor  went 
into  partnership  with  the  fraudulent 
vendee,  to  carry  on  business  with 
the  goods  transferred;  Furaeos  v. 
Ewing,  2  Pa.  St.  479. 

53.  Sickman  v.  Abemathy,  14 
Colo.  174,  23  Pac  447,  where  cred- 
itors proceeded  against  the  pur- 
chasers for  the  moneys  due  upon 
notes  taken  in  payment. 

54.  Fitts  V.  Beardsley,  8  N.  T. 
Supp.  567. 

See  also  Estoppel  —  Knowledge, 
assent  or  aflftrmanoe,  chap.  V,  SS 
18,  19,  infra;  Reoeipt  of  benefit 
under  conyeyance,  chap.  V,  S  21, 
infra;  Right  of  grantee  to  pay  credi- 
tor and  retain  property,  chap.  XIV, 
§  32,  infra;  Election  of  remedies, 
chap.  XV,  S  30.  infra. 


Thk  Effect  of  Fbaubulent  Conveyajs^cb. 


85 


creditors  must  result  therefrom,  even  where  there  is  an  actual 
fraudulent  intent"  A  mere  intent  to  defraud  not  resulting  in 
injury  will  not  render  a  conveyance  fraudulent;  there  must  be 
something  done  in  pursuance  of  the  intention  whioh  operates 
prejudicially  on  the  rights  of  creditors."  If  one  of  two  joint 
judgment  debtors  conveys  property  to  the  other,  such  conveyance 
is  not  prejudicial  to  the  rig^its  of  the  judgment  creditor,  and 
cannot  be  made  the  basis  of  a  creditors'  bill  to  set  aside  the  con- 
veyance as  fraudulent.^  A  conveyance  made  with  intent  to  de> 
fraud  creditors  is  not  fraudulent  if  there  were  no  creditors ;  and 
it  is  for  the  law  to  determine  whether  there  were  creditors  or 


66.  N.  7.— Shand  ▼.  Hanley,  71 
N.  Y.  319. 

Ala, — ^Danner  Land,  etc.,  Go.  v. 
StonewaU  Ins.  Co.,  77  Ala.  184; 
Pickett  V.  Pipkin,  64  Ala.  520. 

Conn. — ^Barney  ▼.  Cutler,  1  Root, 
480. 

On. — Rutherford  v.  Chapman,  59 
Ga.  177;  Brown  v.  Spivey,  53  Ga. 
155. 

/M.— Phillips  V.  North,  77  111.  243. 

loica. — Hook  ▼.  Mowre,  17  Iowa, 
195. 

Ky. — Hanby  ▼.  Logan,  62  Ky.  242; 
Sbiveley  v.  Jones,  45  Ky.  274. 

La. — Willis  ▼.  Scott,  33  La.  Ann. 
1026;  Payne  v.  Kemp,  33  La.  Ann. 
818;  Leri  v.  Morgan,  33  La.  Ann. 
532;  Meche  v.  Lalamie,  30  La.  Ann. 
1136;  Gillis  V.  Dansby,  26  La.  Ann. 
711;  Lafleur  y.  Hardy,  11  Rob.  493; 
Lott  ▼.  Gray,  6  Rob.  152;  Hubbard 
T.  Hobson,  14  La.  453;  Kenney  v. 
Dow,  10  Mart.  577,  13  Am.  Dee. 
342. 

Me. — Crooker  ▼.  Holmes,  65  Me. 
195,  20  Am.  Rep.  687. 

Mich. — Bodine  ▼.  Simmons,  38 
Mich.  682. 

Mi88. — Simmons  v.  Ingram,  60 
Miss.  886;  Henderson  v.  Thornton, 
37  Miss.  448,  75  Am.  Dec.  70;  Winn 


V.  Bamett,  31  Miss.  653;  Ehrerett  v. 
Winn,  1  8m.  ft  M.  Ch.  67. 

N.  ff.— Blake  ▼.  Winiams,  36  N. 
H.  39;  Bean  ▼.  Brackett,  34  N.  H. 
102. 

Pa.— Appeal  of  Haak,  100  Pa.  St. 
59;  Miner  y.  Warner,  2  Grant,  448; 
Boyle  y.  Thomas,  1  Chest.  Co.  Rep. 
117. 

8.  C— Kid  ▼.  Mitchell,  1  Nott  ft 
M.  334,  9  Am.  Dec.  702;  King  v, 
Clarke,  2  Hill  Eq.  611. 

S.  />.— Gardner  v.  Haines  (1905), 
104  N.  W.  244. 

T«p.— Kerr  v.  Hutchins,  46  Tex. 
384,  36  Tex.  452. 

W.  Fa.— Zell  Guano  Co.  v.  Heath- 
erly,  45  W.  Va.  311,  31  S.  E.  932. 

Wi».-— Ingram  v.  Rankin,  47  Wis. 
406,  2  N.  W.  755,  32  Am.  Rep.  762. 

See  also  Tests  as  to  fraudulent  con- 
veyance, chap.  I,  S  3,  eupra.  Persons 
who  may  attack  conyeyance,  chap.  V, 
infra, 

66.  Rice  y.  Ferry,  61  Me.  145; 
Bancroft  y.  Blizzard,  13  Ohio,  30. 
See  also  cases  cited  in  the  last  pre- 
ceding note.  See  also  Accomplish- 
ment of  purpose,  chap.  XIII,  §  3, 
infra, 

67.  McPhee  y.  O'Rourke,  10  Colo. 
301,  15  Pac.  420,  3  Am.  St.  Rep.  579. 


86 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


not"  The  transfer  hj  a  debtor  of  exempt  property  or  property 
of  little  or  no  value,  not  being  prejudicial  to  the  rights  of  credi- 
tors;  cannot  be  set  aside  as  fraudulent  and  the  proper^^  sub^ 
jeeted  by  creditors.® 

§  10.  Conflict  of  laws;  what  law  governs. — ^The  general  rule 
is  that  the  validity  of  a  oonveyance  or  transfer  of  real  property 
by  a  debtor,  as  by  any  other  person,  is  governed  by  and  to  be 
determined  in  accordance  with  the  law  of  the  state  or  place  where 
such  real  property  is  situated.^  The  g^ieral  rule  as  to  a  trans- 
fer of  personal  property  by  a  debtar  wheresoever  situated,  is  that 
the  validity  thereof  is  governed  by  and  to  be  determined  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  law  of  the  debtor's  domicile,  or  of  the  place 
where  the  transfer  is  made;  but  this  rule  always  yields  when  the 
law  and  policy  of  the  state  where  the  property  is  actually  located 
have  provided  a  different  rule  of  transfer  from  that  of  the  state 
where  the  debtor  lives,  or  of  the  place  where  the  transfer  is 
mada*^    Judicial  comity  does  not  require  the  courts  of  one  state 


58.  Day  v.  Lown,  51  Iowa,  364,  1 
N.  W.  786. 

59.  See  Exempt  Property,  chap.  IV, 
§  41,  infra;  Property  of  little  or  no 
value,  chap.  IV,  §  4,  infra, 

60.  17.  fif.— Spindle  v.  Shreve,  111 
U.  S.  542,  4  Sup.  Ct.  522,  28  L.  Ed. 
612;  Nichola  v.  Eaton,  91  U.  S.  716, 
23  L.  Ed.  264;  Nichol  ▼.  Levy,  5  WaU. 
433,  18  L.  Ed.  596. 

AIck— Banner  v.   Brewer,   69  Ala. 

191. 
D.  a— Keane   v.    Chamberlain,  14 

App.  Cas.  84. 

Ifan.— Watson  v.  Holden,  58  Kan. 
667,  60  Pac.  883. 

/Cy.— Brown  v.  Early,  2  Duv.  369. 

Maw.— Chipman  v.  Peabody,  169 
Mass.  420,  34  N.  E.  563,  38  Am.  St. 

Bep.  437.  « 

Ohio. — Brannon     v.     Brannon,     2 

Disn.  224. 
Oitla.-— WiUiams   v.    Kemper,    etc., 


Dry  Goods  Co.,  4  Okla.  145,  43  Pat. 
1148. 

61.  N.  r.—Keller  v.  P^ne,  107  N. 
Y.  83,  13  N.  E.  635;  Warner  v.  Jaf- 
fray,  96  N.  Y.  248,  48  Am.  Rep.  616; 
Ockerman  v.  Gross,  54  N.  Y.  29. 

U.  £f.— Greene  v.  Van  Buskirk^  5 
Wall.  307,  18  L.  Ed.  599,  7  Wall. 
139,  19  L.  Ed.  109. 

AUl — ^Hardaway  ▼.  Senmies,  ^8 
Ala.  657;  Inge  ▼.  Murphy,  10  Ala. 
885. 

Col.— Forbes  v.  Scannell,  13  Oal. 
242. 

Conn. — Ward  v.  Connecticut  Pipe 
Mfg.  Co.,  71  Conn.  345,  41  Ati.  1057, 
71  Am.  St.  Rep.  207,  72  L.  R.  A.  706; 
Ballard  v.  Winter,  39  Conn.  179; 
Koster  v.  Merritt,  32  Conn.  246. 

End, — Ames  Iron  Works  v.  Warren, 
76  Ind.  512,  40  Am.  Rep.  258. 

Kan. — ^Mackey  v.  Pettijohn,  6  Kan. 
App.  57«  49  Pac.  636. 


Thx  Effect  of  Fbaudctlxnt  Convetanok. 


87 


to  enforce  a  transfer  of  personal  property,  which,  eyen,  if  valid 
under  the  lex  damicilii,  conflicts  with  the  policy  of  that  state 
relating  to  property  within  its  borders,  or  impairs  the  rights  or 
remedies  of  domestic  creditors.^  A  transfer  in  one  state,  al- 
though valid  there,  which  would  be  void  as  to  creditors  if  made 
in.  another  state^  does  not  confer  title  to  personal  property  situated 
in  the  latter  state,  that  is  good  as  against  a  resident  of  that 
state  armed  with  legal  process  to  collect  a  debt*'  To  this  ex- 
tent^ in  nearly  all  jurisdictions,  the  rule  of  comity  yields  to  the 
policy  of  the  state  with  refeirence  to  the  collection  of  debts  due 
its  own  citizens,  out  of  property  within  its  boundaries  and  pro- 


Kjf, — htvj  V.  Kentucky  DistiUing 
Go^  9  Kj.  L.  Rep.  103. 

La, — Oliyer  v.  Townes,  2  Mart.  N. 
S.  93. 

Md. — ^Pleasanton  y.  Johnson,  91 
Md.  673,  47  Atl.  1025;  Moore  ▼.  Land, 
etc.,  06.,  82  Md.  288,  33  AU.  641; 
Baltimore,  etc.,  R.  Ck>.  v.  Glenn,  28 
Md.  287,  92  Am.  Dec.  288. 

Ma9$, — Frank  v.  Bobbitt,  165  Mass. 
112,  29  N.  E.  209;  Hallgarten  ▼.  Old- 
bam,  135  Mass.  1,  46  Am.  Bep.  433. 

Minn. — In  re  Kabn,  55  Minn.  509, 
67  N.  W.  154;  In  re  Dalpay,  41  Minn. 
532,  43  N.  W.  564,  16  Am.  St.  Rep. 
729,  6  L.  R.  A.  108;  Lewis  ▼.  Bush, 
30  Minn.  244,  15  N.  W.  113. 

Mo. — ^National  Bank  of  Ck>nmierce 
V.  Morris,  21  S.  W.  511,  19  L.  R.  A. 
463. 

N,  ff.— Sessions  v.  Little,  9  N.  H. 
271. 

2V.  J, — Fra£ier  v.  Fredericks,  24  N. 
J.  L.  162. 

y.  C— Drewry  v.  Phillips,  44  N. 
C.  81. 

Okla. — Williams  v.  Kemper,  etc., 
Dry  Goods  Co.,  4  Okla.  145,  43  Pac. 
1148. 

JPO. — ^Tbwnsend  ▼.  Maynard,  45  Pa. 
St.  198. 


Teim.— Lally  v.  Holland,  1  Swaa, 
399;  Flickey  v,  Loney,  4  Baxt.  169. 

T«».— Fowler  v.  Bell,  90  Ter.  150, 
37  S.  W.  1058,  69  Am.  St.  Rep.  788, 
39  L.  R.  A.  254. 

A  traacf  er  of  personal  property 

which  is  invalid  bv  the  law  of  the 
place  where  it  was  made  and  where 
the  property  was  situated  will  not  be 
declared  valid  in  another  State.  Watt- 
son  V.  Campbell,  38  N.  Y.  153;  Pyatt 
V.  Powell,  51  Fed.  551,  2  C.  C.  A. 
367;  Arkansas  City  Bank  v.  Cassidy, 
71  Mo.  App.  186. 

62,  Dearing  v.  McKinnon  Dash, 
etc,  Co.,  165  N.  Y.  78,  87,  58  N.  E. 
773,  80  Am.  St.  Rep.  708,  aff'g  33 
App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  31,  53  N.  Y.  Supp. 
513;  Keller  v.  Paine,  107  N.  Y.  83, 
89,  13  X.  E.  635;  Warner  v.  Jaffray, 
96  N.  Y.  248,  255,  48  Am.  Rep.  616. 
But  see  Smith  v.  Jones,  63  Ark.  232, 
37  S.  W.  1052,  the  rule  that  a  for- 
eign assignment  will  not  be  upheld 
as  against  domestic  creditors  does 
not  apply  to  an  absolute  and  bona 
fide  sale. 

63.  Dearing  «v.  MeKinnon  Dash, 
etc.,  Co.,  supra;  Guillander  v.  Howell, 
35  N.  Y.  657. 


88 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


tected  by  ite  law.**  If,  however,  a  transfer  of  personal  property 
is  valid  in  the  state  where  it  is  made,  it  will  be  held  valid  by  the 
courts  of  another  state,  as  against  non-resident  creditors,  although 
the  law  and  policy  of  that  state  prescribe  otherwise.^  A  trans- 
fer of  personal  property  by  a  debtor  which  is  legal  under  the 
laws  of  the  state  where  the  transfer  is  actually  made  and  the 
property  is  situated  passes  the  title,  and  the  laws  of  another 
state,  which  is  the  domicile  of  the  debtor,  making  such  a  trans- 
fer void,  cannot  divest  the  title  thus  legally  acquired.^  Where 
a  mortgage  of  personal  property  made  by  a  corporation  organized 
in  one  state  is  made  in  another  state  there  to  be  performed  and 
the  goods  covered  thereby  are  in  the  latter  state,  it  is  not  subject 
to  a  statute  of  the  former  state,  forbidding  mortgages  by  cor- 
porations so  organized,  but  its  validity  is  determined  by  the 
law  of  the  latter  state.*^  Whether  a  wife  acquired  ownership  of 
her  earnings  so  as  to  make  them  a  valid  consideration  for  a 
conveyance  to  her  from  her  husband  must  be  determined  by  the 
law  of  the  state  where  they  resided  when  the  earnings  were 
made.*"  Where  an  insolvent  husband  removes  with  his  wife  from 
one  state  to  another  and  after  removal  makes  a  conveyance  in 
trust  for  her,  in  consideration  of  property  belonging  to 
her  which  he  has  used,  in  determining  his  liability  to  her,  as 
against  his  creditors,  the  law  of  each  state  should  govern  as  to 
that  portion  of  her  property  there  received  and  used  by  him.* 


64.  Dearing  v.  McRinnon  Dash, 
etc.,  Co.,  supra;  Greene  ▼.  Van  Bus- 
kirk,  72  U.  8.  307,  312,  18  L.  Ed.  699, 
74  U.  8. 139,  150, 19  L.  Ed.  109;  Hall- 
garten  r.  Oldham,  136  Mass.  1,  7,  46 
Am.  Rep.  433. 

65.  Bamett  ▼.  Kinnej,  147  U.  8. 
476,  13  Sup.  Ct.  403,  37  L.  Ed.  247; 
Rhode  Island  Gent.  Bank  v.  Danforth, 
14  Gray  (Mass.),  123;  State  Bank  ▼. 
First  Kat.  Bank,  34  N.  J.  Bq.  460; 


Williams  v.  Kemper,  etc.,  Dry  Goods 
Co.,  4  Okla.  146,  43  Pac.  1148. 

66.  Mead  ▼.  Dayton,  28  Conn.  33; 
In  re  Queensland  Mercantile,  etc., 
Co.  (1891),  1  Ch.  636. 

67.  Boehme  v.  Rail,  61  N.  J.  Eq. 
541,  26  Atl.  832. 

68.  Hinman  ▼.  Parlds,  33  Cbna. 
188. 

69.  GiUngr  t.  PoUoek,  82  Ala.  606. 


PlM>FBBTy,  STGv  WHICH  CbEDITOBS  MAY  RbAOH.  89 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Pbophbtt  ahd  Rights  Transfisbbbd  Which  Obbditobs  May 

Rbach. 

SeetioB    1.  Property  subject  to  claims  of  creditors  in  generaL 

2.  Estates  which  may  be  reached. 

3.  Pers<mal  property. 

4.  Property  or  rights  without  pecuniary  value. 

5.  Interest  of  debtor  in  property  conveyed. 

6.  Cbnveyance  of  property  in  another  county. 

7.  Rights  or  choses  in  action. 

8.  Samings  or  wages  of  debtor. 

9.  Earnings,  services  and  savings  of  wife. 

10.  Earnings  or  wages  of  debtor's  minor  child. 

11.  Earnings  or  wages  of  public  officers  or  their  deputiei. 

12.  Services,  labor,  talents  and  industry  of  debtor. 

13.  Services  rendered  by  husband  for  wife. 

14.  Services  rendered  by  parent  for  child. 
16.  Earnings  of  debtor's  property. 

16.  Good-will  of  a  business. 

17.  Membership  in  stock  or  merchants'  exchange. 

18.  Patents,  copyrights  and  trade-marks. 

19.  Fire  insurance. 

20.  Life  insurance  policies  and  proceeds  thereof. 

21.  Payment  of  premiums  for  life  insurance. 

22.  Payment  of  premiums  not  voluntary  or  fraudulent, 

23.  Premiums  not  paid  l^  debtor. 

24.  Improvements,  rents  and  profits  of  real  estate. 
26.  Crops,  ores  and  other  products  of  the  land. 

26.  Equitable  estates,  ri^^ts  and  interests. 

27.  Equity  of  redemption. 

28.  Interest  under  contract  of  purchase. 

20.  Property  purchased  in  name  of  third  person. 

30.  Reservations  by  debtor. 

31.  Property  conveyed  by  debtor  to  equitable  owner. 

32.  Conveyance  in  pursuance  of  parol  trust. 

33.  Conveyance  by  husband  to  or  for  wife. 

34.  Reconveyance  by  fraudulent  grantee. 

35.  Property  subject  to  power  of  appointment. 

36.  Separate  estate  or  property  of  debtor's  wife. 

37.  Husband's  curtesy  or  other  interest  in  wife's  property. 

38.  Wife's  dower  or  other  interest  in  husband's  property. 

39.  Coramunity  property. 


90 


FRAUDUI.ENT    ComrSTANCSB. 


Section  40.  Property  of  adopted  child. 

41.  Exempt  property  in  general. 

42.  Homestead  in  general. 

43.  Homestead  included  in  oonveyanoe  of  other  property. 

44.  Crops  grown  on  homestead. 

46.  Purchase  of  homestead  and  payment  of  liens. 

46.  Improvements  on  homestead. 

47.  Insurance  on  homestead. 

48.  Change  in  character  of  property  and  following  proceeds. 

49.  Stock  in  trade  sold  in  bulk. 

Section  1.  Property  subject  to  claims  of  creditors  in  generaL 
— ^It  is  the  general  policy  of  the  law  that  creditors  shall  have  the 
right  to  resort  to  all  the  property  of  the  debtor  not  protected  by 
statute.^  At  common  law  all  of  a  debtor's  property,  except  nec- 
essary wearing  apparel,  might  be  taken  to  pay  the  claims  of 
creditors.  So  might  all  rights  of  action  arising  from  contract, 
and  also  judgments  recovered  for  the  wrongs  of  others.*  A 
judgment  creditor  with  the  aid  of  equity  may  reach  any  properly 
or  interest  of  his  debtor,  not  exempt  from  execution,  which,  with 
such  aid,  the  debtor  might  himself  reach.'  But  to  authorize  the 
setting  aside  of  a  conveyance  as  fraudulent  as  against  creditors, 
it  must  transfer  property  of  some  value  out  of  which  the  creditor 
could  have  realized  his  claim,  or  some  portion  of  it,  and  the 
transfer  must  have  been  made  with  intent  to  defraud.^    A  trans* 


1.  tSchenck  v.  Barnes,  156  N.  T.  316, 
41  L.  R.  A.  396,  50  N.  E.  967;  Wil- 
liams V.  Thorn,  70  N.  Y.  270;  Graff 
V.  Bonnett,  31  N.  Y.  9,  88  Am.  Dec. 
236;  CatchingB  v.  Manlove,  39  Miss. 
655. 

2.  Stevenson  v.  Stevenson,  34  Hnn 
(N.  Y.)   157. 

3.  Ala. — Sims  v.  Gaines,  64  Ala. 
392. 

Arifc.— Harris  v.  King,  16  Ark.  122. 

Fla, — Rbbinson  v.  Springfield  Co., 
21  Fla.  203. 

2Vc6.— Weckerly  v.  Taylor  (1905), 
103  N.  W.  1065;  Millard  v.  Parsell, 
57  Neb.  178,  77  N.  W.  390. 

.Vw.—White  V.  Seldon,  4  Nev.  280. 


N.  J.-:-Haven  v.  Bliss,  26  N.  J.  Eq. 
363;  Stratton  ▼.  Dialogue,  16  N.  J. 
Eq.  70. 

4.  N,  7.— Hoyt  ▼.  Godfrey,  88  N. 
Y.  669;  Mapes  v.  Snyder,  59  N.  Y. 
450;  Guy  v.  Craighead,  21  App.  Div. 
460,  47  N.  Y.  Supp.  576;  Spaulding 
V.  Keyes,  1  Silv.  Sup.  203,  6  N.  Y. 
Supp.  227,  affd  125  N.  Y.  115,  26  K. 
E.  15. 

17.  flf.— Stewart  v.  Piatt,  101  U.  S. 
731,  25  L.  Ed.  816. 

Ala, — ^Dearman  ▼.  Dearman,  5  Ala. 
202. 

Conn.  —  Barbour  t.  Conneetievt 
Mut.  L.  Ins.  Co.,  61  Conn.  240,  li 
Atl.  154. 


PSOPBXTT^  STC.>  WHIOH   CbKDITORS  MAT  ReAOH. 


91 


fer  by  a  debtor  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  his  creditors  which  does 
not  withdraw  from  the  creditors  aoiy  property  which  was  subject 
to  their  claims.^  A  conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  by  a 
debtor  cannot  be  fraudulent  as  against  ereditors,  where  they  have 
no  rights  either  at  law  or  in  equity,  to  subject  the  property  to 
the  payment  of  their  claims.*  The  transfer  by  a  debtor,  with* 
out  consideration,  of  an  equitable  interest  in  property  not  sub- 
ject to  be  levied  on  at  law,  to  hinder  and  delay  his  creditors,  is 
not  void  as  to  his  judgment  creditors.^  A  debt,  payment  of  no 
part  of  which  can  be  enforced  by  reason  of  the  insolvency  of 
the  debtor,  does  not  constituto  property,  within  the  purview  of 
the  statute,  the  transfer  of  which  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.' 
Future  earnings  of  minor  children  are  not  assets  of  the  father's 
estate  to  which  creditors  have  any  right  to  look,  so  as  to  prevent 
their  relinquishment  by  the  father,  though  insolvent,  to  the 
children,  if  he  so  wills.*  If  a  conveyance  of  land  be  set  aside 
as  fraudulent  the  products  of  the  land  may  also  be  reached  by 


(To. — ^Rutherford  t.  Ghapman,  59 
Ga.  177. 

ITy.— Sieeley  v.  Sieeley,  23  Ky.  L^ 
Sep.  966,  64  8.  W.  642. 

L<k— Baldwin  v.  McDonald,  48  La. 
Ann.  1460,  21  So.  48;  SucoesBion  of 
Goyle,  32  La.  Ann.  79. 

Jfe.— Pulufer  v.  Waterman,  73 
Me.  233;  Hall  ▼.  Sands,  52  Me.  355; 
Hubbard  v.  Bemick,  10  Me.  140 ;  WU- 
son  T.  Ayer,  7  Me.  207. 

Ififiit. — ^Aultman  &  Co.  t.  Pikop,  56 
Minn.  531,  58  N.  W.  651;  Blake  v. 
BoiBJoli,  51  Minn.  296,  53  N.  W.  637. 

Jfo. — ^Trabue  v.  Henderson,  180  Mo. 
616,  79  S.  W.  451;  Ault  v.  EUer,  38 
Mo.  App.  598. 

Or.— Besser  t.  Joioe,  9  Or.  310. 

B,  C. — Durham  Fertiliser  Co.  v. 
Hemphill,  45  S.  C.  621,  24  S.  E.  85; 
Davidson  t.  Graves,  Riley  Eq.  232. 

reiMi.— Read  v.  Moeby,  87  Tenn. 
759,  11  8.  W.  940,  5  L.  R.  A.  122; 


Wagner  t.  Smith,  81  Tenn.  560;  Les< 
lie  T.  Joyner,  39  Tenn.  514. 

Tear. — ^Monday  v.  Vance,  11  Tez. 
CiT.  App.  374,  32  S.  W.  559. 

Ca^ — ^Lodor  ▼.  Creighton,  9  U.  C. 
C.  P.  295;  Blakely  ▼.  Qoul^  24  Ont. 
App.  153;  Mathews  t.  Feaver,  1 
Odz  Ch.  278,  1  Rev.  R^.  39,  29  Bng. 
Reprint^  1165,  oopyholds  not  being 
naturally  subject  to  debts,  are  not  the 
subject  of  a  conveyance  fraudulent  as 
against  creditors. 

5.  Adkins  v.  Bynum,  109  Ala.  281, 
19  So.  400. 

6.  sum  V.  Smith,  183  Mo.  464,  81 
S.  W.  1217.  See  also  eases  in 
note  4. 

7.  Planters'  Bank  v.  Etenderson,  23 
Tenn.  75. 

8.  Hoyt  V.  Godfrey,  88  N.  Y.  669; 
Shults  V.  Hoagland,  85  N.  Y.  464. 

9.  Merrill  v.  Hussey,  101  M&  439, 
64  AU.  819. 


92 


Fraudulent  CoiirvxTANCBS. 


creditors/®  but  improvements  made  pending  the  action  will  not 
be  allowed.^^  A  fraudulait  transfer  does  not  in  any  sense  en- 
large the  rights  of  creditors,  but  leaves  them  to  enforce  such 
rights  as  if  no  conveyance  had  been  made." 

§  2.  Estates  which  may  be  reached. — Land  conveyed  to  hus- 
band and  wife  jointly  and  partly  paid  for  by  the  husband's 
means,  or  the  husband's  portion  of  an  estate  by  the  entirety,  may 
be  reached  by  his  creditors  to  the  extent  of  such  payment,  al- 
though there  vras  no  actual  fraudulent  intents"  A  lease  of  lands 
owned  by  a  debtor,'^  a  contingent  reversionary  interest,^  and  an 
estate  in  expeetanc^,^*  are  within  the  statute  against  fraudulent 
conveyances.  Property  taken  by  a  debtor  in  the  name  of  trus- 
tees for  the  debtor's  family,^^  or  in  the  name  of  the  husband 
and  wife,^  is  also  within  the  statute.  But  the  statute  does  not 
apply  to  the  case  of  a  tenant  in  tail  opening  his  estate  and  re- 


10.  State  ▼.  McBride,  105  Mo.  2S6, 
15  S.  W.  72.  See  chap.  tV,  {  25, 
imfra, 

11.  Grandiii  t.  First  Nat.  Bank 
(N^.  1904),  98  N.  W.  70.  See  Oom- 
pensation  for  improvements,  cHap. 
XIV,  I  43,  infra. 

1«.  V.  flr.—Cox  T.  Wilder,  6.  Fed. 
Oto.  No.  3,308,  2  Dill.  45;  McFarland 
T.  Goodman,  16  Fed.  Gas.  No.  8,789, 
6  Biss.  111. 

Ky. — ^Kneran  ▼.  Speeker,  74  Kj.  1. 

ir«««.— Dnlion  v.  Harkness,  80  Miss. 
8,  31  So.  416,  92  Am.  St.  Rep.  563. 

Mo. — Vogler  t.  Montgomeiy,  54  Mo. 

577. 

y.  C. — Grummen  ▼.  Bennet,  68  N. 

C.  494. 

OA«o.~Sears  v.  Henks.  14  Ohio  Si. 
298,  84  Am.  Dec.  378. 

13.  Newlove  ▼.  Callagfaan,  86  Mich. 
297,  48  N.  W.  1096,  24  Am.  St.  Rep. 
123. 

14.  Daugherty  v.  Bogjr,  3  Ind.  T. 
197,  53  S.  W.  542;  Christy  ▼.  Courts- 


nay,  26  Beav.  140,  63  Eng.  Reprint, 
850;  Shears  v.  Rogers,  8  B.  ft  Ad. 
362,  1  L.  J.  K.  B.  89,  28  E.  G.  L.  164. 

15.  Neale  t.  Day,  4  Jur.  N.  S.  1225, 
28  L.  J.  Ch.  45,  7  Wkly.  Rep.  45; 
French  ▼.  French,  6  DeG.  M.  &  G.  95, 
2  Jur.  N.  S.  169,  25  L.  J.  Ch.  612, 
4  Wkly.  Rep.  139,  55  Eng.  Ch.  74, 
43  Eng.  Reprint  1166. 

16.  Read  v.  Mosby,  87  Tenn.  759, 
11  S.  W.  940,  5  L.  R.  A.  122,  a  TOlnn- 
tary  transfer  by  a  debtor  of  his  ex- 
pectancy in  his  living  father's  estate 
will  not  be  upheld  in  equity  as 
against  creditors  who  were  such 
either  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance 
or  at  the  date  of  the  father's  death. 

17.  Barton  ▼.  Vanheythuysen,  11 
Hare,  126,  18  Jur.  844,  1  Wkly.  Rep. 
429,  45  Eng.  Ch.  127. 

18.  Glaister  t.  Hewer,  8  Ves.  Jr. 
195,  32  Eng.  Reprint,  329.  9  Ves.  Jn 
12,  32  Eng.  Reprint,  504,  11  Ves.  Jr. 
377,  32  Eng.  Reprint,  1183. 


PXOPSXTT,  ETC.,  WHIOH  CbEOITOBS  MAT  RbAOH. 


93 


fiettling  it  on  himself  for  life  with  remainder  over.''  Where  a 
deed  oonveying  realty  in  fee  and  reserving  a  life  estate  is  hdd 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  it  cannot  be  upheld  as  to  the  reserva- 
tion of  the  life  estate  to  the  extent  of  requiring  tliat  the  land 
be  sold  subject  to  the  life  interest  as  an  incumbrance."* 

§  3.  Personal  property. — The  statute  of  13  Elizabeth  avoids 
voluntary  conveyances  of  personal  property  as  well  as  land,  as 
against  creditors,  but  not  as  against  subsequent  purchasers;  and 
the  statute  of  27  Elizabeth  avoids  voluntary  conveyances  of  land 
only  as  against  subsequent  purchasers.  The  latter  statute  as  well 
as  the  former  has  been  often  held  to  be  declaratory  or  affirmative 
of  the  common  law,  although  in  its  terms  it  applies  only  to 
land;"  yet  it  has  been  held  that  it  may  be  regarded  as  a  settled 
principle  that  it  extends  only  to  conveyances  of  real  estate.**  A 
voluntary  conveyance  of  personal  property  is  within  the  spirit 
of  the  statute  of  27  Elizabeth  and,  therefore,  void,  as  against 
subsequent  purchasers,  as  well  as  void  upon  the  principles  of 
the  common  law.*^  Most  American  statutes,  which  are  based 
upon  the  English  statutes  mentioned,*^  in  terms  avoid  all  volun* 
tary  transfers  of  real  or  personal  property,  and  a  creditor's  suit 
will  lie  to  reach  personal  property  fraudulently  transferred.* 
The  mere  omission  of  the  provision  embracing  ^'  goods,  chattels, 
and  things  in  action  "  from  a  statute,  declaring  void  conveyances 
made  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  creditors,  will  not  be  con- 
strued as  affecting  the  common  law  rule  which  renders  a  con- 
veyance of  goods  and  chattels,  made  with  such  intent,  fraudulent 
and  void  as  to  creditors.*'    The  provisions  of  the  statutes  of  13 


19.  ClenMfits  t.  Eccles,  11  Ir.  Eq. 
229. 

20.  McNallj  V.  White,  154  Ind. 
163,  64  N.  E.  704,  56  N.  E.  214. 

21.  Qarrison  v.  Brice,  48  N.  C.  85, 

22.  Footman  v.  PendergraBS,  3 
Rich.  Eq.  (S.  C.)  33;  Hadnal  v.  Wil- 
der, 4  McCord  (8.  C),  294,  17  Am. 
Dee.  744;  Gardner  v.  Cole,  21  Iowa, 
205;  Gibson  v.  Love,  4  Fla.  217. 


23.  Sewall  v.  Glldden,  1  Ala.  52. 

24.  Harper  v.  Scott,  12  Ga.  125. 

25.  See  chap.  I,  $9  8,  11. 

26.  McCIoeky  v.  Stewart,  63  How. 
Pr.  (N.  Y.)  137;  Blair  v.  Smith,  114 
Ind.  114,  16  N.  E.  817,  5  Am.  St.  Rep. 
593. 

27.  Byrnes  t.  Vok,  53  Minn.  110, 
64  N.  W.  942;  Benton  ▼.  Snyder,  22 
Minn.  247;  Hicks  t.  Stone,  13  Minn. 


94 


FbAUBULSNT    CoirVBTAKCBS. 


and  27  Eluabeth  relating  to  fraudulent  transfers  of  pmyqrlji 
apply  to  transfers  of  peroonal  properly,  notwitfastanding  the 
omission  from  suoh  statntesy  as  revised,  of  the  words  ''goods 
and  chattels."* 

§1  4.  Property  or  rights  without  pecuniary  value. — ^Althou^ 
a  voluntary  oonveyanoo  of  property  has  been  held  to  be  void  as 
to  creditors,  irrespective  of  the  value  of  the  propcorty,'*  as  a 
rule  the  gift  or  voluntary  transfer  of  property  of  trifling  value 
or  of  no  value  at  all  will  not  be  adjudged  by  the  courts  to  be  a  dis- 
position of  property  with  intent  to  defraud.  It  is  a  familiar 
rule  that  the  thing  disposed  of  must  be  of  value^  out  of  which 
the  creditor  could  have  realized  all  or  a  portion  of  his  daim."* 


434;  BUckman  v.  Wheaton,  13  Miim. 
326. 

88.  Avery  v.  Wilson,  47  8.  C.  78,  25 
R.  E.  286. 

89.  Garriflon  ▼.  Monaglian,  38  Pa. 
St  232,  owmding  Fkssit  t.  PhilliiM, 
4  Whari.  (Pa.)  390;  Bankin  v.  Gard- 
ner  (N.  J.  Ch.),  34  Atl.  935,  the 
eonveyajioe  of  only  a  valaelew  equity 
in  land  held  to  be  fraudulent. 

SO.  N.  r.— Hqyt  v.  Godfrey,  88 
N.  Y.  669,  canoeIlati<m  of  worthless 
debt  against  an  insolvent;  Guy  v. 
Craighead,  21  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  460, 
47  N.  Y.  Supp.  676.  Compare  Fitts  v. 
Beardsley,  65  Hun  (N.  Y.),  603,  8 
N.  Y.  Supp.  576,  afTd  126  N.  Y.  645, 
27  N.  E.  853,  although  a  mortgage  is 
elaimed  to  have  been  valueless  and 
not  enforceable,  when  the  mortgagee 
testified  that  he  had  advanced  the  full 
consideration  and  one  to  whom  he  had 
assigned  it  has  foreclosed  it,  and  its 
validity  was  not  questioned  in  the 
foreclosure  proceedings,  its  validity  is 
BulBciently  established  to  subject  the 
proceeds  of  the  foreclosure  to  the 
claims  of  the  mortgagee's  creditors  on 


the  ground  that  the  assignoMnt  was 
fraudulent. 

Conn, —  Barbour  v.  Conneeticut 
Mut  L.  Ins.  Co.,  61  Conn.  240,  23 
Atl.  154,  surrender  of  life  insurance 
policies  of  no  value  as  assets. 

Iowa. — Foreman  v.  Citizens'  State 
Bank,  128  Iowa,  661,  105  N.  W.  163, 
transfer  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  of 
a  calf  of  trifling  value;  McCormidc 
Harvester  Maeh.  Co.  v.  Pouder,  123 
Iowa,  17,  98  N.  W.  303,  husband  per- 
mitting wife  to  be  substituted  in  his 
place  as  one  of  the  tenants  under  a 
lease  having  no  peeuniaiy  value  at 
the  time,  although  it  afterwards  be- 
came of  value. 

JTy. — Steeley's  Creditors  v.  Steeley, 
23  Ky.  L.  Bep.  906,  64  8.  W.  642,  as- 
signment by  a  debtor  to  his  wife  of  a 
life  insurance  policy  that  had  no 
vendible  value;  Hanby  v.  Logan,  I 
Duv.   (Ky.)  242. 

La. — ^Baldwin  v.  McDonald,  48  La. 
Ann.  1460,  21  So.  48,  transfer  by  an 
insolvent  debtor  of  the  parts  of  an 
incomplete  patented  machine,  of  prac- 
tically no  value  to  any  one  but  the 


Fbopxbtt^  xto.,  which  Cbeditobs  mat  Bbaoh. 


95 


Tile  convejaDOd  of  an  equity  of  redemption^  practically 
valueless  because  of  the  property  being  incumbered  to 
its  full  value  or  for  more  than  it  is  worth,  will  not  be  set 
aside  as  fraudulent  as  against  creditors,  since  in  such  a  case  the 
creditors  are  not  injured.'^  Actual  intent  to  defraud  should  be 
clearly  established  from  the  value  of  the  property  transferred 
and  the  surrounding  ciicumstances.*^ 


patentee,  wiU  not  be  set  aside  as 
fraudulent  merely  because  an  indebt- 
edness due  the  transferee  is  the  con- 
sideration, if  the  transfer  is  not  inju- 
rious to  the  creditors. 

Me, — ^French  ▼.  Holmes,  67  Me.  186, 
the  gift  of  property  of  infinitesimal 
value  or  so  trifling  in  value  that  it 
would  not  pay  the  expenses  of  a  sale 
on  execution,  will  not  be  disturbed 
as  fraudulent. 

lfa»9.— Williams  v.  Robbins,  15 
Oray  (Mass.),  690. 

Minn, — ^Keith  v.  A1breeht»  89  Minn. 
247,  99  Am.  St  Bep.  666,  94  N.  W. 
677,  transfer  of  equity  in  land  the 
non-exempt  part  of  which  was  at  the 
time  materiaUy  less  in  value  than  the 
vendor's  lien;  Baldwin  v.  Rogers,  28 
Minn.  644,  11  K.  W.  77. 

Pa, — ^In  re  Gross'  Estate,  6  Pa.  Co.. 
Ct.  113,  19  Phila.  80,  gifU  of  articles 
of  insignificant  intrinsic  value,  by  an 
insolvent  husband  to  his  wife,  not  at 
any  one  time  by  way  of  settlement, 
but  at  considerable  intervals,  are  not 
applicable  to  the  payment  of  the 
husband's  debts. 

Wa9h, — ^Klosterman  v.  Vader,  6 
Wash.  99,  32  Pac.  1060,  assignmoit 
of  lease  of  wild  land  of  little  value 
until  improved,  unless  it  is  shown 
that  the  lease  is  of  some  value. 

W.  ya.^Johnson  v.  Riley,  41  W. 
Va.  140,  23  8.  E.  698,  conveyance  of 
proper^  incumbered  to  its  full  value. 


W.  V,  F.— StacT^  V.  Deshaw,  7  Hun 
(N.  y.),    449. 

/ful.— Marmon  v.  White,  161  Ind. 
446,  61  N.  E.  930. 

Jfoss.— Williams  v.  Bobbins,  16 
Oray  (Mass.),  690. 

iftnn.— Keith  v.  Albrecht,  89 
Minn.  247,  94  N.  W.  677,  99  Am.  St. 
Bep.  666;  Aultmau  &  Taylor  Co.  v. 
Dalen,  66  Minn.  631,  68  N.  W.  661; 
Blake  v.  Boisjoli,  51  Minn.  296,  53 
N.  W.  637 ;  Horton  v.  Kelly,  40 
Minn.  193,  41  N.  W.  1031;  Baldwin 
V.  Rogers,  28  Minn.  644,  11  N.  W. 
77,  though  made  with  intent  to  put 
the  land  beyond  their  reach.  Com- 
pere Spooner  v.  Travelers'  Ins.  Ot>., 
76  Minn.  311,  77  Am.  St.  Rep.  661, 
79  N.  W.  305,  as  to  debtor's  right 
when  other  remedy  is  available. 

Afo. — ^Mittelburgh  v.  Harrison,  90 
Mo.  444,  3  S.  W.  203,  affg  11  Mo. 
App.  136,  in  the  absence  of  proof  of 
actual  fraud. 

W.  Fa.— Cox  V.  Horner,  43  W.  Va. 
786,  28  S.  E.  780;  Johnson  v.  Riley, 
41  W.  Va.  140,  23  S.  E.  698,  property 
incumbered  to  its  full  value  may  be 
conveyed  by  an  insolvent  in  satisfac- 
tion of  the  incumbrances,  since  it  is 
not  a  conveyance  to  the  exclusion  or 
prejudice  of  other  creditors. 

38.  Hoyt  V.  Godfrey,  88  N.  T. 
669;  Washington  Cent.  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Hume,  128  U.  S.  196,  9  Sup.  Ct.  41, 
32  L.  Ed.  370,  as  to  premiums  paid 


96 


FSAUDULENT    CONVEYANCES. 


§  5*.  Interest  of  debtor  in  property  conveyed. — Statutes  pro- 
viding that  gifte,  oonveyanoeB,  etc,  of  any  estate,  with  intent  to 
delay,  hinder,  and  defraud,  shall  be  void  as  against  cireditorSi 
have  been  held,  as  a  rule,  to  refer  to  property  owned  by  the 
debtor,  and  not  to  apply  to  property  to  which  he  had  no  title  or 
interest,  legal  or  equitable,  which  was  liable  to  sale  on  execution, 
or  which  his  creditors  could  reach  and  had  a  right  to  subject  to 
the  payment  of  their  claims.''     Such  statutes  do  not  apply  to 


by  an  inflolvent  for  »  moderate 
amount  of  insurance  upon  his  life  in 
favor  of  his  wife;  Hopkirk  v.  Ran- 
dolph, 12  Fed.  Caa.  No.  6,698,  2 
Brock.  (U.  S.)  132;  Emerson  v. 
Bemis,  69  111.  537,  reasonable  gift  or 
provision  for  wife  or  child;  French 
V.  Holmes,  67  Me.  186;  Partridge  v. 
Gopp,  Ambl.  596,  27  Eng.  Reprint, 
3SS,  1  Eden,  163,  28  Eng.  Reprint, 
647;  Lush  v.  Wilkinson,  5  Ves.  Jr. 
384,  31  Eng.  Reprint,  642. 

33.  N.  Y. — Jackson  v.  Ham,  15 
Johns.  (N.  T.)  261,  where  a  lot  was 
oonyiyed  to  the  debtor,  without  con- 
sideration, for  the  purpose  of  qualify- 
ing him  to  vote,  the  grantor  retain- 
ing possession,  and  was  subsequently 
reconveyed  to  the  grantor  while  a 
suit  was  pending  against  the  debtor 
for  a  tort. 

Ala. — ^Dearman  v.  Dearman,  6  Ala. 
202,  where  a  father  Joined  with  a 
son  in  the  conveyance  of  property  to 
another  son,  which  property,  before 
the  conveyance  was  not  liable  for  the 
debt  of  the  father,  the  act  of  the 
father  was  not  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors. 

Oal. — Moore  v.  Besse,  43  Cal.  511, 
where  a  judgment  debtor  sold  land 
to  which  he  had  acquired  a  pre-emp- 
tion right,  to  defraud  a  judgment 
creditor,  and  the  purchaser  pre- 
empted the  land  and  obtained  a 
patent  therefor,  such  creditor  cannot 


attack  the  patent  for  fraud,  or  the 
title  held  by  the  purchaser,  since  at 
the  time  of  the  conveyance  the  debtor 
had  only  a  personal  privilege  to  take 
the  necessary  steps  to  procure  title 
and  had  no  interest  in  the  land 
which  was  liable  to  sale  on  execu- 
tion. 

Conn. — Jarvis  v.  Prentice,  19 
Conn.  272,  conveyance  of  property 
held  in  trust. 

Ind. — ^Brenmierman  v.  Jennings, 
101  Ind.  253,  to  a  complaint  to  set 
aside  an  alleged  fraudulent  deed,  an 
answer  stating  that  the  deed  was 
drawn  up  in  the  debtor's  name  as 
grantee,  that  it  was  never  delivered, 
that  the  grantor  intended  to  give  the 
land  to  his  daughter,  the  debtor's 
wife,  and  that  at  his  request  he  made 
another  deed  coonveying  the  land  to 
her,  was  held  good,  if  for  no  other 
reason  than  that  the  deed  was  never 
delivered  to  the  husband,  and  hence 
he  never  had  any  title  to  the  prop- 
erty which  his  creditors  could  reach. 

Ky. — ^Louisville  City  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Woolridge,  116  Ey.  641,  25  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  869,  76  S.  W.  542,  it  is  no 
fraud  as  to  his  creditors  for  a  hus- 
band to  consent  to  a  wife's  testa- 
mentary disposition  of  her  person- 
alty. 

Af(i.--Mishler  v.  Finch,  104  Md. 
183,  64  Atl.  945,  conveyance  of  prop- 
erty by  a  debtor  «nd  his  wife,  com.- 


Pbopbstt,  etc.,  which  CBEDrroBs  MAT  Reach. 


97 


oonveyanoes  of  trust  property  by  the  trustee  to  the  beneficiaries 
or  to  conveyances  by  one  having  the  bare  legal  title  to  one  al- 
ready having  the  beneficial  title  or  interest  in  the  property.'* 
A  conveyance  in  fraud  of  creditors,  or  a  voluntary  conveyance, 
if  made  to  hinder,  delay,  and  defraud  creditors,  of  lands  to 


▼eying  property  conveyed  by  the  deb- 
tor to  the  wife  prior  to  the  incurring 
of  his  indebtedness. 

Jfidk.— PeUt  ▼.  Hubbell,  106  Mich. 
405,  63  N.  W.  407,  a  levy  and  execu- 
tion sale  may  be  declared  void  as  a 
cloud  upon  the  title  of  the  true 
owner,  who  at  the  time  ol  the  levy 
had  been  promised  a  conveyance  by 
the  debtor,  who  liad  without  author- 
ity, while  acting  as  agent,  taken  the 
title  in  his  own  name;  G61umbia 
Bank  v.  Jacobs,  lO  Mich.  *340,  81  Am. 
Dec.  792,  a  transfer  of  a  mortgagee's 
interest  in  land  is  not  fraudulent  as 
to  creditors. 

Afiss.— Citixens'  Mut.  Ins.  C6.  v. 
Foster,  64  Miss.  288,  1  8a  238,  where 
all  the  debtor  conveyed  was  the  legal 
title,  wnich  could  not  be  subjected  to 
the  debts  of  a  firm  to  which  he  be- 
longed, while  the  equitable  title  was 
in  his  wife. 

Jfo.— Stam  V.  Smith,  180  Mo.  464, 
81  8.  W.  1217.  But  see  8t.  Francis 
MiU  Co.  V.  Sugg,  169  Mo.  130,  69  8. 
W.  359,  where  in  an  actiim  by  judg- 
ment creditors  to  set  aside  a  fraudu- 
lent conveyance  by  their  debtor,  they 
alleged  that  the  land  belonged  to 
him  at  the  time,  and  defendant  also 
asserted  that  title  was  in  him,  and 
claimed  title  under  such  deed,  and 
the  court  found  all  the  issues  in 
favor  of  the  plaintiff,  it  was  error  to 
dismiss  the  bill  on  the  ground  that 
he  had  no  title. 

N.  J.— V7isner  v.  Osborne,  64  N.  J. 
Eq.  614,  55  Atl.   51,  where  an  in- 

7 


solvent  permitted  his  infant  son  to 
contract  for  wages  to  be  paid  to  the 
son,  and  stock  of  a  corporation  was 
bought  with  the  wages  and  stood  In 
the  son's  name,  it  was  not  subject  to 
the  claims  of  the  father's  creditors. 

A'.  O. — Runyon  v.  Leary,  20  N.  C. 
373,  where  the  vendor  and  purchaser 
contracted  for  a  life  estate  in  cer- 
tain slaves  at  a  fair  price  for  such 
interesti  with  the  supposition  that 
the  vendor  was  entitled  to  no  greater 
interest,  and  the  vendor  conveyed  aU 
his  right,  title  and  interest  Uierein, 
and  it  subsequently  appeared  that 
the  vendor  was  entitled  to  an  abso- 
lute interest  in  them,  worth  ten 
times  the  value  of  the  life  estate,  the 
conveyance  was  not  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors. 

W.  ya.— Prim  v.  Mcintosh,  43  W. 
Va.  790, 28  8.  £.  742,  a  vendor  of  land, 
who  knows  that  the  purchase  price 
is  to  be  paid  from  the  separate 
estate  of  the  purchaser's  wife,  al- 
though the  legal  title  is  taken  by  the 
husband,  cannot  thereafter  attack  as 
fraudulent  a  conveyance  made  by  the 
husband  to  the  wife,  in  un  attempt 
to  aubject  the  land  to  the  payment  of 
a  debt  owed  him  by  the  husband  for 
the  purchase  of  a  mule,  of  which  debt, 
the  wife  had  no  notice. 

34.  Smith  V.  Ellison,  80  Ark.  447. 
97  S.  W.  666;  McCormick  Harvesting* 
Mach.  Co.  V.  Perkins  (Iowa,  1906), 
110  N.  W.  156.  See  Conveyance  of 
property  by  debtor  to  equitable  owner, 
diap.  4,  S  31>  tnfra. 


98 


Fbaudulsnt  Contktakgxs. 


T^hichi  at  the  time  of  its  eQcecution,  the  grantor  had  not  sack 
an  interest  as  could  be  subjected  by  his  creditors,  either  in  law 
or  equity,  to  the  payment  of  his  debts,  but  to  which  he  after- 
wards acquired  title,  is  void  as  to  creditors  and  subsequent  hona 
fide  purchasers.  A  voluntary  fraudulent  estoppel  is  imrpotent 
to  defeat  the  just  claims  of  creditors  and  bona  fide  purchasers."^ 

§  6.  Conveyance  in  another  county. — A  judgment  rendered 
is  not  a  lien  on  lands  of  the  judgment  debtor  situated  in  another 
oounty,  where  a  transcript  of  the  judgment  has  not  been  filed 
in  the  county  where  the  land  is  situated;  and  it  does  not  con- 
stitute a  fraud  upon  the  judgment  plaintiff  for  the  judgment 
defendant  to  convey  sudi  land  to  a  third  person  after  the  renr 
dition  of  judgment." 

§  7.  Rights  or  choses  in  acticML — ^It  is  held  by  the  courts  in 
many  jurisdictions  that,  in  the  absence  of  a  statute,  the  debts^ 
choses  in  action,  and  equitable  rights  of  the  debtor  may  be 
reached  in  equity  when  fraudulently  transferred,  althou^  not 
subject  to  execution  and  sale  at  common  law.''    In  other  juris- 


35.  Stokes  ▼.  Jones,  21  Ala.  731, 
ao  beld  as  to  a  oonveyanoe  with  oove- 
iiaiite  of  warranty;  Flynn  v.  Wil- 
liams, 20  N.  C.  32. 

86.  Baker  v.  Chandler,  51  Ind.  85, 
where  no  fraud  in  fact  was  alleged. 

37.  y.  y.— Hadden  ▼.  Spader,  20 
Johns.  (N.  Y.)  554;  Bayard  ▼.  Hoif- 
man,  4  Johns.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)  450; 
McDemratt  t.  Strong,  4  Johns. 
Ch.  (N.  Y.)  687;  Greenwood 
▼.  Brodhead,  8  Barb.  (N.  Y.) 
593;  Edmeston  y.  Lyde,  1  Paige 
(N.  Y.)  637,  10  Am.  Dee.  454.  See 
also  First  Nat  Bank  ▼.  Shuler,  153 
N.  Y.  163,  60  Am.  St.  Rep.  601,  47 
N.  E.  262;  Knower  ▼.  Central  Nat. 
Bank,  124  N.  Y.  552,  21  Am.  St.  Rep. 
700,  27  N.  E.  247. 

17.  £f. — ^Aetna  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Man- 


hattan L.  Ins.  Oo.,  24  Fed.  760,  pro- 
ceeds of  sssigned  policies  and  prem- 
iums and  interest  paid  1^  an  insolv- 
ent on  policies  payable  to  his  wife 
can  be  reached. 

Ga.— Stenson  v.  Williams,  35  Oa. 
170,  if  a  judgment  creditor  has  pur- 
sued his  legal  remedies  to  every 
ayailable  extent  without  success. 

/tt.— Hitt  V.  Ormsbee,  14  HI.  233. 

Me, — Sargent  v.  Salmond,  27  Me. 
530. 

IfaM.— Drake  ▼.  Rice,  130  Mass. 
410;  Anthracite  Ins.  C6.  ▼.  Sears, 
100  Mass.  383. 

Mich, — Ionia  County  Sav.  Bank  t. 
McLean,  84  Mich.  625,  48  N.  W.  150, 
a  policy  taken  out  for  the  benefit  of 
the  estate  of  the  assured',  and  not  for 
the    sole    benefit    of    his    wife    and 


Pbopebty,  eto.,  which  Ceeditobs  mat  Beaoh. 


99 


dictions  the  rule  is  maintained  tliat  such,  property,  not  being 
subject  to  execution  at  common  law,  cannot  be  subjected  in 
equity  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  claims  of  creditors.''  In  most 
jurisdictions,  either  by  express  statutory  enactmemts,  or  under 


danghter,  cannot  be  assigned  to  them 
so  aft  to  place  it  beyond  the  reach  of 
his  ereditora. 

Miu, — Cfttchings  v.  Manlove,  39 
Misa.  666,  equity  will  avail  to  sub- 
ject the  avails  of  a  life  insurance 
policy  voluntarily  assigned  by  an  in- 
solvent debtor  to  his  wife  and  chil- 
dren; Wright  V.  Petrie,  1  8m.  &  M. 
Ch.  <Miss.)  282,  a  transfer  of  a 
chose  in  action  by  a  release  of  a 
mortgage  and  the  liability  due 
thereunder  la  fraudulent. 

iio. — ^Pendleton  v.  Perkins,  49  Mo. 
566. 

Neh. — ^Rogers  v.  Jones,  1  Neb.  417. 

N.  H.— Abbott  V.  Tenney,  18  N.  H. 
109;  Tappan  v.  Evans,  11  N.  H.  311. 

N.  J.— Oolgan  v.  Jones,  44  N.  J. 
£q.  274,  18  Atl.  66,  the  assignment 
by  a  debtor  of  his  claim  for  damages 
for  personal  injuries  by  a  railroad 
cc^lision  for  $330  to  an  attorney,  who 
prosecuted  it  to  judgment  and  re- 
covered in  the  name  of  the  debtor 
$4,000,  was  void  as  to  antecedent 
creditors  so  far  as  the  amount  re- 
covered exceeded  reasonable  compen- 
sation for  the  attorney's  services. 

N.  O, — Burton  v.  Farinholt,  86  N. 
G.  260;  Powell  v.  Powell,  63  N.  C. 
283. 

OMo, — ^Bryans  v.  Tkiylor,  Wright 
(Ohio),  246. 

Po.— Elliott's  Appeal,  60  Pa.  St. 
76,  88  Am.  Dec.  626. 

^np.^Ryall  V.  Rolle,  1  Atk.  166, 
26  Eng.  Rep.  107,  1  Vea.  348,  27  Eng. 
neprint,  1074;  Partridge  v.  Gopp, 
Ambl.  696,  27  Eng.  Reprint,  388,  1 
Eden,    163,   28   Eng.    Reprint^    647; 


King  V.  Dupine,  2  Atk.  603,  note,  26 
Eng.  Reprint,  760;  Taylor  v.  Jones, 
2  Atk.  600,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  768. 

38.  Ala.— Henderson  v.  HaU,  134 
Ala.  466,  32  8a  840. 

Ark, — ^Matlock  v.  Bledsoe  (Ark.), 
90  S.  W.  848,  an  administrator  may 
not  attack  his  intestate^s  assignment 
of  his  life  insurance  aa  in  fraud  of 
creditors. 

Ind. — Stewart  v.  English,  6  Ind. 
176. 

Ky. — McFerran  v.  Jones,  2  Litt 
(Ky.)   219. 

Md, — Harper  v.  Clayton,  84  Md. 
346,  67  Am.  St  Rep.  407,  36  Atl. 
1083,  36  L.  R.  A.  211,  44  Cent.  L.  J. 
97,  an  unassigned  right  of  dower 
cannot  be  reached  by  a  creditor's 
bill,  in  the  absence  of  a  statute; 
Watkins  v.  Dorsett,  1  Bland.  630. 

Mich, — Columbia  Bank  v.  Jacobs, 
10  Mich.  349,  81  Am.  Dec.  792,  in- 
terest of  mortgagee. 

N,  J.— Green  ▼.  Tantum,  19  N.  J, 
Eq.   106. 

B,  /. — Greene  v.  Keene;,  14  R.  I. 
388,  61  Am.  Rep.  400. 

re«.— White  Sewing  Mach.  C6.  v. 
Atkinson,  76  Tex.  330,  12  S.  W.  812. 
But  see  Taylor  v.  Gillean,  23  Tez. 
608. 

Can.—Blakely  v.  Gould,  24  Ont. 
App.  163,  assignment  of  prospective 
profits  under  an  executory  contract; 
Lodbr  v.  Creighton,  9  U.  C.  C.  P. 
296,  assignment  of  mortgage. 

Eng. — Norcutt  v.  Dodd,  Cr.  k  Ph. 
100,  41  Eng.  Reprint,  428;  Rider  v. 
Kidder,  10  Ves.  Jr.  360,  32  Eng.  Re- 
print,   884;    Stokoe   v.    Cowan,    29 


100 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


statutes  rendering  them  liable  tk>  attaehment,  ezeontion,  or 
garnishment,  choses  in  action,  when  fraudulently  transferred  or 
assigned  bj  debtors,  like  any  other  property  fraudulently  oon« 
veyed  may  be  reached  by  creditors  in  equity,  and  under  some 
statutes  even  at  law.**  If  the  effect,  not  necessarily  the  object, 
of  the  assignment  or  transfer  is  to  defeat^  hinder^  or  delay  one 
particular  creditor  only,  the  assignment  or  transfer  will  be  void 
under  the  statuta^     This  general  rule  under  the  statutes  has 


Beav.  637,  7  Jar.  K.  S.  901,  4  L.  T. 
Bep.  N.  S.  695,  9  Wkly.  Rep.  801,  64 
Eng.  Reprint^  775;  Sims  v.  Thomas, 
9  L.  J.  Q.  B.  399,  12  A.  &  E.  536,  4 
P.  A  D.  233,  40  E.  C.  L.  268,  a  bond 
is  not  goods  and  chattels  within  13 
Eliz.  chap.  5;  Gorogan  v.  Cooke,  2 
Ball.  &  B.  233 ;  McCarthy  v.  Goold,  1 
Ball.  &  B.  387 ;  Dundas  v.  Dntens,  2 
Cox.  Ch.  235,  30  Eng.  Reprint,  109, 
1  Ves.  Jr.  196,  1  Rev.  Rep.  112,  30 
Eng.  Reprint,  298. 

39.  Afo.— Hall  &  Farley  t.  Ala- 
bama Term,  k  Imp.  Co.  (AUu),  .39 
So.  285. 

Col. — Ballon  v.  Andrews  Banking 
Co.,  128  Cal.  662,  61  Pac.  102,  as- 
signment of  book  account. 

OotMiw — Enos  ▼.  Tattle,  3  C6nn.  27. 

/nd.— Qnarl  v.  Abbett,  102  Ind. 
233,  1  N.  E.  476,  52  Am.  Rep.  662; 
Scott  V.  Indianapolis  Wagon  Works, 
48  Ind.  75,  iFraudulent  transfer  ol 
the  capital  stock  of  a  corporation. 

Kjf, — Bnmes  v.  Cade,  73  Ky.  251; 
Davis  T.  Sharron,  54  Ky.  64. 

La.— North  ▼.  Cordon,  15  La.  Ann. 
221. 

jr«.--Spaulding  t.  Fisher,  57  Me. 

411. 

N,  J.-— Tenbrook  ▼.  Jessup,  60  N. 
J.  Eq.  234,  46  Atl.  516;  Mallory  ▼. 
Kirkpatrick,  54  N.  J.  Eq.  50,  33  AU. 
205;  Colgan  ▼.  Jones,  44  K.  J.  Eq. 
274,   18  Atl.  55;  Tantum  v.  Qreen^ 


21  N.  J.  Eq.  364,  alfg  19  N.  J.  Eq. 
105. 

Ohio, — ^liiaclaren  v.  Stone,  18  Ohio 
Cir.  Ct.  854»  9  Ohio  Cir.  Dee.  794, 
release  by  husband  of  his  dower  in- 
terest in  lands  of  his  deceased  wife 
to  his  children;  Newark  ▼•  Fonk,  15 
Ohio  St.  462. 

R.  /. — ^Beckwith  t.  Borroa^,  14  R. 
I.  366,  51  Am.  Dee.  392. 

lFt«.— Bragg  v.  Gaynor,  85  Wis. 
468,  55  N.  W.  919,  21  L.  R.  A.  168; 
LaCrosse  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Wilson,  74 
Wis.  391,  43  N.  W.  153. 

Can, — Upper  Canada  Bank  ▼. 
Shickluna,  10  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  157. 

Eng, — ^Edmunds  v.  Edmunds,  73  L. 
J.  P.  97,  P.  362,  91  L.  T.  568,  sincr 
choses  in  s;4!tion  became  attachable  by 
Common  Law  Procedure  Act,  1854,  (  60 
et  8eq,,  an  assignment  of  them  may 
be  void  under  13  Elis.  c.  5,  as  tend- 
ing t9  defeat,  hinder  or  delay  credi- 
tors. See  also  SUt.  1  and  2  Vict.  c. 
110,  S  12;  Stokoe  ▼.  Cowan,  29  Beav. 
637,  7  Jur.  N.  S.  901,  4  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  695,  9  Wkly.  Rep.  801,  54  Eng. 
Reprint,  775;  Warden  ▼.  Jones,  2 
DeO.  k  J.  76,  4  Jur.  N.  S.  269,  27  L. 
J.  Ch.  190,  6  Wkly.  Rep.  180,  59 
Eng.  Ch.  61,  44  Eng.  Reprint^  916; 
Barrack  ▼.  McCulloch,  3  Jur.  N.  S. 
180,  3  Kay.  L.  J.  110,  26  L.  J.  Ch. 
105,  5  Wkly.  Rep.  38. 

40.  Edmunds  v.  Edmunds,  73  L.  J. 
P.  97,  P.  362,  91  L.  T.  568. 


Peopekty^  £TOv  which  Cseditobs  may  Keaoh.        101 

been  hdd  to  apply  to  the  transfer  or  assignm^it  of  promissory 
notesy^  drafts/'  money  and  bank  bills,^  acoounte  and  balances  due 
on  accounts^^  debts  due  under  contract  for  the  sale  of  land,^ 
rents  due  under  a  lease^^*  mortgages/^  stock  of  a  oorporatiouy^ 
subscriptions  for  stock  in  corporations,^  life  insurance  policiesi'^ 


41.  Cofm. — ^Enos  ▼.  Tattle,  3  Conn. 
27. 

La, — ^North  ▼.  Gordon,  16  La.  Ann. 
221. 

Me, — Sargent  t.  Salmond,  27  Me. 
539. 

Neb, — Rogers  ▼.  Jones,  1  Neb.  417. 

Wit.— -Bragg  ▼.  Qaynor,  S5  Wis. 
4S8,  56  N.  W.  919,  21  L.  R.  A.  161; 
LaCrosse  Nat.  Bank  v.  Wilson,  74 
Wis.  391,  43  N.  W.  163. 

42.  LaCrosse  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Wilson, 
74  Wis.  391,  43  N.  W.  163,  non- 
leviable  assets,  things  in  action,  evi- 
dences of  debt,  credits  and  effects,  and 
any  property  held  by  any  sort  of  con- 
▼eyanoe  or  title  void  as  to  the  credi- 
itors  of  the  principal  debtor,  may  be 
garnished,  under  Wis.  Rev.  Btat., 
I  2768. 

48.  N,  7.— Hadden  v.  Spader,  20 
Johns.  664;  Spader  v.  Davis,  6  Johns. 
Ch.  280;  Bayard  v.  Hoffman,  4  Johns. 
Ch.  461. 

17.  i9.— Shainwald  v.  Lewis,  6  Fed. 
766,  770,  7  Sawy.  148. 

/fui.— Blair  v.  Smith,  114  Ind.  114, 
6  Am.  St.  Rep.  693,  16  N.  F.  817. 

ife.— Spaulding  v.  Fisher,  67  Me. 

411. 

8.  C— Brenan  v.  Burke,  6  Rich. 
Eq.  200,  money  of  debtor  in  hands  of 
sheriff. 

44.  Ballou  V.  Andrews  Banking 
Co.,  128  Cal.  662,  61  Pac.  102;  Drake 
V.  Rice,  130  Mass.  410. 

45.  Hitt  V.  Ormsbee,  14  111.  223. 

46.  Daugherty  v.  Bogg,  3  Ind.  T. 
197,  63  S.  W.  642. 


47.  Wrij^t  V.  Petrie,  Sm.  ft  M. 
Ch,  (Miss.)  282;  Tantum  v.  Green, 
21  N.  J.  Eq.  364;  Bragg  v.  Gaynor,  86 
Wis.  468,  66  N.  W.  919,  21  L.  R.  A. 
161;  Upper  Ganada  Bank  v.  Shick- 
luna,  10  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  167. 

48.  N.  r.— Weed  v.  Pierce,  9  Cow. 
722;  Edmeston  v.  Lyde^  1  F)uge» 
637,  19  Am.  Dec.  464;  Bayard  ▼. 
Hoffman,  4  Johns.  Ch.  460. 

/nil.— Quarl  v.  Abbett,  102  Ind. 
233,  62  Am.  Rep.  662,  1  N.  E.  476; 
Scott  V.  Indianapolis  Wagon  Works, 
48  Ind.  76. 

B,  I. — ^Beckwith  v.  Burrough,  14 
R.  I.  366,  61  Am.  Dec.  392. 

Eng, — Warden  v.  Jones,  eupra; 
Barrack  v.  McCuUoch,  supro. 

49.  U,  £f.— Camden  v.  Stuart,  144 
U.  S.  104,  12  Sup.  Ct.  686,  36  L.  Ed. 
363;  Hadley  v.  Stuta,  139  U.  S.  417, 
11  Sup.  Ct.  630,  36  L.  Ed.  227;  Hatch 
V.  Dana,  101  U.  S.  206,  26  L.  Ed.  886; 
Ogilvie  V.  Knox  Ins.  Co.,  22  How. 
380,  16  L.  Ed.  349;  Marsh  v.  Bur- 
roughs, 16  Fed.  Cas.  No.  9,112,  1 
Woods.  463. 

Ohio, — Henry  v.  Vermillion  R.  Co., 
17  Ohio,  187;  Miers  v.  Zanesville, 
etc..  Turnpike  Co.,  14  Ohio,  273;  13 
Ohio,  197. 

Wi9. — ^Pierce  v.  Milwaukee  Constr. 
Co.,  38  Wis.  263. 

60.  Catchings  v.  Manlove,  39  Miss. 
656;  Burton  v.  Farinholt,  86  N.  C. 
260;  Stokoe  v.  Cowan,  supro.  See 
Life  insurance,  chap.  IV,  |  20,  infra. 


102 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


leg^CBy^^  annuities,"  distributive  shares  in  a  decedent's 
tate^"  unassigned  dower  interest,^  judgments,"  daims  for  dam- 
ages for  torts  with  respect  to  pfroperty,"*  and  for  damages  for 
personal  injuries."  But  it  has  been  held  in  other  cases  that  a 
debtor's  mere  rig^t  of  action  for  a  personal  tort,  as  for  assault 
and  battery,  slander,  malicious  prosecution,  and  other  personal 
injuries,  cannot  be  reached  by  a  creditor's  bill."  Nor  can  the 
debtor's  right  of  action  for  a  conversion  of  property  exempt  from 
execution  be  reached  in  equity."  The  cancellation  or  release  of 
a  mortgage  or  other  debt  by  an  insolvent  debtor,  without  con- 
sideration, is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  existing  creditors."    The 


51.  Bigelow  V.  Ayrault,  46  Barb. 
(K.  Y.)  143;  Taylor  ▼.  Jones,  2  Atk. 
600,  26  Eng.  Reprint^  768. 

52.  De  Hierapolis  v.  Lawrence,  115 
Fed.  761 ;  Norcutt  v.  Dodd,  Cr.  k  Pb. 
100,  41  Eng.  Reprint,  428;  King  ▼. 
Dupine,  2  Atk.  603,  note,  26  Eng.  Re- 
print, 760. 

53.  Smitb  v.  Patton,  194  111.  638, 
62  N.  E.  794,  surrender  of  rigbt  to 
contest  will  as  consideration  for  con- 
veyance; Moores  ▼.  Wbite,  3  Gratt. 
(Va.)   139. 

54.  See  Wife's  dower  or  otber  in- 
terest in  busband's  property,  cbap. 
IV,  S  38,  infra. 

55.  Egberts  v.  Pemberton,  7  Jobns. 
Cb.  (N.  T.)  208;  Nortb  ▼.  Gordon,  16 
La.  Ann.  221. 

66.  Reilly  v.  Sicilian  Asphalt  Pav- 
ing Co.,  170  N.  Y.  40,  62  N.  E.  772, 
88  Am.  St.  Rep.  636,  67  L.  R.  A.  176; 
Hudson  V.  Plets,  11  Paige  (N.  Y.), 
180;  Cincinnati  ▼.  Hafer,  49  Obio  St. 
60,  30  N.  E.  197;  Dening  v.  Nelson,  I 
Obio  Dec.  (Reprint)  503,  10  West.  L. 
J.  215.  See  also  Ten  Broeck  y.  Sloo, 
18  How.  Pr.  (N.  Y.)  28. 

67.  Colgan  v.  Jones,  44  N.  J.  Eq. 
274,  18  Atl.  55.    See  note  37,  aupra. 

58.  Hudson  ▼.  Pletc,  11  Paige  (N. 


Y.)  180;  Bennett  ▼.  Sweet,  171  Mass. 
600,  51  K.  E.  183,  a  yerdiet  for  per- 
sonal injuries  before  judgment  bas 
been  entered  tbereon  is  not  property 
wbieb  can  be  reaebed  in  equity. 

59.  Hudson  v.  Plets,  11  Paige  (K. 
Y.)  180,  altbou^  a  right  of  action 
for  the  destruction  or  injury  of  prop- 
erty liable  to  execution  may  be. 

60.  Ind, — Johnson  ▼.  Jones,  79  Ind. 
141,  surrender  of  notes  and  mort- 
gages. 

JfoM.— Martin  t.  Root,  17  Mass. 
222. 

N.  ff .— E^rett  v.  Read,  3  N.  H.  55. 

y.  J.— Youngs  V.  Public  School 
Trustees,  31  N.  J.  Eq.  290. 

Can, — ^Upper  Canada  Bank  ▼.  Shick- 
luna,  10  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  157,  dis- 
charge of  mortgage  without  conside- 
ration. 

Eng, — Sibthorp  v.  Mozon,  3  Atk. 
581,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  1134,  1  Yes.  49, 
27  Eng.  Reprint,  883,  the  cancellation 
of  a  debt  by  will  is  not  Talid  as 
against  creditors.  See  chap.  11,  |  19, 
8upra, 

Aooidettt  poliay. — ^Where  a  wife 
took  out  an  accident  policy  in- 
suring her  husband,  who  was  made 
beneficiary    therein,    and    the    only 


Pbopebtt^  £To..  which  Cbeditobs  may  Reach. 


103 


▼olnntary  release  by  an  insolvent  grantor  of  the  covenant  of  his 
grantee  to  assume  and  pay  a  debt  secured  by  mortgage  on  the 
premises  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors,  if  the  effect  of 
the  release  is  to  hinder  or  defraud  creditors.*^  But  a  judgment 
creditor  cannot  impeach  a  release,  by  an  insolvent  debtor,  of  a 
mere  contingent  obligation.^ 

.§  8.  Earnings  or  wages  of  debtor*— Where  a  debtor  assigns 
his  earnings  or  wages  after  they  become  due,  without  considera- 
tion, or  with  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  his  creditors, 
they  may  be  reached  in  equity  by  the  creditors,  like  any  other 
chose  in  action,  if  they  are  not  by  law  exempt  from  the  claims 
of  creditors.**  No  agreement  entered  into  by  a  debtor,  with 
a  view  to  deprive  his  creditors  of  his  future  earnings,  under 
either  an  existing  or  future  contract,  and  enable  him  to  retain 
and  use  them  for  his  own  benefit,  is  valid  as  against  them.^    But 


referenoe  to  the  wife  was  in  the  ap- 
plication which  provided  that  the 
policy  in  case  of  death  should  be  pay- 
able to  the  vrife,  and  the  wife  paid 
the  premiums  thereon,  and  the  hus- 
band assigned  all  his  interest  in  the 
policy  to  his  wife,  and  thereafter  he 
was  injured,  the  assignment  was  not 
fraudulent  as  to  the  creditors  of  the 
husband.  Weckerly  ▼.  Taylor  (Neb. 
1906),  110  N.  W.  738. 

61.  Youngs  ▼.  Public  School  Trus- 
tees, 31  N.  J.  Eq.  290,  but  such  re- 
lease, although  without  consideration, 
is  Talid  if  the  grantor  is  solvent. 

6t.  McGay  v.  Keilback,  14  Abb.  Pr. 
(N.  Y.)  142. 

eS.  Wolfsberger  v.  Mort,  104  Mo. 
App.  267,  78  S.  W.  817,  an  insolvent 
debtor  cannot  systematically  give 
practically  all  earnings  to  his  wife, 
and  thereby  allow  her  to  accumulate 
property  in  her  own  name,  which,  if 
acquired  by  him,  would  be  subject  to 
levy;  Bobinaon  v.  McKenna,  21  R.  I. 


117,  42  Atl.  510,  an  assignment  of 
wages  to  secure  a  present  indebted- 
ness and  future  advances  of  goods 
and  merchandise  is  not  good  as 
against  creditors,  so  as  to  include 
money  paid  over  to  the  assignor  out 
of  the  wages  under  an  agreement  to 
that  effect  outside  of  the  assignment; 
Dow  ▼.  Taylor,  71  Vt  337,  46  Atl. 
220,  76  Am.  St.  Rep.  775,  where  a 
debtor  assigned  his  wages  for  a  debt 
honestly  uue,  but  also  to  prevent 
other  creditors  trusteeing  his  em- 
ployer for  the  excess  over  the  debt, 
the  assignment  was  within  the  stat- 
ute against  fraudulent  conveyances; 
Moran  v.  Moran,  12  Bush.  (Ky.) 
301. 

64.  Tripp  V.  Childs,  14  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  85;  Lennon  v.  Parker,  21  R.  1. 
43,  46  Atl.  44,  defendant's  assign- 
ment of  wages  to  a  creditor,  who  col- 
lected the  same  and  turned'  them  over 
to  defendant,  retaining  a  small  part 
to  apply  OQ  his  claim^  was  fraudu- 


104 


FSAUDULBNT   CoNVBTANCES* 


where  the  assignment  is  given  for  a  valid  and  valuable  considera* 
tion,*^  or  made  in  consideration  of  neoeesariee  to  be  furnished  to 
the  assignor  for  the  support  of  himself  and  his  family,^  or  where 
wages  and  earnings  of  the  debtor  axe  exempted  by  statutes  from 
the  claims  of  creditors,^  such  an  assignment  is  good  as  against 
creditors.  An  employer  cannot  be  garnished  by  bis  employee's 
creditor  where  he  has  paid  the  employee's  wages  in  advance^  so 
that  at  the  time  of  service  there  is  nothing  due  the  latter,  al- 
though they  were  paid  in  advance  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding 
liability  to  garnishment.®  A  creditor  cannot  ooerce  a  debtor  to 
labor  for  his  benefit,  and  a  debtor  is  not  obliged  to  apply  the 
proceeds  of  his  labor  to  the  benefit  of  his  creditor,  leaving  his 
family  to  suffer  want.®  A  debtor's  wife  receiving  her  husband's 
earnings  may  entirely  consume  them  in  the  suitable  support  of 
his  family,  without  becoming  in  any  way  answerable  to  his 
creditors.^  But,  as  against  them,  she  cannot  appropriate  such 
earnings  or  income  to  make  investments  in  her  own  name, 
either  for  him  or  herself,  or  to  keep  down  or  pay  off  incum- 
brances on  or  otherwise  improve  her  own  property,  or  to  pay 
the  debts  or  increase  the  profits  of  her  separate  business.^^  The 
fact  that  a  part  of  the  price  of  a  house  and  lot  conveyed  to  the 
wife  for  a  home,  and  the  cost  of  the  improvements  thereon  neces- 
sary for  the  comfort  of  the  family,  are  paid  for  out  of  the 
husband's   earnings,    but  not   exceeding  the   amount   which   is 


lent;  Gragg  y.  Mastin,  12  Allen 
(Mass.),  498,  00  Am.  Dec  164;  Rob- 
inson ▼.  McKenna,  supra;  Dow  v. 
Taylor,  supra. 

65.  Lannan  ▼.  Smith,  7  Gray 
(Mass.),  150;  Emery  v.  Lawrence,  8 
Cush.  (Mass.)  161;  Boylen  ▼. 
Leonard,  2  Allen  (Mass.),  407;  Dole 
T.  Farwell,  72  N.  H.  183,  55  Atl. 
553;  Fradd  ▼.  Charon,  60  N.  H.  180, 
44  Atl.  010. 

ee.  Dole  ▼.  Farwell,  72  N.  H.  183, 
56  Atl.  653;  Provencher  ▼.  Brooks, 
64  N.  H.  470,  18  Atl.  641 ;  Lannan  ▼. 


Smith,   supra;  Emery  ▼.   Lawnneei, 
supra. 

67.  See  Exempt  earnings  or 
wages,  chap.  IV,  8  41,  infra. 

68.  Van  Vleet  v.  Stratton,  01 
Tenn.  473,  10  S.  W.  428. 

69.  Van  Vleet  ▼.  Stratton,  81 
Tenn.  473,  10  S.  W.  428;  Leslie  ▼. 
Joyner,  2  Head'.  (Tenn.)  514. 

70.  Trefethen  v.  Lynam,  00  Me. 
376,  38  Atl.  336,  60  Am.  St.  Rep.  271. 
38  L.  R.  A.  100;  Ckiyne  ▼.  Sayre,  04 
N.  J.  Eq.  702,  30  Atl.  06. 

71.  Trefethen  ▼.  Lynam,  suprm. 


Pbopkbtt^  btc,  whioh  Creditors  hat  Ksaoh. 


105 


neoeesary  for  the  reasonable  support  of  the  f amilj,  does  not  ren- 
der the  conveyance  fraudulent  as  against  the  husband's  credi- 
tors." 13ie  obligation  of  a  husband  to  support  his  family  ia 
paramount  to  that  of  paying  his  debts^  and  such  support  inyolves 
provision  of  a  home  to  shelter^  as  well  as  raiment  to  dothe^  or 
food  to  sustain  lifa"  A  judgment  creditor  has  no  right  to  the 
products  of  his  debtor's  labor^  which  became  as  soon  as  pro- 
duced the  property  of  a  third  person^  and  it  is  immaterial  that 
the  debtor  refused  to  make  the  contract  to  furnish  the  products 
directly,  fearing  that  they  might  be  subjected  to  the  judgment 
debt,  but  procured  a  contract  to  be  made  by  his  wife.^^ 

§  9.  BamingSy  services^  and  savings  of  wife. — ^The  common 
law  rule  that  the  wife's  earnings  belong  to  the  husband,  and 
that  he  cannot  give  or  voluntarily  relinquish  them  to  her,  or 
invest  them,  or  permit  her  to  invest  them,  in  property  in  her 
own  name,  and  thus  withdraw  them  or  the  property  from  the 
claims  of  his  existing  creditors,  still  prevails,  in  the  absence  of 
statute,  and  the  earnings  of  the  wife  while  cohabiting  with  her 
husband  are  not  made  her  separate  property  by  the  Married 
Woman's  Acts  in  the  absence  of  express  provision  in  such  acta.^ 


72.  EreTBole  ▼.  Bullock,  26  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1098,  83  S.  W.  666;  Green  v. 
Buckler,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep.  286,  40  S. 
W.  382;  (^Gorman  ▼.  Madden,  9  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  667,  6  8.  W.  766;  Coyne  ▼. 
Sayre,  Mipro. 

78.  Oreene  v.  Buckler,  supra, 

74.  Buckley  v.  Dunn,  67  Miaa. 
710,  19  Am.  St.  Rep.  334,  7  So.  660. 

75.  17.  «.— fleitz  ▼.  Mitchell,  94  U. 
S.  680,  24  L.  Ed.  179,  alfg  1  Mc- 
Arthur  (D.  C),  480;  Union  Tnitt 
Co.  v.  Fiaher,  26  Fed.  178. 

Ala.— Batea  v.  Morria,  101  Ala. 
282,  13  So.  138;  Banga  ▼.  Edwarda, 
88  Ala.  382,  6  So.  764;  Carter  v. 
Worthington,  82  Ala.  334,  2  So.  616, 
60  Am.  Rep.  738;  ^ing  v.  Roawald, 
74  Ala.  346;  <3ordon  ▼.  Tweedy,  71 


Ala.  202;  Evana  ▼.  Covington,  70 
Ala.  440;  Glaze  v.  Blake,  66  Ala. 
379;  McLemore  y.  NuckoUa,  37  Ala. 
62;  Pinkaton  v.  McLemore,  31  Ala. 
308. 

Conn, — Hinman  v.  Parkia,  33  Conn. 
188. 

Oa. — Georgia  R.  &  Banking  Co.  t. 
Tice,  124  Ga.  469,  62  S.  E.  916. 

/U.— Bowman  ▼.  Aah,  143  111.  649, 
32  N.  E.  486;  Schwartz  v.  Saundera, 
46  lU.  18. 

/oioa. — ^Duncan  v.  Roaelle,  16  Iowa, 
601. 

Ky. — ^Penn  v.  Young,  10  Buah, 
626;  Uhrig  v.  Horatman,  8  Buah, 
172;  Muagrave  ▼.  Pariah,  10  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  998,  11  S.  W.  464,  the  proeeeda 
of  the  labor  of  a  married  woman,  on- 


106 


Fbaudulsnt  Convxtanoxs. 


But^  as  against  subsequent  creditors,  a  gift  or  voluntary  renun- 
ciatioo  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  of  her  earnings  is  valid  at  com- 
mon law,  unless  successfully  assailed  for  intentional  fraud.^  In 
most  jurisdictions  the  common  law  rule  has  been  changed  or 
modified  by  statutes  which  give  a  married  woman  the  right  to 
her  earnings  in  carrying  on  a  separate  business  with  the  esEpress 
or  implied  consent  of  her  husband,  or  after  desertion  by  him." 


less  derived  from  an  employment  bj 
or  under  a  third  person,  belong  to 
her  husband. 

Mita. — Apple  ▼.  Oanong,  47  lifiss. 
180. 

N.  -ff.— Hoyt  V.  White,  46  N.  H. 
45. 

N,  J. — Cramer  ▼.  Keford,  17  N.  J. 
Eq.  367,  90  Am.  Dec.  604.  But  see 
Tresch  y.  Wirtz,  34  N.  J.  Eq.  124, 
prior  to  N.  J.  Statute,  a  husband 
could  make  a  valid  gift  or  relinquish- 
ment to  his  wife  of  her  earnings,  even 
against  creditors  whose  debts  had 
already  been  contracted. 

8.  C— McAfee  v.  McAfee,  28  S.  C. 
188,  6  S.  E.  480;  Bridgers  v.  Howell, 
27  S.  C.  426,  3  S.  E.  700. 

Tenn. — Cox  v.  Scott,  0  Baxt.  306. 

Fa.— Grant  v.  Sutton,  00  Va.  771, 
10  S.  E.  784,  prior  to  the  taking  ef- 
fect of  the  Virginia  Code,  May  1, 
1888;  Campbell  v.  Bowles,  30  Oratt. 
662. 

W.  Fa.— Bailey  v.  Gardner,  31  W. 
'  Va.  04,  6  8.  E.  636,  13  Am.  St  Bep. 
■\  847.    See  also  chap.  VIII,  8  43,  infra. 
I     76.  Bates  v.  Morris,  9upra;  Bangs 
•V.    Edwards,    supra;    Wing   v.    Ros- 
wald,  supra;  Glaze  v.  Blake,  supra; 
Pinkston  v.  McLemore,  supra;  Bow- 
man V.  Ash,  supra.    But  when  a  hus- 
band said  to  his  wife  that  she  might 
have  certain  earnings  of  hers  to  do 
with  as  she  pleased,  but  still  used 
them  in  his  business,  and  gave  no  re- 
ceipt therefor,  and  she  asserted  no 


claim  thereto  for  fourteen  years,  the 
gift  could  not  then  be  established  in 
equity  as  against  his  subsequent 
creditors.  Evans  v.  Covington,  70 
Ala.  440.  See  also  Carleton  v. 
Rivers,  64  Ala.  467;  Shaeffer  v. 
Sheppard,  64  Ala.  244,  the  Alabama 
statutes  have  not  changed  the  com- 
mon law  rule  giving  the  husband 
the  earnings  of  the  wife,  so  that  she 
has  no  separate  estate  in  the  com- 
pensation for  her  services  in  keeping 
a  boarding  house,  carried  on  in  the 
name  of  her  husband,  or  in  money 
spent  by  her  husband  in  paying  a 
debt  for  lands  purchased  by  him, 
which  money  was  earned  by  the  wife 
carrying  on  a  farm  for  several  years. 

77.  N.  y. — Stevens  v.  Cunnings 
ham,  181  N.  T.  454,  74  N.  E.  434, 
rev'g  75  App.  Div.  126,  77  N.  Y. 
Supp.  364,  the  enabling  statutes  have 
no  effect  upon  those  duties  which  a 
wife  owes  to  the  husband  at  common 
law  in  the  marriage  relation. 

Ala.- Reeves  v.  McNeill,  127  Ala. 
175,  28  So.  623;  Bates  v.  Morris, 
supra;  Carter  v.  Worthington, 
supra;  Wing  v.  Roswald,  supra. 

Conn.- Whiting  v.  Beckwith,  31 
Conn.  606. 

/».— Bowman  v.  Ash,  143  111.  640, 
32  N.  £.  486;  Partridge  v.  Arnold, 
73  lU.  600. 

/fid.— Boots  V.  GrifKth,  80  Ind. 
246. 

Iowa. — ^Hed)ge  v.  Glenny,  76  Iowa, 


Pbopebtt^  xto.^  whioh  Cbbditobs  may  Bbach. 


107 


But  the  earnings  of  the  wife,  in  order  that  they  may  be  exempt 
from  liability  for  the  husband's  debts,  must  have  accrued  to  her 
from  services  rendered  to  a  third  party  in  conducting  a  separate 
business,  distinct  from  the  common  law  duties  she  owes  her  hus- 


513,  39  N.  W.  sis,  1  L.  R.  A.  479, 
the  keeping  of  boarders  bj  a  married 
woman  is  such  business  and  entitles 
her  to  the  proceeds  under  the  Iowa 
statute.  See  also  King  ▼.  Wells,  106 
Iowa,  640,  77  N.  W.  338,  subsequent 
creditors  of  the  husband  cannot  sub- 
ject to  the  payment  of  their  claims 
land  held  by  a  wife  obtained  through 
her  labor  and  prudent  management, 
althoujgh  the  husband  worked  with 
her  and  aided  with  his  labor  in  pur- 
chasing it;  Carse  t.  Reticker,  96 
Iowa,  26,  63  N.  W.  461,  58  Am.  St. 
Rep.  421,  profits  of  a  wife  in  a  con- 
tract for  boarding  prisoners. 

fan.— Larimer  v.  KeUy,  10  Kan. 
298. 

JTy.— Clark  ▼.  Meyers,  24  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  380,  68  S.  W.  853,  the  wife's 
earnings  under  an  employment  by 
her  husband  as  agent  of  another 
may  be  held  by  her  free  from  the 
husband's  creditors;  Wallace  v. 
Mason,  100  Ky.  560,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
935,  38  S.  W.  887,  real  estate  paid 
for  by  the  labor  of  a  wife  is  not  sub- 
ject to  a  judgment  against  her  hus- 
band; Rath  V.  Rankins,  17  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1120,  33  S.  W.  832,  the  pro- 
ceeds received  by  a  wife  from  the  sale 
of  produce,  the  products  of  her  in- 
dustry, are  not  subject  to  the  pay- 
ment of  her  husband's  debts  under 
the  Kentucky  statute;  Carter  v. 
Drewery,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep.  888. 

Mass. — ^Draper  ▼.  Buggee,  133 
Mass.  258,  where  a  wife  paid,  with 
money  earned  by  her  own  labor  a 
note  of  her  husband  and  a  mortgage 
on  land  owned  by  him,  the  convey- 


anoe  of  the  land  to  her  was  not  in 
fraud  of  creditors. 

ifo.—- Furth  ▼.  March,  101  Mo. 
App.  329,  74  S.  W.  147,  the  earnings 
of  the  wife  in  keeping  boarders  not 
subject  to  husband's  debts;  Gruner 
y.  Scholz,  154  Mo.  415,  55  S.  W.  441, 
drug  business  conducted  by  wife 
with  assistance  bf  her  husband; 
Bartlett  ▼.  Behrens,  94  Mo.  530,  7  S. 
W.  581,  where  a  married  woman 
loaned  to  her  husband  earnings  ac- 
cumulated by  her  with  his  consent, 
which  were  afterwards  advanced  by 
him  for  the  purchase  of  real  prop- 
erty for  her,  the  deed  was  not  fraud- 
ulent; Kidwell  V.  Kirkpatrick,  70 
Ma  214;  Coughlin  v.  Ryan,  43  Mo. 
99,  97  Am.  Dec.  375;  Beach  v.  Bald- 
win, 14  Ma  597;  Baer  v.  Pfaff,  44 
Ma  App.  35. 

N,  J. — Costello  V.  Prospect  Brew. 
Co.,  52  N.  J.  Eq.  357,  30  Atl.  682,  a 
wife  who  pays  with  her  own  and  her 
children's  earnings  part  of  a  mort- 
gage on  land  voluntarily  conveyed 
to  her  by  her  husband  is  entitled, 
where  the  conveyance  is  set  aside  as 
fraudulent,  to  a  lien  for  the  amount 
paid  by  her;  Peterson  v.  Mulford,  36 
X.  J.  L.  481 ;  Nat.  Bank  of  Metropo- 
lis V.  Sprague,  20  N.  J.  £q.  13; 
Quidort's  Adm'r  v.  Pergeaux,  18  K. 
J.  Eq.  472. 

Pa.— Phillips  T.  Hall,  160  Pa.  St 
60,  28  Atl.  502,  personal  property 
purchased  in  part  by  wife^s  earnings 
in  keeping  boarders;  Holcomb  ▼• 
People^s  Sav.  Bank,  92  Pa.  St  338; 
Bucher  ▼.  Ream,  68  Pa.  St  421; 
Brown  v.  Pendleton,  60  Pa.  St  419. 


62 


Fraudulent  Conveyancbs. 


cannot,  by  doing  business  in  the  name  of  another^  defraud  his 
creditors.^  Where  an  insolvent  or  failing  debtor,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  pladog  his  property  beyond  the  reach  of  his  creditors, 
conducts  business  in  the  name  of  his  wife,  child,  or  other  third 
person,  but  die  business  is  carried  on  or  managed  by  him  alone 
and  is  in  fact  his  own,  the  transaction  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors^ 
and  the  property  used  or  accumulated  in  such  business  and  the 
profits  of  the  business  are  liable  for  and  may  be  subjected  to  his 
debtfl.^  But  if  a  debtor  carry  on  a  business  in  the  name  and 
upon  the  credit  of  another,  neither  the  property  used  nor  that 
acquired  in  the  business  belongs  to  the  debtor  or  can  be  reached 
by  his  creditors,  and  if  allowed  to  so  carry  on  a  business  for 
his  sole  benefit,  only  the  property  acquired  by  him  in  the  business 
could  be  reached  by  his  creditors,  and  not  the  property  which 
the  debtor  was  allowed  to  use.^  One  may  allow  the  use  of  hia 
name  and  capital  to  another  to  carry  on  a  business,  giving  the 
whole  profits  to  the  latter  for  his  labor  and  attention,  without  any 


30.  Fa88  ▼.  Rice,  30  La.  Ann.  1278. 

40.  Ark, — ^Nickle  ▼.  Emerson  Mer- 
cantile, etc.,  Co.,  13  S.  W.  78. 

ni, — ^Robinson  ▼.  Brems,  90  IlL 
351;  Moran  ▼.  Lilley,  10  111.  App. 
103. 

lotca. — Hamill  v.  Augpistine,  81 
Iowa,  302,  46  N.  W.  1113;  Hamilton 
V.  Ligfatner,  53  Iowa,  470,  6  N.  W. 
603,  where  accumulated  property  had 
been  conveyed  to  the  wife. 

La.— Oppenheim  ▼.  Loovis,  9  La. 
Ann.  261,  a  simulated  partnership, 
entered  into  by  a  debtor  to  protect 
his  property,  will  not  prevent  a  credi- 
tor from  seizing  the  partnership  stock 
to  the  amount  pretended  to  have  been 
contributed. 

N.  Jf .— Levy  v.  Woodcock,  63  N.  H. 
413. 

y^  J.— National  Bank  of  Metropolis 
V.  Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13,  where  a 


husband,  acting  under  a  power  of  at- 
torney from  his  wife,  who  had  no  sep- 
arate property,  formed  a  copartner- 
ship in  the  name  of  his  wife  with  an- 
other and  conducted  a  hotel  business. 
Pa. — Cadbury  v.  Brown,  5  Phila. 
43,  where  a  failing  debtor  took  his 
children  into  partnership  without 
other  consideration  than  services  to 
be  rendered  by  them  in  the  business, 
the  arrangement  is  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors  by  limiting  their  remedy  by 
execution  sale  to  a  disposal  of  the 
debtor's  interest  in  the  firm,  under 
which  the  purchaser  would  get  noth- 
ing but  a  suit  in  equity  for  an  ac- 
counting. 

Wis, — ^Ansorge  v.  Barth,  88  Wis, 
553,  60  N.  W.  1056,  43  Am.  St.  Rep. 
928. 

41.  Smith  V.  Van  Olinda,  48  N.  T. 
169. 


Pbopebtt^  btc.^  whioh  Cbeditobs  hay  Eeaoh. 


109 


as  between  father  and  child^  is  a  yoluntary  conveyance,  without 
legal  consideration^  and  therefore  fraudulent  and  void  as  to 
the  creditors  of  the  parent,  and  the  property  may  be  reached  in 
equity  and  subjected  by  existing  creditors  of  the  parent.^    The 
services  of  a  son  rendered  during  minority  to  his  father  cannot 
be  set  up  as  part  of  a  valuable  consideration  of  a  deed  from  the 
latter  to  the  former,  and  a  conveyance  from  a  father  to  his 
minor  son,  paid  for  in  part  by  money  which  he  had  earned  in 
wages  and  his  note  for  the  rest  of  the  price,  is  fraudulent  and 
void  as  to  creditors.^    The  investment  by  a  father  of  the  earn- 
ings of  minor  children  in  real  estate  in  their  names  cannot  pro* 
tect  the  property  from  his  debts*'^    Lands  purchased  by  a  mother 
with  earnings  of  her  minor  son  which  he  gave  her  are  liable 
to  the  father's  debts,  where  the  father  never  emancipated  the 
son.**    But  a  father  has  no  present  valuable  property  in  the  fu- 
ture labor  or  earnings  of  his  minor  child,  and  may,  acting  in 
good  faith,  though  insolvent  at  the  time,  emancipate  him,  or 
make  a  valid  gift  or  release  to  him  of  his  time  and  future  earn- 
ings.    And  if  the  father  emancipates  his  child  and  allows  him 
to  contract  for  and  retain  his  own  wages  or  earnings,  whether 
the  child  continues  as  a  member  of  his  father's  family  or  pro- 
vides for  his  own  support  and  education  by  his  own  labor,  the 
father  does  not  thereby  withdraw  from  his  creditors  any  property 
or  funds  to  which  they  are  legally  or  justly  entitled  for  the  pay- 
ment of  his  debts;  and  hence  after  such  emancipation  the  child 
becomes  competenit  to  contract  as  if  of  full  age,  and  such  wages 


70.  Cr.  iSf. — ^Dowell  v.  Applegate,  15 
Fed.  419,  8  Bawy.  427. 

Ala, — ^Donegan  ▼.  Detis,  66  Ala. 
362;  Godfrey  ▼.  Hays,  6  Ala.  601,  41 
Am.  Dec.  58. 

Kan, — Stumbaugh  v.  Anderson,  46 
Kan.  541,  26  Pac.  1045. 

MiM9, — Dick  ▼.  Grissom,  1  Freem. 
C!h.  428. 

y,  J.— Gardner's  Adm'r  v.  Sehoo- 
ley,  25  N.  J.  Eq.  150. 


N,  C— North  V.  York,  35  N.  C.  206. 
Pa.— Beaver  ▼.  Bare,  104  Pa.  St.  68, 
49  Am.  Rep.  567. 

80.  BuUett  y.  Worthington,  3  Md. 
Ch.  99;  Winchester  v.  Beid,  53  N.  C. 
877. 

81.  Bell  V.  Hallenbach,  Wright 
(Ohio),  751. 

82.  Schuster  y.  Baumaa  Jewelry 
Co.,  79  Tex.  179,  23  Am.  St  Rep.  327, 
15  a  W.  259. 


110 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


or  earnings,  or  the  property  purchased  with  them  or  in  which 
they  have  been  invested,  by  or  for  the  child,  cannot  be  reached 
and  subjected  by  the  father's  creditors."    Profits  resulting  to  the 


8S.  y.  y.— Kain  ▼.  Larkin,  131  N. 
T.  300,  30  N.  E.  106,  rev^g  62  Hon, 
621,  17  N.  Y.  Supp.  223;  McCaffrey  ▼. 
Hiekey,  66  Barb.  480. 

AUl — ^Donegan  ▼.  Davis,  66  Ala. 
362;  Lyon  ▼.  Boilings  14  Ala.  763, 
48  Am.  Dee.  122. 

Ark. — Bobo  y.  BrysoD,  21  Ark.  387, 
76  Am.  Dec.  406. 

Cal.— Lackman  ▼.  Wood,  26  Oal. 
147. 

Comft.— Atwood  ▼.  Holoomb,  39 
Gonn.  27O9  12  Am.  Bep.  386. 

Oa.— Wilson  ▼.  McMillan,  62  Oa. 
16,  36  Am.  Rep.  116,  where  a  father 
promised  his  minor  child  a  reason- 
able part  of  the  prospective  crop  as 
eompensation  for  the  child's  labor. 

/IZ.— Heeren  ▼.  Kittson,  28  HI. 
App.  260,  where  a  father  agreed  to 
pay  his  minor  son  as  much  as  any 
other  man  would  give  him  for  his 
services  until  he  became  of  age,  and 
a  certain  sum  thereafter;  Partridge 
V.  Arnold,  73  lU.  600. 

Ind. — Jenison  v.  Graves,  2  Blackf. 
440. 

l<noa, — Bener  v.  Edgington,  76 
Iowa,  105,  40  N.  W.  117;  Wolcott  v. 
Rickey,  22  Iowa,  171. 

Me. — ^Lord  v.  Poor,  23  Me.  660. 
Future  earnings  of  minor  children 
are  not  assets  of  the  father's  estate 
to  which  creditors  have  any  right  to 
look,  so  as  to  prevent  their  relin- 
quishment by  the  father,  thou^  in- 
solvent, to  the  children,  if  he  so  wills. 
MerriU  v.  Hussey  (Me.)  64  Atl.  810. 

Mq98, — Jenney  v.  Alden,  12  Mass. 
376;  Whiting  v.  Earle,  3  Pick.  201, 
16  Am.  Dec.  207. 


IfiM.— Dick  V.  Grissom,  1  Freem. 
Oh.  428. 

ifo.—Mott  V.  Puroell,  98  Mo.  247, 
11  8.  W.  664;  Dierker  v.  Hess,  64 
Mo.  246. 

^e6.~Shortel  v.  Toung,  23  Neb. 
408,  36  N.  W.  672,  where  the  testi- 
mony raises  a  presumption  of  his 
emancipation;  Clemens  v.  Brillhart, 
17  Neb.  336,  22  N.  W.  779. 

V,  H. — Johnson  v.  Silsbee,  49  N.  H. 
643. 

V,  J. — ^^sner  v.  Osbom,  64  N.  J. 
Eq.  614,  66  Atl.  61,  where  stock  of  an 
incorporation  was  purchased  with  the 
wages  of  an  emancipated  son;  Coyne 
V.  Sayre,  64  N.  J.  Eq.  702,  36  Ati. 
96. 

OJkio.— Geringer  v.  Heinlein,  20 
Cine.  L.  Bui.  339,  6  Ohio  8.  k  C.  PI. 
Dec.  26. 

Or, — ^Flynn  v.  Baisley,  36  Or.  268, 
67  Pac.  908,  76  Am.  St.  Rep.  496,  45 
L.  R.  A.  646. 

Pa. — ^Beaver  v.  Bare,  104  Pa.  St. 
68,  49  Am.  Rep.  667;  Appeal  of 
Brown,  86  Pa.  St.  624;  Rush  v. 
Vought,  68  Pa.  St  437,  93  Am.  Dec. 
769;  McCloskey  v.  Cyphert,  27  Pa. 
St.  220. 

Tenn. — ^Rosenbaum  v.  Davis  (Ch. 
App.),  48  S.  W.  706;  Carpenter  v. 
Franklin,  80  Tenn.  142,  14  8.  W.  484; 
Leslie  v.  Joyner,  2  Head,  614. 

Tem. — ^Furrh  v.  McKnigfat,  6  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  683,  26  S.  W.  96;  Schuster 
V.  Bauman  Jewelry  Co.,  79  Tex.  183, 
23  Am.  St.  Rep.  327,  15  8.  W.  269. 

y*.--Bray  v.  Wheeler,  29  Vt  514; 
Chase  v.  Elkins,  2  Vt  290. 

Fa.— Penn  v.  Whitehead,  17  Gratt. 
503,  94  Am.  Dec.  478. 


J 


Bbopbbtt^  stc.^  which  Creditobs  icAY  Bbaoh.       Ill 

separate  estate  of  a  wife^  wliose  minor  child,  with  its  father's 
consenti  gives  her  the  benefit  of  his  labor  on  such  separate  estate^ 
are  not  liable  for  the  father's  debts.** 


§  11«  Earnings  or  wages  of  public  officers  or  their  deputies. 
— ^The  same  rules  are  applicable  to  an  assignment  or  release  of 
the  compensation^  salary^  or  fees  of  a  public  oflicer^  as  are 
applicable  to  other  earnings  or  wages  of  a  debtor  unless  they  are 
expressly  exempted  by  statute."^  It  has  been  held,  howenrer, 
that  a  sheriff  may  grant  to  a  deputy  all  the  fees  earned  by  the 
latter,  so  that  they  cannot  be  garnished  for  the  sheriff's  debts.** 

§  12.  Services^  labor,  talents^  and  industry  of  a  debtor. — 
The  creditors  of  an  insolvent  have  no  claim  upon  his  talents  or 
industry,  his  labor  or  services  They  cannot  compel  him  to  work 
and  earn  wages  for  their  benefit,  and  hence  he  does  not  defraud 
them  and  they  have  no  legal  right  to  complain,  if  he  chooses  to 
give  away  has  services  by  working  gratuitously  for  another.  It 
is  only  the  debtor's  property  that  may  be  reached  by  creditors.*^ 


W.  V0. — ^Ttapnell  ▼.  Conklyii,  87  W. 
Ya.  242,  16  S.  E.  670,  38  Am.  8t.  Rep. 
80. 

Wit.— Wsmbold  v.  Vick,  60  Wis. 
466,  7  K.  W.  438. 

Can, — Jack  v.  Greig,  27  Grant  Ch. 
<U.  C.)  6, 

See  also  Earnings  or  service  of 
diild  as  consideration  for  conveyance, 
chap.  Vin,  SS  67,  69,  infra. 

84.  TrapneU  v.  Conklyn,  37  W.  Va. 
242,  16  8.  E.  670,  38  Am.  St.  Rep. 
30;  Atwood  v.  Dolan,  34  W.  Va.  663, 
12  S.  E.  688;  Rush  v.  Vonght,  66  Pa. 
St  437,  93  Am.  Dec.  769. 

85.  See  chap.  IV,  S  8>  fupra. 

86.  Pioneer  Printing  Co.  v.  San- 
bom,  3  Minn.  413. 

87.  N.  7.— Abbey  v.  Deyo,  44  N.  Y. 
343. 

U.  £f.— Voorhees  v.  Bonetteel,  16 
WaU.  16,  31,  21  L.  Ed.  268. 


Ala. — ^Nanoe  v.  Nance,  84  Ala.  376, 
4  So.  699,  6  Am.  St.  Rep.  378,  the 
labor  and  skill  of  a  husband  in  mak- 
ing improvements  on  his  wife's  separ- 
ate estate  cannot  be  charged  thereon 
by  his  creditors. 

Oa.— King  v.  Skellie,  79  Ga.  147, 
161,  3  S.  E.  614,  it  is  an  invariable 
principle  that  the  debtor  cannot  be 
forced  to  apply  his  labor  to  the  ex- 
tinguishment of  his  creditor's  claim. 

Minn, — ^Eilers  v.  Conradt,  39  Minn. 
242,  39  N.  W.  320,  12  Am.  St  Rep. 
641. 

if  tM. — ^Buckley  v.  Dunn,  67  Miss. 
710,  7  So.  660,  10  Am.  St.  Rep.  334. 

Jfo.--Oruner  v.  Schols,  164  Mo. 
416,  66  S.  W.  441. 

N.  .r.— Tresch  V.  WirtE,  34  N.  J. 
Eq.  124. 

Pa.— Rush  V.  Vought^  66  Pa.  St. 
437,  93  Am.  Dec  769. 


112 


Fbauditlent  Conveyances. 


The  property  of  a  debtor,  by  the  laws  of  all  commercial  countries, 
belongs  to  his  creditors.  He  must  be  just  before  he  is  generous. 
He  must  pay  before  he  gives.  !Not  so  with  his  talents  and  his 
industry.  Whether  he  has  much,  or  little,  or  nothing,  his  first 
duty  is  the  support  of  his  family.  The  instinctive  impulse  of 
every  just  man  holds  this  to  be  the  first  purpose  of  his  industry. 
The  application  of  the  debtor's  property  is  rigidly  directed  to 
the  payment  of  his  debts.  He  cannot  transport  it  to  another 
country,  transfer  it  to  his  friend,  or  conceal  it  from  his  creditor. 
Any  or  all  of  these  things  he  may  do  with  his  industry.  He  is 
at  liberty  to  transfer  his  person  to  a  foreign  land.  He  may 
bury  his  talent  in  the  earth,  or  he  may  give  it  to  his  wife  or 
friend.  "No  law,  ancient  or  modem,  has  ever  held  to  the  con- 
trary.^ But  a  debtor  may  not  conduct  a  business  in  the  name 
of  another,  which  he  uses  as  a  subterfuge  to  cover  his  property 
from  the  claims  of  creditors,  and  by  his  labor  and  skill  in  that 
undertaking  accumulate  property  for  himself  and  thus  defraud 
his  creditors.^  But  whether  or  not  a  business  conducted  in  the 
name  of  another  is  fraudulent  is  a  question  of  fact  for  the 


jury 


M 


%  13.  Services  rendered  by  husband  for  wife. — One  oannol 
by  doing  business  in  the  name  of  anotlier  defraud  his  creditors.*^ 
An  insolvent  debtor  cannot  use  his  wife's  name  as  a  mere  de- 


Tenn. — ^Leslie  y.  Joyner,  2  Head. 
614. 

7/.— Webeter  v.  HUdreth,  33  Vt 
467,  78  Am.  Dec.  632. 

Fa.--Penn.  ▼.  Whitehead,  17  Oratt. 
603,  94  Am.  Dec.  478. 

W,  Va, — ^Boggess  ▼.  Richards,  30  W. 
Va.  667,  20  8.  E.  609,  46  Am.  St. 
Rep.  938,  26  L.  R.  A.  637;  Trapnell 
V.  Conklyn,  37  W.  Va.  242,  16  8.  E. 
670,  38  Am.  81.  Rep.  30. 

Can.--Baby  v.  Ross,  14  Ont.  Or. 
440. 

See  also  chap.  IV,  S  8,  supra. 


88.  Abbey  v.  Deyo,  44  N.  Y.  343, 
347. 

80.  Nickle  ▼.  Emerson  Mercantile, 
etc.,  0>.  (Arlc.)  13  S.  W.  78,  where 
property  was  purchased  from  funds 
raised  from  a  business  so  conducted; 
Wilson  ▼.  Loomis,  66  111.  362;  Hamil- 
ton ▼.  Lightner,  63  Iowa,  470,  6  N.  W. 
603,  although  he  loaned  his  wife  the 
money  which  was  originaUy  invested 
in  the  business. 

00.  Fass  V.  Rice,  30  La.  Ann. 
1278;  Dunham-Buckley  v.  Halberg,69 
Mo.  App.  609. 

01.  Fass  ▼.  Rice,  30  La.  Ann.  1278. 


J 


Pbopebty^  £tc.^  whioh  Cseditobs  hat  Beach.        113 


vice  to  cover  up  and  keq>  from  his  creditors  the  assets  and 
profits  of  a  business  which  is  in  fact  his  own.  He  cannot  de- 
fraud his  creditors  by  conducting  a  business  in  his  wife's  name  but 
for  hia  own  benefit^  thus  keeping  his  property  out  of  the  reach 
of  his  creditors.**  But  a  husband  may  donate  his  services  to  his 
wife,  in  working  for  or  assisting  her  in  a  business  owned  and 
conducted  bj  her  as  her  separate  property,  or  as  her  agent  in 
executing  a  contract  made  by  her  with  a  third  person,  and,  with 
stronger  reason,  where  the  husband  is  employed  by  the  wife  on  a 
salary,  and  the  husband's  creditors  cannot  by  reason  of  such 
donation  of  his  services  or  employment  reach  and  subject  the 
property  or  claims  thereby  acquired  by  the  wife  to  the  payment 
of  their  claims."    A  wife  may  employ  her  husband  or  accept  his 


02.  y.  y.-— Abbey  ▼.  Deyo,  44  N.  T. 
343;  O'Leary  v.  Walter,  10  Abb.  Pr. 
N.  S.  439. 

Ark. — ^Nlckle  v.  Emerson  Mercan- 
tile, ete.,  Co.  (1800),  13  S.  W.  78. 

/tt.--Lacfaman  v.  Martin,  130  111. 
450,  28  N.  E.  795;  Robinson  v. 
Brems,  90  111.  351;  Mattingly  ▼.  Ob- 
lej,  1  HI.  App.  626. 

lowtt, — Hamill  v.  Augustine,  81 
Iowa,  302,  46  N.  W.  1113;  Hamilton 
T.  Ligfatner,  53  Iowa,  470,  5  N.  W. 
603. 

Ky. — Gross  ▼.  Eddlnger,  85  Ky. 
168,  8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  829,  3  S.  W.  1; 
Moran  ▼.  Moran,  75  Ky.  301;  Farm- 
ers' Bank  v.  Marsball,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
249,  35  S.  W.  912. 

Mo, — Jobnson  v.  Christie,  79  Mo. 
App.  46. 

2^e6.— Wedgwood  v.  Withers,  35 
Neb.  583,  53  N.  W.  676. 

N.  J.— Talcott  V.  Arnold,  54  N.  J. 
Sq.  670,  35  Atl.  532;  Metropolis  Nat. 
Bank  ▼.  Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Bq.  13. 

OJkto.— Glidden  v.  Taylor,  16  Ohio 
8L  609,  91  Am.  Dec.  98. 

Pa.— Blum  v.  Ross,  116  Pa.  St.  163, 
10  AU.  32;  Keeney  v.  Good,  21  Pa. 

8 


St.  849.    Compare  Vowinkle  ▼.  John- 
ston, 9  Pa.  Cas.  86,  11  Ati.  634. 

Con.— Campbell  v.  Cole,  7  Ont  127; 
In  re  Gearing,  4  Ont.  App.  173;  Le- 
vine  V.  Claflin,  31  U.  C.  C.  P.  600; 
Meakin  ▼.  Samson,  28  U.  C.  C.  P.  355; 
Foulds  V.  Curtelett,  21  U.  C.  C.  P. 
868;  Lett  v.  Commercial  Bank,  24  U. 
C.  Q.  B.  652;  Harrison  v.  Dou|^a8S,4 
U.  S.  Q.  B.  410. 

^np.— Lovell  ▼.  Newton,  4  C.  P.  D. 
7,  39  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  609,  27  Wkly. 
Rep.  366;  Laporte  v.  Costick,  31  L. 
T.  Rep.  N.  S.  434,  23  Wkly.  Rep.  181. 

03.  N.  r.— Abb^  ▼.  Deyo,  44  N.  Y. 
343;  Gage  ▼.  Dauchy,  34  N.  Y.  293; 
Buckley  v.  Wells,  33  N.  Y.  518; 
Kluender  ▼.  Lynch,  2  Abb.  Dec.  538. 

U.  8, — Gamer  r.  Second  Nat. 
Bank,  161  U.  S.  420,  14  Sup.  Ct.  390, 
37  L.  Ed.  218;  Aldridge  v.  Muir- 
head,  101  U.  S.  397,  25  L.  Ed.  1013; 
Voorhees  ▼.  Bonesteel,  16  Wall.  16, 
21  L.  Ed.  268;  Hyde  v.  Frey,  28  Fed. 
819. 

Ala.— Hoot  T.  Sorrell,  11  Ala.  386. 

Ark. — ^Nickle  ▼.  Emerson  Mercan- 
tile, etc.,  Co.,  supra. 


114 


Fraudulent  Convbtancss. 


services  in  running  her  business  without  subjecting  the  property 
to  the  claims  of  his  creditors.^  The  personal  skill  and  labor  of 
a  husband,  expended  in  making  valuable  improvements  on  hia 
wife's  property,  cannot  be  reached  or  subjected  by  his  creditors 
to  the  satisfaction  of  their  claims.*'  Inventions  perfected  by  a 
husband  and  patents  therefor,  where  a  salary  and  expenses  are 
paid  by  the  wife  out  of  her  separate  estate^  and  the  husband  acts 
merely  as  her  employee,  are  her  separate  property  and  not  subject 
to  his  debts.**  Where  a  husband  has  no  interest  in  his  wife's 
business,  which  he  is  managing  as  her  agent,  her  title  to  the 
property,  as  against  claims  of  his  creditors,  is  not  impaired  by 


DeL— Kirkl«j  ▼.  Laroey,  7  Houst. 
218,  30  Atl.  994. 

Ill — Lachman  v.  Martin,  supra; 
Sexton  ▼.  MarUn,  37  111.  App.  537; 
Olaen  ▼.  Kern,  10  111.  App.  578. 

/fui.^Cooper  v.  Ham,  49  Ind.  393. 

Iowa. — ^McCormick  Harvester  Mach. 
Co.  ▼.  Ponder,  123  Iowa,  17,  98  N. 
W.  303;  King  v.  Wells,  106  Iowa, 
649,  77  N.  W.  338. 

Jfififi. — Eilers  ▼.  Conradt,  39  Minn. 
242,  39  N.  W,  320,  12  Am.  Rep.  641 ; 
Ladd  V.  Newell,  34  Minn.  107,  24  N. 
W.  366;  Hosfeldt  v.  DiU,  28  Minn. 
469,  10  N.  W.  781. 

Mi»». — Buckley  V.  Dunn,  67  Miss. 
710,  7  8o.  650,  19  Am.  St.  Rep.  334. 

jfo.— Tipton  T.  Adair,  172  Mo.  156, 
72  8.  W.  51f ;  Seay  v.  Hesse,  123  Mo. 
450,  20  S.  W.  1017,  27  8.  W.  633; 
Wolfsberger  v.  Mort,  104  Mo.  App. 
267,  78  8.  W.  817 ;  Hibbard  v.  Heck- 
art,  88  Mo.  App.  544;  Baer  ▼.  Ffaff, 
44  Mo.  App.  36. 

N.  J.— Arnold  ▼.  Talcott,  65  N.  J. 
Eq.  619,  37  Atl.  981;  Taylor  v. 
Wands,  55  N.  J.  Eq.  491,  37  Atl. 
315;  Tresch  ▼.  Wirta,  34  N.  J.  Eq. 

124. 
H.  C— Osborne  v.  Wilkes,  108  N. 

C.  651,  13  8.  £.  285. 


Po.— Rush  ▼.  Vought,  55  Pa.  8t. 
437,  93  Am.  Dec.  769. 

8.  C— Hodges  ▼.  Cobb,  8  Rich.  50. 

Ff.— -Webster  v.  Hildreth,  33  Vt. 
457,  78  Am.  Dec.  632. 

W,  Fc— Board  of  Education  v. 
Mitchell,  40  W.  Va.  431,  21  8.  E. 
1017;  Trapnell  ▼.  Gonklyn,  37  W. 
Va.  242,  16  8.  E.  570,  38  Am.  8t. 
Rep.  30. 

Wi«.— Mayers  v.  Kaiser,  85  Wis. 
382,  55  N.  W.  688,  39  Am.  8t.  Rep. 
849,  21  L.  R.  A.  623;  Second  Nat. 
Bank  y.  Merrill,  81  Wis.  151,  50  N. 
W.  505,  29  Am.  8t.  Rep.  877;  Day- 
ton ▼.  Walsh,  47  Wis.  113,  2  N.  W. 
65,  33  Am.  Rep.  757. 

Can, — Baby  v.  Ross,  14  Ont.  Pr. 
440;  Plows  V.  Maughan,  42  U.  C.  Q. 
B.  129;  Arnold!  v.  Stewart,  17  Que- 
bec Super.  Ct.  252. 

Eng. — ^Lovell  v.  Newton,  14  C.  P. 
D.  7,  39  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  8.  609,  27 
Wkly.  Rep.  366. 

94.  Gruner  v.  Scholts,  154  Mo.  415, 
55  8.  W.  441. 

96.  Nance  v.  Nance,  84  Ala.  375, 
4  So.  699,  5  Am.  St.  Rep.  378. 

96.  Arnold  v.  Talcott^  55  N.  J.  Eq. 
519,  37  Atl.  891. 


PSOPERTY^  ETG.^  WHIOH  CrEDITOBS  MAY  BeAOH.  115 


the  fact  that  a  portion  of  the  inccmie  is  applied  to  his  support*^ 
The  wife  may  carry  on  business  throng  her  husband  as  agent^ 
and  the  fact  that  she  employs  him  and  supports  him  does  not 
raise  a  presumption  of  fraud,  although  it  is  competent  in  trying 
the  issue  to  show  his  manner  of  conducting  the  business.**  So 
theL  fact  that  the  husband  is  paid  a  salary  by  the  wife  does  not 
of  itself  establish  that  the  business  belongs  to  the  wife^**  The 
fact  that  the  wife  had  neither  experience  in  the  business  nor  a 
separate  estate  when  she  contracted  to  purchase  a  stock  of  goods, 
although  a  circumstance  to  be  considered  in  determining  the 
question  of  fraud,  is  insufficient  in  itself  to  show  fraud  sufficient 
to  subject  the  profits  of  the  business  and  property  purchased 
therewith  to  the  claims  of  creditors  of  the  husband.^  It  is  held 
in  some  jurisdictions,  however,  that  if  a  husband  engages  in 
business  with  his  wife's  capital  and  in  her  name,  and  owing  to 
his  skill  and  labor  large  profits  accrue  therefrom  over  and  above 
the  necessary  expenses  and  indebtedness  of  the  business,  includ- 
ing the  support  of  himself,  wife,  and  family,  a  court  of  equity 
will  justly  apportion  such  profits  between  his  wife  and  his  exist- 
ing creditora*  In  other  jurisdictions  it  is  held  that  if  a  mar- 
ried woman  advances  money  from  her  own  separate  estate  and 
places  the  same  in  the  hands  of  her  husband  for  the  purpose  of 
carrying  on  any  general  trade,  although  in  the  wife's  name,  and 
the  husband  by  his  labor  and  skill  in  that  undertaking  increases 
the  fund,  the  entire  capital  embarked  in  the  enterprise,  together 
with  the  increase,  will  not  constitute  the  separate  estate  of  the 
wife,  but  will  be  liable  for  the  debts  of  the  husband.* 


97.  Abbey  ▼.  Deyo,  44  N.  Y.  348; 
Voorhees  ▼.  Bonesteel,  Id  Wall.  (U. 
8.)   16,  21  L.  Ed.  268. 

98.  Stanley  v.  National  Union 
Bank,  116  N.  Y.  122.  22  N.  E.  29; 
Osborne  ▼.  Wilkes,  108  N.  C.  661,  13 
S.  E.  286. 

99.  Johnson  ▼.  Cbrlstie,  79  Mo. 
App.  46. 

1.  GaUett  V.  Alsop,  99  Va.  680,  3 
Va.  Sup.  Ct.  Rep.  491,  40  S.  E.  34. 


2.  Johnson  v.  Christie,  9upra; 
Talcott  V.  Arnold,  64  N.  J.  Eq.  570, 
36  Atl.  632;  Catleti  v.  Alsop,  supra; 
Penn  v.  Whitehead,  17  Gratt.  fVa.) 
603,  94  Am.  Dec.  478;  Boggess  ▼. 
Richards,  39  W.  Va.  667,  20  S.  E. 
599,  46  Am.  St  Rep.  938,  26  L.  R.  A. 
637. 

3.  Robinson  v.  Brems,  90  HI.  361; 
Patton  ▼.  Gates,  67  111.  164;  Wilson 
V.  Loomis,  65  111.  352;  Woitman  ▼• 


116 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances* 


i 


§  14.  Services  rendered  by  parent  for  child. — ^A  parent  may 
noty  as  against  creditors,  conduct  a  business  in  his  child's  name, 
but  in  fact  for  his  own  benefit,  using  such  device  as  a  doak  to 
cover  up  his  property  and  earnings  and  put  them  out  of  the  reach 
of  creditors/  although  he  may  donate  his  services  to  his  child  the 
same  as  to  his  wife  or  to  a  friend.^  But  a  debtor  will  not  be 
permitted  to  donate  the  services  and  earnings  of  teams  belong- 
ing to  him  to  his  infant  son,  to  avoid  payment  of  his  debts  to  a 
creditor  for  whom  such  infant  son,  with  such  teams,  performs 
labor.* 

§  15.  Earnings  of  debtor's  property. — A  debtor  may  not  do- 
nate the  use  of  his  property  to  another  in  fraud  of  his  creditors, 
and  if  he  does  so  the  earnings  of  such  property  may  be  reached 
and  subjected  by  his  creditors,^  except  where  the  property  is 
exempt  from  the  claims  of  creditors.' 


§  16.  Good  will  of  a  business. — The  good  will  of  a  business 
has  been  held  to  be  the  subject  of  a  fraudulent  conveyance,  and 
to  be  assets  available  to  creditors.* 


Price,  47  111.  22;  BrowneU  ▼.  Dixon, 
37  111.  197;  Pease  ▼.  Barkowsky,  67 
ni.  App.  274;  Card  v.  RobinMm,  2 
lU.  App.  19;  Guill  v.  Hanny,  1  111. 
App.  490;  Brooks- Waterfleld  Co.  ▼.  ' 
Prisbie,  99  Ky.  125,  36  S.  W.  106,  69 
Am.  St.  Rep.  462;  Gross  ▼.  Eddinger, 
86  Ky.  168,  8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  829,  3  S. 
W.  1 ;  Moran  v.  Moran,  76  Ky.  301 ; 
Shields  v.  Lewis,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep.  822, 
70  S.  W.  61;  Blackburn  ▼.  Thomp- 
son, 23  Ky.  L,  Rep.  1723,  66  S.  W.  6, 
66  L.  R.  A.  938;  Edelmuth  v.  Wy- 
brant,  21  Ky.  L.  Rep.  929,  63  S.  W. 
628;  Glidden  v.  Taylor,  16  Ohio  St. 
600,  91  Am.  Dec.  98. 

4.  Pass  ▼.  Rice,  30  La.  Ann.  1278. 

5.  See  chap.  IV,  89  12,  13,  supnt. 

6.  Tuckey  v.  Lovell,  8  Ida.  731,  71 
Pac.  122. 


7.  Tuckey  y.  Ixnrdl,  8  Ida.  731,  71 
Pac  122. 

8.  Leslie  ▼.  Joyner,  2  Head 
(Tenn.)  614.  See  also  ESzempt  prop- 
erty, chap.  rV,  S  41,  infra^ 

0.  Prench  ▼.  French,  6  De  G.  M.  ft 
G.  96,  2  Jur.  N.  S.  169,  26  L.  J.  Ch. 
612,  4  Wkly.  Rep.  139,  66  Eng.  Oh. 
74,  43  Eng.  Reprint,  1166;  Neale  v. 
Day,  4  Jur.  N.  8.  1226,  27  L.  J.  Ch. 
46,  7  Wkly.  Rep.  46,  where  an  attor- 
ney, being  in  insolvent  circumstances, 
assigned  the  good  will  of  his  busi- 
ness in  consideration  of  a  sum  of 
money  paid  down  and  an  annuity 
secured  by  bond  to  be  paid  to  his 
fHfe  fer  life,  with  remainder  to  him- 
self for  life,  the  settlement  of  the  an- 
nuity was  void  as  against  his  cred- 
itors. 


Fbopsbty^  sto.^  whioh  Cbxditobs  may  Rbaoh.       117 


§  17.  Membership  in  stock  of  merchant's  exchange. — ^Al- 
though of  a  character  somewhat  peculiar,  its  use  restricted,  its 
range  of  purchasers  narrow,  and  its  ownership  do^ed  with  con- 
ditions, a  seat  or  membership,  or  the  right  to  a  seat  or  member- 
ship, in  a  stock  exchange,  merchant's  exchange,  or  a  board  of 
trade,  is,  according  to  many  authorities,  a  valuable  right,  capable 
of  transfer,  and  correctly  decided  to  be  property,  whioh,  if 
fraudulently  conveyed  or  assigned,  can  be  resched  in  equity  and 
subjected  by  creditors.^^  Other  authorities  maintain,  however, 
that  a  certificate  of  membership  in  a  stock  or  a  produce  exchange, 
or  a  board  of  trade,  is  not  property  liable  to  be  subjected  to  the 
payment  of  debts  of  the  holder  in  legal  proceedings.^ 

§  18.  Patents,  copytigbts^  and  trade  marks. — ^A  patent  right 
or  the  rights  acquired  by  a  patentee  on  the  issue  of  a  valid  patent 
is  property,  which  is  subject  to  the  claims  of  creditors,  and  may 
be  reached  in  equity  by  creditors'  bill,  and  applied  to  the  pay- 
ment of  the  debts  of  the  patentee.^*    But  unpatented  inventions. 


10.  y.  y.— Piatt  v.  Jones,  96  N. 
Y.  24;  Powell  ▼.  Waldron,  80  N.  Y. 
328,  42  Am.  Rep.  301;  Sprogg  ▼. 
Dichman,  28  Misc.  Rep.  400,  60  N.  Y. 
Supp.  066;  Colby  ▼.  Peabodj,  52  N. 
Y.  Super.  Ct  804;  Ritterband  ▼.  Bag- 
gett,  42  N.  Y.  Super.  Ct.  656,  4  Abb. 
N.  C.  67;  Oroeers'  Bank  ▼.  Murphy, 
60  How.  Pr.  426;  Loudheim  ▼. 
White,  67  How.  Pr.  467. 

U.  8. — Paige  ▼.  Edmunds,  187  U. 
S.  606,  23  Sup.  Ct.  200,  47  L.  Ed. 
318;  Hyde  v.  Woods,  04  U.  S.  523; 
In  re  Page,  5  Am.  B.  R.  707,  107 
Fed.  80,  46  C.  C.  A.  160;  In 
re  Ketcham,  1  Fed.  840;  In  re 
GaUagher,  10  N.  B.  R.  224;  Matter 
of  Werder,  10  Fed.  276,  28  Alb.  L. 
J.  176.  Compare  In  re  Sutherland, 
6  BisB.  626,  23  Fed.  Cas.  No.  13,637. 

Ca2.^Habenieht  ▼.  Lissak,  78  Cal. 
361,  20  Pac.  874,  12  Am.  St  Rep.  63, 
6  L.  R.  A.  713.     Compare  Rowe  ▼. 


Blake,  00  Cal.  167,  33  Pac.  864,  37 
Am.  St.  Rep.  45. 

lfo.~.EliGt  V.  Merchants'  Exch.,  14 
Mo.  App.  234,  28  Alb.  L.  J.  612. 

11.  Barclay  v.  Smith,  107  111.  340, 
47  Am.  Rep.  437,  28  Alb.  L.  J.  175; 
Pancoast  v.  Gowen,  03  Pa.  St.  66; 
Thompson  ▼.  Adams,  03  Pa.  St.  55. 
The  Pennsylvania  courts  do  not  go  so 
far  as  to  hold  that  the  seat  or  mem- 
bership is  not  property,  but  hold  that 
it  is  not  property  subject  to  ordinai*y 
process  at  law. 

1«.  N,  F.— Gillett  V.  Bate,  86  N. 
Y.  87,  and  want  of  utility  or  novdty 
is  no  defense  to  the  patentee  or  his 
fraudulent  assignee;  Barnes  ▼.  Mor- 
gan, 3  Hun,  703;  McDermott  y. 
Strong,  4  Johns.  Ch.  680;  Spader  ▼. 
Davis,  5  Johns.  Ch.  280,  20  Johns. 
664. 

V.  i8.— Ager  v.  Murray,  105  U.  a 
126,  26  L.  Ed.  042;  Gorrell  y.  Dick- 


118 


FRAUDULENT   CONVEYANCES. 


in  which  the  inventor  has  only  an  inchoate  right  to  their  exclu- 
sive use  which  he  may  perfect  and  render  absolute,  are  not  prop- 
erty in  such  sense  that  they  can  be  reached  by  creditors."  The 
interest  of  a  debtor  in  the  copyright  of  a  book,  map,  or  picture, 
when  fraudulently  transferred,  may  be  reached  in  equity  by 
the  ereditors,^^  and  likewise  moneys  accruing  to  the  debtor  as 
royalty  from  the  sale  thereof."  The  right  to  use  trade  marks,  in 
connection  with  a  manufacturing  business,  which  are  not  pei^ 
sonal,  but  designate  merely  the  place  or  establishment  at  which 
the  goods  are  manufactured,  passes  to  the  assignee  in  insolvency 
under  the  Massachusetts  statuta" 


§  19.  Fire  insurance. — A  fire  insurance  upon  property  is  not 
an  incident  to  the  insured  property,  but  a  special  agreement 
with  the  insured  against  his  own  loss,  not  that  of  another  as 
grantee,  creditor,  etc^^  Hence,  the  proceeds  of  or  money  due 
on  a  policy  of  insurance  procured  by  or  issued  to  a  vendee  in  a 
conveyance  which  is  void  for  fraud  as  against  creditors,  as  to  a 


Bon,  26  Fed.  454;  Mathews  v.  Green, 
19  Fed.  649,  a  license  to  use  a 
patented  invention  may,  by  a  biU  in 
equity,  be  subjected  to  sale  to  pay  a 
judgment.  Compare  Ashcroft  ▼. 
Walworth,  2  Fed.  Gas.  No.  580, 
Holmes,  152. 

Cal. — ^Pacific  Bank  ▼.  Robinson,  57 
Cal.  520,  40  Am.  Rep.  120. 

Conn, — Vail  ▼.  Hammond,  60  Conn. 
374,  22  Ail.  954,  25  Am.  St.  Rep. 
330,  a  patent  may  be  sold  in  equity 
for  the  payment  of  a  debt. 

Mass. — Wilson  v.  Martin-Wilson 
Automatic  Fire  Alarm  Co.,  149 
Mass.  24,  20  N.  E.  318,  151  Mass. 
515,  24  N.  E.  784,  8  L.  R.  A.  309, 
letters  patent  may  be  sold  and  trans-, 
ferred  by  a  court  of  equity  through 
its  master  for  the  benefit  of  cred- 
itors of  their  owner;  Barton  ▼. 
White,  144  Mass.  281,  10  N.  E.  840, 
59  Am.  Rep.  84,  letters  patent  pass 


to  the  assignee  in  insolyeney,  and 
equity  will  compel  an  insolvent  to 
execute  an  assignment.  But  see  Qv- 
Ter  T.  Pedc,  131  Mass.  291,  a  patent 
right  is  not  an  interest  which  can  be 
reached  by  a  creditor  of  the  owner  in 
equity  under  the  Massaehusetts  stat- 
ute. 

R.  /.—In  re  Keaeh,  14  R.  I.  671, 
a  patent  right  passes  to  the  receiver 
of  an  insolvent  debtor,  although, 
being  incorporeal,  it  cannot  be  at- 
tached at  law. 

13.  Gillett  V.  Bate,  86  N.  Y.  S7, 
94. 

14.  Bryan  v.  University  Pub.  Co., 
112  N.  Y.  382,  2  L.  R.  A.  638,  19  N. 
E.  825;  Stephens  v.  Gady,  14  How. 
(U.  S.)  528,  14  L.  Ed.  528. 

15.  Lord  T.  Harte,  118  Mass.  27L 

16.  Warren  v.  Warren  Thread  Co., 
134  Mass.  247. 

17.  Nippes'  Appeal,  76  Pa.  St.  472. 


J 


PlU>PBBTT,  STOv  WHICH  CsEDITOfiS  MAY  BsAOH.  lid 

wife  upon  property  conveyed  to  her  by  her  husband  or  otherwise 
in  fraud  of  her  husband's  creditors^  are  not  proceeds  of  the  prop- 
erty conveyed  which  creditors  can  subject  to  the  payment  of  hia 
debts,  or  follow,  under  the  rule  elsewhere  stated/^  in  lieu  of  such 
property.**  This  has  been  held  to  be  the  rule  although  the  debtor 
paid  the  premiums,^  but  it  has  been  held  that  the  creditors  have 
a  claim  upon  the  money  to  the  extent  of  the  premiums.^  Where, 
a  policy  on  the  goods  of  a  debtor  was  more  payable  to  the  mort« 
gagee  of  the  goods  as  his  interest  might  appear,  and  a  loss  oc- 
curred, it  has  been  held  that  a  creditor  of  the  debtor  might 
garnish  the  insurance  money  in  the  hands  of  the  insurance  com- 
pany, and,  the  mortgagee  coming  in  as  a  claimant,  the  creditor 
mi^t  attack  the  mortgage  as  in  fraud  of  creditors." 

§  20.  Life  instu-jance  policies  and  proceeds  thereof^ — ^The 
interest  of  an  insolvent  debtor  in  a  policy  of  insurance  on  his 
life  taken  out  for  the  benefit  of  the  estate  of  the  debtor,  or  pay- 
able to  himself  or  his  legal  representatives,  cannot  be  assigned, 
surrendered,  or  otherwise  disposed  of  so  as  to  place  it  beyond 
the  readi  of  his  creditors,  but  may  be  reached  in  equity  and  sub- 
jected by  creditors  the  same  as  other  choses  in  action,  either  dur- 
ing his  lifetime  or  after  his  death,  if  fraudulently  assigned,  sur- 
rendered, or  otherwise  disposed  of  by  him."    This  rule  has  been 


18.  See  Following  prooeeds  of  prop- 
erty fratidiilently  eoayeyed,  ehap.  IV, 
{  48,  infra. 

10.  Forrester  ▼.  GUI,  11  Colo.  App. 
410,  63  Pac.  230;  Lerow  v.  Wilmarth, 
9  Allen  (Mass.),  382;  Bomheim  t. 
Beer,  66  Miss.  149;  Nippes'  Appeal, 
9upra.  See  also  McLean  t.  Hess,  106 
Ind.  666,  7  N.  E.  667. 

80.  Forrester  v.  Gill,  tupra. 

Zl^  Nippes'  Appeal,  supra. 

ZZ.  C<^endall  ▼.  Ladd,  32  Minn. 
629;  North  Star  Boot  &  Shoe  Co.  t. 
Ladd,  32  Minn.  381,  20  N.  W.  334. 

28.  y.  7.— Leonard  t.  Clinton,  26 
Hun,  288. 


U.  Sr.^Aetna  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Manhat- 
tan  Life  Ins.  Co.,  24  Fed.  769;  Cen- 
tral Nat  Bank  ▼.  Hume,  128  U.  S. 
196,  9  Snp.  Ct  41,  82  L.  Ed.  870. 

A#l.— Friedman  ▼.  Fsmell,  94  Ala. 
670,  10  So.  649. 

Oonn. — ^Barbour  t.  Gonneeticiit 
Mnt  L.  Ins.  Go.,  61  Conn.  240,  23  Atl. 
164. 

Ky, — Stokes  v.  Coffey,  8  Bush,  633, 
where  the  debtor  exchanged  a  policy 
payable  to  himself  or  his  estate  for 
one  payable  to  his  wife. 

Jfa.— wyman  v.  Gay,  90  Me.  36, 
37  Ati.  326,  60  Am.  St.  Rep.  238. 


120 


F&AUDUIJmT   CoNV£TAVCK& 


hdd  not  to  apply  where  the  assigmnent  or  other  disposition  of 
the  poliqr  is  within  the  provisions  of  a  statute  permitting  in- 
surance for  Uie  protection  of  wife  or  children  and  exempting  il 
from  the  claims  of  creditors,**  but  other  cases  hold  that  a  statute 


Man, — ^Anthracite  Ins.  Co.  ▼.  Sean, 
100  Maae.  383. 

Mich. — ^loni*  Goonty  Sav.  Bank  t. 
HeLean,  84  Mich.  626,  48  N.  W.  16S. 

JfiM. — Oatehings  ▼.  Manlove,  39 
Hiaa.  6S6. 

N.  O, — ^Burton  t.  Fkrinholt»  86  N. 
C.  260. 

Olk«o^— Child  T.  Oraham,  8  Ohio 
Dee.  (Reprint)  204,  7  Cine.  L.  Bui. 
43. 

Pa.— In  re  McKown,  108  Pa.  St  06, 
47  Ail.  1111,  a  Toluntary  assignment 
hj  one^  when  insolvent,  to  his  wife,  of 
a  policj  on  his  life,  is  presnmptiTely 
fraudulent;  McCutcheon's  Appeal,  00 
Pa.  St  133;  Elliot's  Appeal,  60  Pa. 
St.  76,  88  Am  Dee.  626,  an  assign- 
ment in  trust  for  benefit  of  wife. 

2*0iin. — Walter  t.  Hattmani(Tenn.), 
67  8.  W.  476. 

Can, — ^Prentice  v.  Steel,  4  Montreal 
Super.  Ct.  310. 

Eng. — Stokoe  t.  Cowan,  20  Bear. 
637,  7  Jur.  N.  S.  001,  4  L.  T.  Rep.  N. 
8.  606,  0  Wkly.  Rep.  801,  64  Eog.  Re- 
print, 775;  Taylor  v.  Coenen,  1  Ch. 
Div.  636,  34  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  18; 
Freeman  y.  Pope,  L.  R.  0  Eq.  206, 
80  L.  J.  Ch.  148,  L.  R.  6  Ch.  638,  39 
L.  T.  Ch.  680,  21  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  816, 
18  Wkly.  Rep.  006;  Schondler  t. 
Wace,  1  Camp.  487;  Jenkyn  v.  Vau- 
gfaan,  3  Drew,  410,  2  Jur.  N.  S.  100, 
26  L.  J.  Ch.  338,  4  Wkly.  Rep.  214 
(since  the  statutes  of  1  and  2  Vict., 
ohap.  110,  fi  12,  bringing  insurance 
policies  within  13  Eliz.,  chap.  6. 

84.  Cole  V.  Marple,  08  111.  58,  38 
Am.  Rep.  83,  the  wife  may  hold  the 
proceeds  of  a  policy  which  tiie  hus- 


band haa  proenied  on  his  own  life  and 
assigned  to  her,  less  premiums,  with 
interest,  paid  by  him  within  the 
statutory  period  of  limitaticm  with 
intent  to  defraud  creditors;  More- 
head's  Adm'r  v.  Mayfield,  100  Ky.  61, 
68  S.  W.  473,  22  Ky.  L.  Rep.  680,  the 
assignment  of  a  policy  to  the  wife  of 
insured  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  his 
creditors,  except  as  to  premiums  paid 
by  him  when  he  was  insolvent; 
Thompscm  v.  Cnndiff,  74  Ky.  667; 
Eamshow  ▼.  Stewart,  64  Ifd.  613,  2 
Aa  734;  Elliott  T.  Bryan,  64  Md. 
368,  1  Atl.  614;  Judson  v.  Walker^ 
166  Mo.  166,  65  S.  W.  1083,  a  policy 
assigned  in  favor  of  his  wife  by  an 
insolyent  husband  entitles  her  to  such 
insurance  to  the  extent  to  which,  un- 
der the  statute,  it  is  exempt  from 
the  claims  of  creditors  where  he  pays 
the  premiums;  McCutcheon's  Appeal, 
00  Pa.  St.  133;  Sebrine  v.  Brickley, 

7  Pa.  Super.  Ct  108,  42  Wkly.  Notes 
Gas.  180.     But  see  Child  v.  Graham, 

8  Ohio  Dec.  204,  7  Wkly.  Law  Bui.  43, 
where  an  assignment  of  a  life  insur- 
ance policy  by  a  husband  to  his  wife 
was  held  invalid  as  to  creditors  under 
S  6344  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  be- 
cause made  with  actual  intent  to  de- 
fraud them,  the  entire  proceeds  of  the 
policy  were  subject  to  the  claims  of 
the  creditors,  and  not  merely  the 
premiums  paid,  as  provided  by 
S  3620. 

Tlioiisli  &«t  aeknoirledced  or 
recorded,  the  assignment  of  a  policy 
is  valid  under  a  statute  providing 
that  "a  gift,  transfer  or  assignment 
of  personal  property  between  husband 


Pbopsstt^  btCv  which  Gbbditobb  hat  Bbaoh.       121 


protecting  as  against  creditors  money  payable  on  a  life  insurance 
policy  taken  out  by  a  husband  or  father  for  the  benefit  of  his 
wife  or  children^  does  not  cover  an  assignment  to  them  of  a 
policy  payable  to  himself^  his  executors,  administrators,  or  as- 
signs.^ Nor  does  this  rule  apply  where  the  assignment  is  within 
the  rule  maintained  by  the  courts  in  some  jurisdictions,  in  the 
absence  of  statute,  that  a  debtor  may  make  reasonable  provision 
for  his  wife  and  children  by  life  insurance,  where  there  is  no 
intent  to  defraud  creditors.**  Where  the  contract  of  insurance 
was  made  solely  for  the  benefit  of  another,  although  made  pay- 
able to  the  debtor  or  his  estate,  and  an  assignment  of  it  was  de- 
livered simultaneously  with  the  policy  to  such  other  person,  the 
rule  has  been  held  not  to  apply,  since  the  assignment  did  not 
transfer  anything  in  which  the  creditors  had  an  interest.*^  So  a 
policy  of  insurance  having  no  surrender  value,  or  no  real  value, 
or  a  merely  trivial  value,  as  an  asset  for  creditors,  is  held  not  to 
be  within  the  rule  stated."  Likewise  an  assignment  or  surrender 
by  the  beneficiary  of  insurance  upon  the  life  of  another,  as  by  a 
wife  of  an  insurance  on  the  life  of  her  husband  during  his 


and  wife  shall  not  be  valid  as  to  third 
persons  unless  the  same  be  in  writing 
and  acknowledged  and  recorded  as 
chattel  mortgages  are  required  by 
law  to  be  recorded,  since  the  statute 
does  not  apply  to  a  policy  of  insur- 
ance which  at  the  time  of  its  assign- 
ment had  no  surrender  value.  More- 
head's  Adm'r  t.  Mayfield,  9upra; 
8teeley  v.  Steeley,  23  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
966,  64  S.  W.  642;  Cole  v.  Marple, 
8upra, 

S5.  Friedman  v.  Fennell,  04  Ala. 
570,  10  So.  649;  Ionia  County  Say. 
Bank  v.  McLean,  84  Mich.  626,  48  K 
W.  169;  Burton  ▼.  Farinholt,  86  N.  C. 
260.  But  see  Cole  v.  Marple,  Mipro, 
holding  to  the  contraiy,  and  Tuthill 
y.  Qoss,  89  Hun  (N.  Y.),  609,  36  K. 
T.  Supp.  136,  holding  that  such  an  as- 
signed policy  inures  to  the  benefit  of 


the  wife,  except  as  to  the  premiums 
paid  by  the  husband  in  excess  of  $500 
annually.    See  also  Judson  y.  Walker, 

56.  Johnson  y.  Alexander,  125  Ind. 
575,  25  N.  E.  706,  9  L.  R.  A.  660; 
State  y.  Tomlinson,  16  Ind.  App.  662, 
45  N.  £.  1116,  59  Am.  St.  Rep.  336; 
Chapman  y.  Mcllwrath,  77  Mo.  38,  46 
Am.  Rep.  1 ;  Dayid  Adler,  etc.,  Cloth- 
ing Co.  y.  Hellman,  55  Neb.  266,  75 
N.  W.  877. 

57.  Shayer  y.  Shayer,  35  App.  Diy. 
(N.  T.)  1,  54  N.  T.  Supp.  464. 

28.  Barbour  y.  Connecticut  Mut.  L. 
Ins.  Co.,  61  Conn.  240,  23  Atl.  154; 
Steeley  y.  Steeley,  23  Ky.  L.  Rep.  996, 
64  S.  W.  642;  Provident  L.,  etc.,  Co. 
▼.  Fidelity  Ins.,  etc.,  Co.,  203  Pa.  St. 
82,  52  Atl.  34. 


122 


FjUUDUI^ITT   CoirVXTAHCBS. 


liie,^  or  by  a  husband  of  insurance  payable  to  liis  wiie,^  maj 
not  be  attacked  by  the  creditors  of  the  beneficiaiy  as  f raudulenty 
since  the  beneficiary  has  no  vested  rights  or  interest 
in  the  insurance  which  a  creditor  oould  seize.  It  is  like  the  dis- 
position of  property  exempt  from  execution  of  which  creditors 
cannot  complain^  An  attempted  assignment  or  transfer  of  an 
insurance  policy  being  set  aside  as  fraudulent  and  void  as  against 
creditors^  and  the  insurance  having  become  payable^  by  the  death 
of  the  decedent  before  the  judgment  annulling  the  transfer,  it 
has  been  held  that,  upon  both  principle  and  authority,  the  full 
value  of  the  policy  having  become  fixed  by  the  death,  the  entire 
insurance  insures  to  the  benefit  of  the  creditors,  and  not  merely  the 
cash  value  thereof." 

§  21.  Pajfinent  of  premiums  for  life  insurance^ — ^Iji  the  ab- 
sence of  actual  fraud,  it  is  held,  as  a  general  rule^  that  the 
premiums  paid  by  an  insolvent  debtor  for  insurance  upon  his 
life,  in  favor  of  his  wife  and  children,  or  either,  cannot  be  re- 
covered by  creditors,  whether  existing  or  subsequent,  as  made 
in  fraud  of  their  rights,  or  the  proceeds  of  the  policy  subjected 
to  the  payment  of  his  debts,  to  the  amount  of  the  premiums  paid 
by  the  insolvent  debtor  during  insolvency,  where  the  provision 
for  the  family  is  reasonable  and  not  excessive.**    On  the  other 


29.  Smillie  v.  Quinn,  00  N.  T.  492, 
affg  26  Hun  (N.  Y.),  332. 

80.  Schillinger  v.  Boes,  85  Ky.  357, 
3  S.  W.  427,  9  Ky.  L.  Hep.  18. 

SI.  Continental  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Moore,  88  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  419,  82 
N.  Y.  Supp.  302,  an  assignment  in 
contemplation  of  suicide;  In  re  Mc- 
Kown,  198  Pa.  St.  96,  47  Atl.  11; 
Catchings  v.  Manlove,  39  Miss.  655; 
Ionia  County  Say.  Bank  v.  McLean,  84 
Mich.  626,  48  N.  W.  159;  Stokoe  v. 
Cowan,  29  Beav.  637,  7  Jur.  N.  S. 
901,  4  L.  T.  Kep.  N.  S.  695,  6  Wkly. 
Rep.  801,  54  Eng.  Reprint,  775; 
Schondler  y.  Waoe,  1  Campb.  487. 


as.  r.  £r.--Central  Kat  Bank  t. 
Hume,  128  U.  S.  196,  9  Sup.  Ot  41, 
32  L.  Ed.  370. 

Oolo. — Hendrie,  etc.,  Mfg.  06.  v. 
Piatt,  13  Colo.  App.  16,  56  Pae.  209. 

Ind. — Johnson  y.  Alexander,  126 
Ind.  675,  25  K.  E.  706,  9  L.  R.  A. 
660;  Pence  y.  Makepeace,  06  Ind. 
345;  Foster  y.  Brown,  05  Ind.  234. 

Ky, — ^Hise  v.  Hartford  Life  Ins.  06., 
90  Ky.  101,  13  S.  W.  367,  11  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  924,  29  Am.  St.  Rep.  358;  Thom- 
son y.  Cundiff,  74  Ky.  567;  Stokes  y. 
Coffee,  71  Ky.  533,  the  amount  of  the 
policy  ought  to  be  no  more  than  will 
be    sufficient   to    proyide    reaaonabk 


Fbopxbtt^  btc,  whioh  Cseditobs  hat  Bbaoh. 


123 


hand^  it  is  held  in  some  jurisdictions  that  payments  made  by 
an  insolvent  debtor  on  a  policy  of  insurance  on  his  own  life,  for 
the  benefit  of  his  wife  or  children,  arer  voluntary  gifts  to  the 
beneficiary  and  are  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors  eousting 
at  the  time  of  such  payments.**  In  some  jurisdictions  it  is  held 
that  where  an  insolvent  debtor  voluntarily  pays  premiums  on  a 
policy  of  insurance  on  his  life  for  the  ben^t  of  his  wife,  or 
children,  or  another,  in  fraud  of  his  creditors,  the  latter  may  in 
equity  reach  and  subject  the  full  amount  of  the  insurance  in  the 
hands  of  the  insurance  company,**  the  policy  or  insurance  which 
it  represents  being  regarded  as  the  subject  of  the  gifl^  and  not 
the  premiums  paid.**  More  generally,  however,  the  rule  is  main- 
tained,  in  such  cases,  that  thei  creditors  of  the  debtor  may  reach 
and  subject  the  insurance  to  the  payment  of  their  claims  only 
to  the  extent  of  the  premiums  so  paid,  with  interest,**  the  insure 


support  for  the  wife  and  family  and 
the  education  of  the  children. 

Neb. — ^David  Adler,  etc.,  Clothing 
Co.  Y.  Hellman,  56  Neb.  266,  76  K.  W. 
877. 

Pii.^Elliott'8  Appeal,  60  Pa.  St. 
75,  88  Am.  Dec.  525. 

83.  Feam  v.  Ward,  65  Ala.  33,  80 
Ala.  555,  2  So.  114;  First  Nat.  Bank 
▼.  Simpson,  152  Mo.  638,  54  S.  W. 
506;  First  Nat.  Bank  t.  White,  60 
N.  J.  Bq.  587,  46  Atl.  1092;  Mer- 
chants',  etc.,  Transp.  Co.  ▼.  Borland, 
53  N.  J.  Eq.  282,  31  Ati.  272;  Stigier 
▼.  Stigier,  77  Va.  163. 

34.  Lehman  v.  Gunn,  124  Ala.  217, 
27  So.  475,  82  Am.  St.  Rep.  159,  51 
L.  R.  A.  112;  Stone  t.  Knickerbocker 
L.  Ins.  Co.,  52  Ala.  589;  Feam  ▼. 
Ward,  9upra;  First  Nat.  Bank  v. 
White,  supra. 

Am  Inawaaoe  polioj  or  the 
proeeeds  la  &ot  mm  asset  of  the 
estate  of  a  decedent  applicable  to  the 
payment  of  his  debts,  where  the  pol- 
icy is  payable  to  another  than  him- 


self or  his  I^gal  representatiTSs,  al- 
though he  may  have  paid  the  pre- 
miums. Jones  T.  Patty,  73  Miss.  179i 
18  So.  794;  Bishop  v.  Corphey,  60 
Hiss.  22.  See  also  Simmons  v.  Biggs, 
99  N.  C.  236,  6  S.  S.  235;  Oonigland 
▼.  Smith,  79  N.  C.  303. 

A  poliey  of  lasnraaee  upon  the 
iiecedent's  life  which  made  the  amount 
insured  payable  "  to  the  said  assured, 
his  executors,  administrators  or  as- 
signs, for  the  benefit  of  his  widow,  if 
any,"  belongs  to  the  widow,  and  was 
recovered  by  the  executor  not  as  an 
asset  of  the  estate,  but  as  a  trustee 
under  the  policy  for  the  widow.  Mat- 
ter of  Van  Dermoor,  42  Hun  (N.  T.), 
826. 

85.  Lehman  t.  Ounn,  supra. 

86.  N.  T. — Shaver  v.  Shaver,  36 
App.  Div.  1,  64  N.  T.  Supp.  644. 

17.  iSf. — ^Aetna  Nat.  Bank  v.  U.  8. 
Life  Ins.  Co.,  24  Fed.  770;  In  re 
Bear,  2  Fed.  Cas.  No.  1,178,  11  Nat 
Bankr.  Reg.  46. 


124 


F&AUDULENT   CONVEYANGSS. 


ance  being  upon  tlie  intereet  of  the  wife,  child,  or  other  person 
in  his  life,  not  the  creditor's  interest  in  his  life,  and  the  amount 
due  representing  and,  beyond  the  amount  of  premiums  paid, 
being  the  interest  of  the  beneficiary."  But  the  rules  stated  above 
do  not  apply  where  the  transaction  is  authorized  and  made  law- 
ful by  a  statute  of  exemption  or  by  a  statute  permitting  a 
debtor,  as  against  his  creditors,  to  pay  premiums  for  insurance 
upon  his  life  for  the  benefit  of  his  wife  and  children,  or  other 
dependent  relatives,  except  where  such  a  statute  expressly  ex- 
cepts from  its  provisions  cases  in  which  the  premiums  are  paid 
with  intent  to  defraud  creditors.**     Such  statutes  being  in  the 


Oolo, — ^Hcndrie,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v. 
Piatt,  •upm. 

D,  O, — Central  Nat.  Bank  v.  Hume, 
8  Mackey,  3S0,  rev'cE  on  other  grounday 
128  U.  8.  195. 

Ind. — ^Peace  t.  Makepeace,  Mipro. 

lfiM..^one8  ▼.  Patty,  73  Miis. 
179,  IS  So.  794. 

Oftio.— Hoffman  v.  Kiefer,  10  Ohio 
ar.  Ct.  401,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  304. 

Ycu — Stigler  v.  Stigler,  Mipro. 

37.  Aetna  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  U.  S.  life 
Ins.  Co.,  24  Fed.  770. 

38.  V,  r. — Baron  y.  Bnimmer,  100 
N.  T.  372,  3  N.  E.  474;  Bmmmer  ▼. 
Cohn,  86  N.  Y.  11,  40  Am.  Rep.  503, 
it  need  not  appear  from  the  terms  of 
the  policy  or  extrinsic  evidence  that 
it  was  the  intention  of  the  insured  to 
avail  himself  of  the  provisions  of  the 
statute,  nor  need  tlM  policy  provida 
for  the  disposition  of  the  fund  in  case 
of  the  wife^s  death  before  the  hus- 
band; Brick  V.  Campbell,  8  St.  Rep. 
(N.  Y.)  98. 

V.  S.'-lik  re  Jordan,  13  Fed.  Cas. 
No.  7,611,  2  Hask.  362,  under  Maine 
statute;  Smith  v.  Missouri  Valley  L. 
Ins.  Co.,  22  Fed.  Cas.  No,  13,083,  4 
Dill.  353,  under  Missouri  statute. 

^la.— F^lrath  v.  Schonfield,  76  Ala. 
199,  62  Am.  Rep.  319. 


Conn, — Continental  L.  Ins.  Co.  ▼. 
Palmer,  42  Conn.  60,  19  Ami  Rep. 
680. 

ill.— Cole  V.  Marple,  98  111.  68,  38 
Am.  Rep.  83;  Wagner  v.  Koch,  45 
111.  App.  601. 

Ky. — ^Hise  v.  Hartford  L.  Ins.  Co., 
90  Ky.  101,  13  S.  W.  367,  11  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  924,  29  Am.  St.  Rep.  368; 
Thompson  v.  Cundiff,  11  Bush.  667. 

Ifd— Elliott  V.  Bryan,  64  Md.  368, 
1  AU.  614. 

ifo. — Judflon  V.  Walker,  166  Mo. 
166,  65  S.  W.  1083;  Pullis  T.  Robin- 
son, 73  Mo.  201,  39  Am.  Rep.  497; 
Charter  Oak.  L.  Ins.  Co.  v.  Brant,  47 
Mo.  419,  4  Am.  Rep.  328;  Kiely  v. 
Hickcoz,  70  Mo.  App.  617. 

2\r.  J. — ^Merchants',  etc.,  Transp.  Co. 
V.  Borland,  63  N.  J.  £q.  282,  31  Atl. 
272. 

Ohio, — ^Weber  v.  Paxton,  48  Ohio  St. 
266,  26  N.  E.  1051.  Such  a  sUtute 
applies  to  a  policy  issued  by  a  foreign 
insurance  company  as  well  as  to  one 
of  those  issued  by  domestic  com- 
panies. Cross  V.  Armstrong,  44  Ohio 
St.  613,  10  N.  E.  160. 

Pa. — ^Appeal  of  McCutcheon,  99  Pa. 
St.  133. 

Tenn, — ^Rose  v.  Wortham,  95  Tenn. 
506,  32  S.  W.  458,  30  L.  R.  A.  609» 


Fbopsbtt^  xtc.^  whioh  Cbeoitobs  iCAT  Bbach.       125 

nature  of  exemption  laws  are  liberally  construed  by  the  courts 
in  favor  of  those  intended  to  be  benefitted  thereby.'*     Where 


policy  exempt  by  statttte,  althoui^ 
taken  out  hy  the  htubaiid  before  his 
marriage,  and  although  payable  to 
his  legal  repreeentatiTea;  Har?^  ▼. 
Harrison,  89  Tenn.  470,  14  S.  W. 
1083. 

Va, — ^Mahoney  v.  James,  94  Va. 
176,  26  S.  £.  384. 

^n^.— Holt  ▼.  Everall,  2  Ch.  D. 
266,  46  L.  J.  Ch.  433,  34  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  699,  24  Wkly.  Rep.  471. 

TmnMetioM  oorevMl  bj  sta« 
tmtm* — It  has  been  held  that  a  policy 
procured  l^  a  debtor  in  favor  of  one 
of  his  children  only  was  not  within 
the  protection  of  a  statute  authoriz- 
ing a  married  wmnan  to  cause  the  life 
of  her  husband  to  be  insured  for  the 
benefit  of  hefself  and  children,  free 
from  the  daims  of  the  representa- 
tiyea  of  the  husband  or  any  of  his 
creditors.  Feam  ▼.  Ward,  66  Ala.  33, 
80  Ala.  666,  2  Bo.  114.  But  a  statute 
providing  that  it  shall  be  lawful  for 
any  married  woman,  by  herself  and  in 
her  own  name,  or  in  the  name  of  any 
third  person  as  her  trustee,  to  cause 
the  life  of  her  husband  to  be  insured 
for  her  sole  use,  and  exempting  such 
insurance  from  the  daims  of  the  hua* 
band's  representatives  or  creditors, 
contemplates  and  includes  cases  where 
the  husband  procures  for  his  wife  a 
policy  on  his  own  life.  Felrath  v. 
Schonfleld,  76  Ala.  199,  62  Am.  Rep. 
319;  Houston  v.  Maddux,  179  111. 
377,  63  N.  £.  699. 

Am,  eBdewmamt  peUoy  lias  been 
hdd  to  be  within  such  a  statute. 
Brummer  v.  Oohn,  86  N.  T.  11,  40 
Am.  Rep.  603. 

m  pmM  yrior  to  the 
•f  tko  etatwte  are  not 


protected.     Thompson  v.  Cundiif,  11 
Bush.  (Ky.)  667. 
I>«ath  of  wife  bof ovo  hvobama. 

—See  Tompkins  v.  Levy,  87  Ala.  263, 
6  So.  346.  13  Am.  St  Rep.  31. 
btoat  to  deframd  evoditora.— 

Under  a  statute  permitting  the  insur- 
ance of  a  husband's  life  for  his  wife's 
sole  use,  and  exempting  such  insur- 
ance from  the  claims  of  the  hus- 
band's representatives  or  creditors, 
but  providing  that  if  the  premium  on 
such  a  policy  is  paid  by  any  person 
"with  intent  to  defraud  his  credit- 
ors," an  amount  of  the  insurance 
equal  to  the  premiums  so  paid  shall 
inure  to  the  boiefit  of  sudi  creditors, 
it  has  l>een  held  that  voluntary  pay- 
ment by  a  husband  of  the  premiums 
on  a  policy  in  favor  of  his  wife  while 
he  is  insolvent,  since  it  results  in 
hindering,  delaying  or  defrauding 
creditors,  is  fraudulent,  within  the 
meaning  of  the  proviso,  without  refer- 
ence to  the  motive  or  actual  intention 
in  making  the  payments.  Houston  v. 
Maddux,  179  111.  377,  63  N.  E.  699. 
See  also  Marmon  v.  Harwood,  124 
ni.  104,  16  N.  E.  236,  7  Am.  St.  Rep. 
346;  Cole  v.  Marple,  98  111.  68,  38 
Am.  Rep.  83;  Wagner  v.  Koch,  46 
111.  App.  601;  Merchants',  etc, 
Transp.  Go.  v.  Borland,  63  N.  J.  Eq. 
282,  31  Atl.  272;  Union  Cent.  L.  Ins. 
Go.  V.  Ohio  Dec.  (Reprint)  628,  6  Am. 
L.  Rec.  462.  Compare,  however, 
Weber  v.  Paxton,  48  Ohio  St.  266,  26 
N.  £.  1061. 

Under  the  Kentucky  statute  of 
1870,  which  provides  in  substance 
that  insurances  made  by  husbands, 
whether  insolvent  or  not,  for  the  bene- 
fit of  thdr  wives  and  children,  are 


126 


Fbauduxxitt  Conteyancks. 


Ilie  debtor  expends  for  insurance  more  than  the  statute  au- 
thorizes^ or  where  there  is  an  intent  to  defraud  his  creditors^ 
the  latter^  in  some  jurisdictions,  may  subject  the  insurance  to 
the  extent  of  such  excess  payments  onlj.^    In  oth^  jurisdictions. 


valid  M  against  creditors,  unless  the 
insnnmce  is  made  with  intent  to  de- 
fraud creditors,  in  which  case  the 
premiums  paid  shaU  be  subject  to 
their  claims,  it  has  been  held  that 
if  the  husband  be  insolvent  and  the 
amount  of  the  insurance  unreasonable, 
this  wiU  be  sufficient  evidence  of 
fraud.  Hise  v.  Hartford  L.  Ins.  Co., 
90  K7.  101,  13  S.  W.  367,  11  Ky.  L. 
Bep.  924,  29  Am.  St.  Bep.  36S.  See 
also  Morehead  v.  Mayfleid,  109  Ky. 
51,  58  S.  W.  473,  22  Ky.  L.  Rep.  580; 
Thompson  v.  Cundiff,  11  Bush.  (Ky.) 
5S7. 

HesorrmtteA  ef  bttaeflt  to  hva- 
baad. — ^Where  the  husband  takes  out 
a  policy  of  insurance  on  his  own  life, 
in  favor  of  his  wife,  *'  her  heirs,  execu- 
tors or  assigns,"  paying  the  premiums 
with  his  own  funds,  a  provision  to  the 
effect  that,  after  the  expiration  of  fif- 
teen years,  on  surrender  of  the  policy, 
none  of  its  provisions  having  been  vio- 
lated, the  company  would  pay  to  him, 
his  heirs,  executors  or  assigns,  the 
equitable  value  of  the  policy,  "  as  an 
endowment  in  cash,"  is  the  reserva- 
tion of  a  benefit  to  himself,  and  ren- 
ders the  policy  fraudulent  as  against 
his  creditors.  Tompkins  v.  Levy,  87 
AU.  263,  6  So.  346,  13  Am.  St  Bep. 
31. 

Paymemt  of  promimn  hj  &oto 
of  debtor* — ^It  has  been  held  that  it 
is  immaterial,  so  far  as  the  claims 
of  existing  creditors  are  concerned, 
whether  a  debtor  who  takes  out  a 
policy  of  insurance  on  his  life  pays 
the  premium  in  cash  or  executes  his 
note  therefor,  since  the  fund  to  which 


the  creditors  have  a  right  to  look  for 
the  payment  of  their  claims  may  be 
diminished  by  the  fraudulent  creation 
of  additional  claims  against  it,  as 
well  as  by  the  improper  diversion  of 
assets  which  constituted  it.  Lehman 
V.  Ounn,  124  Ala.  213,  27  So.  475,  82 
Am.  St.  Bep.  169,  51  L.  B.  A.  112. 

80.  3V.  r.— Brummer  v.  Cohn,  86  K. 
Y.  11,  40  Am.  Bep.  503. 

Altt.— Tompkins  v.  Levy,  87  Ala. 
263,  6  So.  346,  13  Am.  St.  Bep.  31; 
Felrath  v.  Schonfield,  supra. 

lU. — ^Houston  V.  Maddux,  siipm; 
Cole  V.  Marple,  aupra;  Bamsey  v. 
Nichols,  73  111.  App.  643. 

Mo. — Jiidson  v.  Walker,  9upra; 
Charter  Oak  L.  Ins.  Co.  v.  Brant, 
supra, 

Tenn. — ^Bose  v.  Wortham,  supra. 

40. — N.  Y. — Stokes  v,  Amerman, 
121  N.  Y.  337,  24  N.  E.  819;  Tuthill 
V.  Goes,  35  N.  Y.  Supp.  136. 

U.  8. — ^Ingles  v.  New  England  Mut. 
L.  Ins.  Co.,  27  Fed.  249,  Massachu- 
setts statute;  In  re  Jordan,  13  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  7,511,  2  Hask.  362,  Maine 
statute.  In  a  federal  case  it  was  held 
that  where  policies  on  the  life  of  a 
husband  were  made  for  flie  benefit  of 
his  wife,  but  the  premiums  werei  paid 
''from  the  property  of  the  husband 
in  fraud  of  the  rights  of  his  credit- 
ors,'* his  creditors  could  subject  tbe 
insurance  to  the  amount  of  the  pre- 
miums so  paid.  Although  this  deci- 
sion was  made  in  New  York,  there 
was  no  reference  in  the  opinion  to  the 
New  York  statute  allowing  insurance 
to  a  limited  extent  on  the  life  of  the 
husband  for  the  benefit  of  his  wife. 


Pbopbbtt^  btGv  wuioh  Cbbditobs  may  Beaoh.       127 

however,  the  creditors,  may  subject  the  entire  insurance,  or  such 
proportion  of  the  insurance  as  the  excess  of  premiums  paid 
bears  to  the  total  amount  of  premiums  paid/' 

§  22.  Payment  <rf  premiums  not  voluntary  or  fraudulent.^ — 
The  premiums  paid  by  an  insolvent  debtor  for  life  insurance 
policies  taken  out  in  favor  of  his  wife  or  for  another's  benefit, 
or  the  proceeds  of  such  policy,  are  not,  in  the  absence  of  fraudu- 
lent intent,  liable  for  his  debts  and  subject  to  the  claims  of 
creditors,  where  the  payment  of  the  premiums  was  not  volun- 
tary but  based  on  adequate  consideration,  or  the  insurance  was 
effected,  or  the  policy  was  assigned,  as  security  for,  or  in  pay- 
ment of,  bona  fide  indebtedness  due  to  the  assignee  or  beneficiary 
of  the  poli(gr.^    The  proceeds  of  life  insurance  policies  on  the 


Aetna  Nat.  Bank  y.  United  States  L. 
Ins.  Go.,  24  Fed.  770. 

A  qiiart«rl7  prentiiim  not  €Z- 
oeeding  the  statutory  annual  limita- 
tion, no  other  premium  being  paid, 
eannot  be  reached  bj  creditors.  In 
re  Jordan,  siifM^ 

]Iamb«rAlp  Im  a  1iem«Tolemt 
aaaoeiat&oa  la  Ufa  imsiunuioa 
within  the  meaning  of  the  Illinois 
statute  providing  for  recovery  by 
creditors  of  an  insolvent  of  life  in- 
surance premiums  paid  by  such  insol* 
vent  with  intent  to  defraud  his 
creditors.    Ramsey  v.  Nichols,  Bupra. 

Ekeasa  prensinms  paid  before 
•o&traetlns  of  debt. — ^Under  the 
New  York  statute  limiting  the  ex- 
emption of  insurance  policies  on  a 
husband's  life  from  the  claims  of  his 
creditors  by  declaring  thai  where  the 
amount  of  the  annual  premium  paid 
out  of  the  husband's  funds  or  prop- 
erty exceeds  a  certain  sum,  the  ex- 
emption shall  not  apply  to  such  por- 
tions of  the  premiums  as  are  in  excess 
of  the  sums  specified,  it  has  been  held 
that  where  the  premiums  so   paid, 


after  the  contracting  of  a  debt  by  a 
husband,  do  not  exceed  the  sum  lim- 
ited, the  creditor  can  acquire  no  lien, 
although  prior  to  the  contracting  of 
the  debt  premiums  were  so  paid  in 
excess  of  the  statutory  limitation. 
Baron  v.  Brummer,  100  N.  T.  372,  3 
N.  E.  474. 

A  polioj  ia  not  void  because  ex- 
cessive premiums  have  been  paid. 
Smith  V.  Missouri  Valley  L.  Ins.  Co., 
supra. 

41.  Stone  v.  Knickerbocker  L.  Ins. 
Co.,  62  Ala.  689.  Excess  of  insurance 
not  assets  of  estate.  Jones  v.  Patty, 
73  Miss.  179,  18  So.  794.  See  supra, 
note  34. 

48.  Feam  v.  Ward,  80  Ala.  565,  2 
So.  114;  Hendric,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v. 
Piatt,  13  Colo.  App.  15,  66  Pac.  209, 
where  the  debtor  was  indebted  to  his 
wife  in  a  sum  more  than  sufficient 
for  the  payment  of  such  premiums, 
and  the  insurance  was  affected  under 
an  express  agreement  with  his  wife 
to  keep  his  life  insured  in  an  amount 
sufficient  to  repay  such  indebtedness, 
and  to  provide  a  fund  for  the  sup- 


128 


FSAUDULEKT    Coif  V£ YAKCES. 


life  of  a  debtor,  payable  to  or  assigned  to  bis  wife  or  another, 
are  not  subject  to  the  payment  of  his  debts,  where  the  premiums 
thereon  were  paid  by  the  debtor  while  he  was  solvent  and  there 
was  no  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  his  creditors/'  And 
it  has  been  held  in  some  states  that  the  proceeds  of  such  a  policy 
are  not  subject  to  the  claims  of  the  creditors  of  the  debtX)r  or 
assignor,  where  there  is  no  fraudulent  intent,  merely  because  the 
debtor  was  insolvent  at  the  time  when  the  insurance  was  effected 
or  the  assignment  was  made.^^ 

^  23.  Premiums  not  paid  by  debtor* — Vlfhere  premiums  on 
insurance  policies  on  the  life  of  a  debtor  for  the  benefit  of  or 
assigned  to  his  wife  or  another  were  not  paid  by  the  debtor 
but  by  his  wife  out  of  her  separate  estate  or  by  another  person, 
the  proceeds  thereof  or  premiums  paid  on  such  insurance  can^ 
not  be  reached  and  subjected  by  creditors  of  the  debtor  or  as- 
signor.^    But  since  the  right  of  existing  creditors  to  proceed 


port  of  herself  and  children  after  his 
death ;  First  Nat  Bank  ▼.  White,  60 
N.  J.  £q.  487,  46  Atl.  1092,  where 
the  insured  agreed  to  take  out  a  life 
insurance  policy  in  favor  of  his  wife 
in  consideration  of  heing  allowed  the 
income  from  her  estate  during  the 
life  of  the  policy,  and  such  income 
exceeded  the  amount  of  premium 
paid  by  him;  Sebring  v.  Brickley,  7 
Pa.  Super.  Ot  19S,  42  W.  N.  C.  189. 
AislsBjnemt  of  polioj  Im  eea- 
■ideratioa  of  auurriaco^ — ^Where 
an  inaoWent  debtor  assigned  a  policy 
of  insurance  on  his  life  in  considera- 
tion of  the  assignee's  promise  to 
marry  him,  which  she  subsequently 
did,  and  she  took  the  assignment 
without  notice  of  his  insolvency  and 
without  knowledge  of  any  intent  on 
his  part  to  defraud  his  creditors,  it 
was  held  that  she  took  a  good  title 
as  a  purchaser  for  a  valuable  consid- 
eration   as    against    his    creditors. 


Provident  L.,  etc.,  Oou  v.  Fidelity 
Ins.,  etc.,  Go.,  203  Pa.  St  82,  52  Atl. 
34. 

43.  Foster  v.  Brown,  66  Ind.  234; 
Langford  v.  Freeman,  60  Ind.  46; 
King  V.  Cram,  185  Mass.  103,  69  K. 
E.  1049;  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Simp- 
son, 152  Mo.  638,  54  S.  W.  506; 
Trough's  Estate,  8  Phila.  (Pa.)  214. 

44.  McGutchoen's  Appeal,  99  Pa. 
St.  133;  Chapman  v.  Mcllwrath,  77 
Mo.  38,  46  Am.  Rep.  1;  Weber  v. 
Paxton,  48  Ohio  St  266,  26  N.  E. 
1051. 

46.  N.  7. — ^Baron  v.  Brunaner, 
100  N.  T.  372,  3  N.  E.  474,  where  no 
premium  in  excess  of  the  statutory 
amount  was  paid  by  the  debtor  after 
the  contracting  of  the  plaintiff's  debt. 

17.  8. — ^In  re  Murrin,  17  Fed.  Cas. 
No.  9,968,  2  Dill.  120. 

Ky. — Stokes  v.  Coffey,  8  Bush.  633. 

Jfo.— First  Nat  Bank  v.  Simpaoo, 


Peopebty,  etc.,  which  Creditors  may  Keaoh. 


129 


against  the  fund  arising  from  an  insurance  policy  of  their  debtor 
arises  upon  the  death  of  the  debtor,  their  right  cannot  be  af- 
fected by  the  fact  that  another  person  pays,  after  the  death  of 
the  debtor,  as  an  act  of  generosity  to  the  beneficiaries  named  in 
the  policy,  the  premium  note  given  by  the  debtor.** 

^  24.  Improvements,  rents,  and  profits  of  real  estate. — Judg- 
ment creditors,  with  executions  returned  unsatisfied  and  their 
remedies  at  law  exhausted,  may  by  bill  in  chancery  assail  any 
fraudulent  disposition)  of  their  debtor's  real  or  personal  prop- 
erty, and  reach  either  legal  or  equitable  assets  of  their  debtor. 
Any  beneficial  interest  of  the  debtor  in  real  property,  as  well  as 
in  personal  estate,  rights  which  do  not  necessarily  pertain  to 
the  absolute  fee  or  ownership  of  real  property  but  which  grow 
out  of  such  ownership,  acquisitions  which  are  the  mere  fruit 
and  outgrowth  of  the  property,  may  be  thus  reached  and  sub* 
jected  by  creditors.*^    Thus  rents  and  profits  may  be  recovered  by 
a  creditor  from  a  fraudulent  grantee  of  the  debtor.     The  debtor 
can  no  more  give  away  the  rents  and  profits  of  his  real  estate 
than  he  can  give  away  the  real  estate  itself,  and  the  fraudulent 
grantee  has  no  more  ri^t,  as  against  creditors  of  the  grantor, 
to  hold  the  former  than  he  has  to  hold  the  latter.*^     But  the 
grantee  of  lands  by  a  fraudulent  conveyance  is  not  accountable 
to  the  creditors  at  large  for  the  rents  and  profits  prior  to  the 
time  when  a  receiver  is  appointed,**  nor  is  a  trustee,  under  an 
assignment  of  land  which  is  declared  fraudulent  at  the  suit  of 
a  creditor,  bound  to  account  for  the  rents  received  and  in  good 


Ohio, — Jacob  ▼.  Continental  L.  Ins. 
Co.,  1  Cine.  Super.  Ct.  619. 

Tewn. — ^Roberta  y.  Winton,  100 
Tenn.  484,  45  S.  W.  «73,  41  L.  R.  A. 
275. 

Eng, — ^Holt  v.  Everall,  supra. 

46.  Lehman    v.    Gunn,    124    Ala 
213,  27  So.  475,  82  Am.  St.  Rep.  159, 
51  L.  R.  A.  112. 

47.  Loos  V.  Wilkinson,  110  N.  Y. 
195,    18    N.   E.    99,   L.   R.    A«   260; 

9 


Farnham  v.  Campbell,  10  Paige  (N. 
Y.)  598;  Edward  v.  Entwisle,  2 
Mackey  (D.  C),  43;  State  v.  Mo- 
Bride,  105  Mo.  265,  15  S.  W.  72. 

48.  Loos  V.  Wilkinson,  supra; 
Marshall  t.  Croom,  60  Ala.  121; 
Kipp  T.  Hanna,  2  Bland  (Md.)  26. 
See  also  Rents,  issues  and  profits, 
chap.  XIV,  §  38,  infra. 

49.  Robinson  v.  Stewart,  10  N.  Y. 
189. 


130 


FlUUDULBNT   CoirVBTAKOBS. 


faith  applied,  aooordiiig  to  the  termd  of  the  trust,  before  the 
commencemeiii;  of  the  suit,  or  the  attaching  of  any  specific  lien 
upon  the  lands.^  Improvements  placed  by  a  debtor  upon  the 
real  property  of  another,  whether  his  wife,  child,  or  other  third 
person,  acting  in  concert  or  collusion  with  him  to  defraud  credi- 
tors, or  money  or  property  of  a  debtor  expended  in  improvements 
upon  the  real  property  of  any  such  person,  without  consideration 
and  with  intent  to  defraud  creditors,  the  owner  of  the  property 
participating  in  and  having  knowledge  of  such  intent,  can  be 
followed,  and  the  real  estate,  or  the  rents  or  profits  thereof, 
charged  in  favor  of  creditors  with  the  value  of  such  improve- 
ments, and  creditors  can  reach  and  subject  the  real  estate,  or 
the  rents  and  profits,  to  the  satisfaction  of  their  daimff  to 
the  extent  of  the  value  of  such  improvements.^  The  rule  doe? 
not  apply,  however,  as  to  subsequent  creditors  in  the  absence  of 
an  intent  to  defraud  them  participated  in  by  or  known  to  the 


50.  CoUumb  ▼.  Read,  24  N.  T.  605. 

51.  N.  r.— Isham  ▼.  Scbafer,  60 
Barb.  317,  ''where  no  debt  has  been 
created  between  the  parties  to  the 
fraudulent  transaction,  and  the  per- 
sonal property  of  the  judgment 
debtor  has  merged  in  and  become 
part  of  the  real  estate  of  another  in 
this  way,  the  appropriate,  if  not  the 
only  remedy  is  to  fasten  the  judg- 
ment upon  the  real  estate  to  the  ex- 
tent of  the  judgment  debtor's  prop- 
erty thus  made  part  of  the  realty;** 
Bachs  ▼.  Tomlinson,  1  St.  Rep.  (N. 
Y.)  484. 

Ala,— Ware  v.  Seasongood,  92  Ala. 
162,  9  So.  138. 
/».•— Diets  Y.  Atwood,  19  III.  App. 

96. 

fful.— Blair  v.  Smith,  114  Ind.  114, 
15  N.  E.  817,  6  Am.  St.  Eep.  693; 
Moore  v.  Lampton,  80  Ind.  301. 

JETy.^Brooks-Waterfield  Go.  ▼. 
Frisbie^  99  Ky.  126,  36  S.  W.  106,  69 
Am.  St.  Rep.  462;  Heck  t.  Fisher,  78 


Ky.  643;  Athey  t.  Knotts,  6  B.  Mon» 
24. 

Me. — ^Trefethen  t.  Lynam,  90  Me. 
376,  38  Atl.  336,  60  Am.  St.  Rep.  271,^ 
38  L.  R.  A.  190. 

Ma99, — ^Lynde  ▼.  McGregor,  13^ 
Allen,  182,  90  Am.  Dee.  188,  the 
amount  of  the  increase  in  Talue,  for 
which  no  consideration  has  been 
paid  by  a  wife,  and  which  has  been 
added  to  her  estate  by  the  husband  in 
fraud  of  his  creditors,  in  equity  be- 
longs to  them,  and  may  be  made  a 
charge  upon  the  land  for  their  bene- 
fit. 

Ifinn.— Christian  v.  Klein,  77 
Minn.  116,  79  N.  W.  602. 

Jfo.— Kirby  v.  Bruns,  45  Mb.  234, 
100  Am.  Dec.  376. 

N.  ff.— Caswdl  ▼.  Hill,  47  K.  H. 
407. 

Pa, — ^Peoples  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Loef* 
fert,  184  Pa.  St.  164,  88  Atl.  996. 

W.  Va, — ^Humphrey  v.  Spencer,  36 
W.  Va.  11,  14  S.  E.  410;   Burt  ▼. 


PSOPEBTY^  ETO.,  WHICH  CbEDITOBS  MAY  BeAOH.     131 


owner  of  the  property."  Temporary  or  perishable  improvements 
which  do  not  add  to  the  permanent  value  of  the  land^  cannot 
be  reached." 

§  26.  Crops,  ores,  and  other  products  <rf  the  land. — Where 
a  conveyance  of  land  is  fraudulent  and  void  aa  to  creditors^  the 
growing  crops  on  the  lands  so  fraudulently  conveyed  are 
subject  to  execution  in  favor  of  the  grantor's  creditors  and  may 
be  reached  and  subjected  by  creditors  of  the  grantor.^  The  same 
rule  applies  to  ores  and  similar  products  of  the  land."  A  judg- 
ment creditor  is  also  entitled  to  resort  to  crops  growing  upon 
the  land  of  his  debtor  after  its  conveyance  in  fraud  of  creditors, 
so  far  at  least  as  the  fraudulent  grantor  retains  an  interest  in 
them  by  ani  understanding  with  the  grantee,"  notwithstanding 


Timmons,  29  W.  Va.  441,  2  S.  E. 
7S0,  6  Am.  St.  Eep.  664;  Rose  ▼. 
Brown,  11  W.  Va.  122.  See  also 
Vandervoart  v.  Fouse,  62  W.  Va.  214, 
43  S.  E.  112. 

aonmi.^Web8ter  t.  Hildreth,  33 
Vt.  467,  78  Am.  Dec.  632;  White  t. 
Hildreth,  32  Vt.  266. 

58.  Sexton  t.  Wheaton,  8  Wheat. 
(U.  S.)  229,  6  L.  Ed.  603;  Robinson 
T.  Huffman,  16  Mon.  (Ky.)  80,  61 
Am.  Dec.  177;  Caswell  v.  Hill,  47  N. 
H.  407. 

53.  Dick  T.  Hamilton,  1  Deady 
(U.  S.)  322. 

54.  Dodd  Y.  Adams,  126  Mass. 
398,  hay  cut  on  such  land  is  subject 
to  execution  to  satisfy  a  debt  of  the 
grantor  contracted  subsequent  to  the 
conveyance;  Pierce  v.  Hill,  36  Mich. 
194,  24  Am.  Rep.  641,  and  it  is  not 
necessary  to  have  the  conveyance  set 
aside  in  a  direct  proceeding  for  that 
purpose;  Erickson  v.  Paterson,  47 
Minn.  626,  60  N.  W.  699,  growing 
crops  subject  to  levy,  upon  exempt 
land,  may  be  so  levied  upon,  although 
as  between  the  grantor  and  grantee 
they  pass  ¥rith  the  land;  Merchants', 


etc.,  Sav.  Bank  v.  Lovejoy,  84  Wis. 
601,  66  N.  W.  108;  Stehdinan  v. 
Huber,  21  Pa.  St.  260. 

55.  State,  Mastin  v.  McBride,  106 
Mo.  266,  16  S.  W.  72,  32  Am.  ft  Eng. 
Corp.  Cas.  616,  ores  taken  out  by 
the  purchaser  at  a  trustee's  sale  of 
lands  of  a  mining  company  are  sub- 
ject to  execution  against  the  com- 
pany, where  the  purchaser  is  a  mere 
figurehead  and  nominal  purchaser  as- 
sisting the  company  to  defraud  its 
creditors.  t 

56.  Fury  v.  Strohecker,  44  Mich. 
337,  6  N.  W.  834,  and  where  there  is 
reason  to  suppose  that  collusion 
exists  all  doubts  should  be  solved  in 
the  creditor's  favor. 

Crops  om  land  pvrehasod  in 
wife's  name  by  an  insolvent  debtor, 
with  the  intention  of  paying  therefor 
by  his  labor  and  skill,  and  the  pro- 
ceeds of  the  property,  are  subject  to 
the  payment  of  his  debts.  Turner- 
Looker  Go.  V.  Garvey,  19  Ey.  L. 
Rep.  1205,  43  S.  W.  202. 

Crops  severed  and  gathered 
hj  a  craator,  who  is  left  in  pos- 
session of  the  property  by  the  laches 


132 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


such  crops  had  not  been  sown  at  the  time  of  the  fraudulent  con- 
veyance." But  if  the  fraudulent  grantee  enters  into  possession, 
and  cultivates  the  land  upon  his  own  account^  the  creditors  of 
the  grau'tor  cannot  attach  the  annual  crops.  They  can  only 
attach  and  levy  upon  what  their  debtor  owns  and  fraudulently 
conveyed."  They  cannot  seize  the  products  of  the  land,  pro- 
duced by  the  industry  of  the  grantee,  as  the  goods  of  the  grantor ; 
as,  for  example,  gypsum  or  plaster,  where  the  rock  was  dug  from 
the  soil  by  the  grantee  and  made  into  plaster  at  his  own  ex- 
pense." An  absolute  conveyance  intended  as  a  mortgage,  whereby 
a  debtor  conveys  to  one  of  his  creditors  all  cropa  to  be  raised 
by  him  during  succeeding  years  on  the  mortgaged  premises, 
of  which  he  maintains  possession,  is  void  as  to  other  creditors 
of  the  mortgagor,  whether  prior  or  subsequent  to  its  date  or  to 
the  time  when  a  crop  is  raised,  unless  before  their  rights  attach 
thereto  the  property  is  delivered  to  the  mortgagee,  or  a  subse- 
quent act  necessary  to  make  it  valid  is  performed.^  But  a 
sale  by  a  landlord  of  his  rental  interest  in  growing  crops  on  the 
land  leased  is  valid  as  against  his  creditors,  where  it  is  made  in 
good  faith  and  for  a  valuable  consideration,  and  -with  the  in- 
tention of  a  present  vesting  of  title.*^  The  hona  fides  of  a  pur- 
ported sale  of  an  immatured  crop,  and  the  question  of  title  to 
the  property,  may  be,  however,  for  the  determination  of  the  jury 
imder  certain  circumstances.^    Where  a  fraudulent  conveyance 


of  the  grantee,  are  subject  to  attach- 
ment against  the  grantor.  Wolcott 
V.  Hamilton,  61  Vt.  79,  17  Atl.  39. 

57.  Fury  v.  Strohecker,  supra. 
But  Bee  Jones  v.  Bryant,  13  N.  H.  53. 

58.  Jones  v.  Bryant,  13  N.  H.  53; 
Kilbride  v.  Cameron,  17  U.  C.  C.  P. 
373. 

59.  Garbutt  v.  Smith,  40  Barb. 
(N.  Y.)  22,  a  creditor  cannot  thus 
attack  an  alleged  fraudulent  wavej- 
ance  collaterally. 

60.  Merchants',  etc.,  Sav.  Bank  t. 
Lovejoy,  84  Wis.  601,  56  N.  W.  108. 


61.  Hood  ▼.  Gibson,  8  Kan.  App. 
688,  56  Pac.  148. 

62.  Haines  ▼.  McKinnon,  35 
Oreg.  573,  57  Pac.  903,  where  there 
was  an  apparent  ambiguity  in  the 
purported  bill  of  sale,  arising  from  a 
provision  requiring  the  grain  to  be 
delivered  at  the  vendee's  warehouse 
at  the  time  of  threshing,  and  the  lat- 
ter testified  that  he  bought  the  prop- 
erty at  the  time  the  bill  of  sale  was 
executed,  and  that,  although  the 
property  was  to  be  so  delivered  to 
him,  it  was  understood  between  the 


J 


Pbopbbty^  bto.^  which  Cbbditobs  may  Beaoh.       138 

of  a  farm  has  been  made,  the  grantee  has  the  title  to  the  crops, 
as  against  the  creditors  of  the  grantor,  until  the  conveyance  is 
impeached,  unless  he  acts  as  agent  of  the  grantor,^  and  is  en- 
titled, so  long  as  the  conveyance  is  not  set  aside,  to  the  crops 
which  he  raises  on  the  land  for  his  own  benefit.^ 

§  26.  Equitable  estates,  rights,  and  interests. — The  transfer 
by  a  debtor  of  any  equitable  estate,  right  or  interest  in  prop- 
erty, not  subject  to  be  levied  on  at  law,  without  consideration 
or  with  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  his  creditors,  is  void- 
able at  the  election  of  existing  and  subsequent  creditors,  and 
such  estate,  right,  or  interest  may  be  reached  and  subjected  by 
creditors,  in  equity,  in  the  hands  of  the  fraudulent  transferee.^ 
By  statute,  in  some  jurisdictions,  such  interests  may  be  reached 
even  at  law.^  A  debtor,  however,  may  sell  his  equitable  in- 
terest in  property,  if  it  be  done  without  fraud,  before  a  bill  is 


parties  that  the  title  had  already 
passed. 

618.  Hartman  ▼.  Weiland,  36  Minn. 
223,  30  N.  W.  S16. 

64.  Gain  v.  Mead,  66  Minn.  195, 
6S  N.  W.  840. 

66.  N.  y.— Loos  V.  Wilkinson,  110 
N.  Y.  195,  18  N.  E.  99,  1  L.  R.  A. 
250. 

U.  iSf.— Watson  v.  Bonfils,  116  Fed. 
157,  53  C.  G.  A.  535;  Sanford  v. 
Lackland,  21  Fed.  Gas.  No.  12,312,  2 
Dill.  6,  if  property  was  given  to  trus- 
tees to  hold  for  A.  until  he  reached 
a  certain  age,  when  it  was  to  be  paid 
over  to  him,  and  A.  became  bankrupt 
before  he  arrived  at  that  age,  his  as- 
signee in  bankruptcy  was  entitled  to 
the  property. 

N.  C— Frost  V.  Reynolds,  39  N.  G. 
494. 

Pa. — ^Mackason's  Appeal,  42  Pa. 
St.  330,  82  Am.  Dec.  517,  one  9ui 
juris  cannot,  as  against  creditors, 
either  prior  or  subsequent,  settle  his 


property,  in  trust  for  his  own  use 
for  life,  and  over  to  his  appointees 
by  will,  and,  in  default  of  such  ap- 
pointment, to  the  use  of  his  lawful 
heirs-in-fee;  property  so  settled  is 
assets  in  the  hands  of  the  trustees 
for  the  payment  of  debts,  whether 
contracted  prior  or  subsequent  to  the 
execution  of  the  deed  of  trust. 

8,  C— McNair  v.  Moore,  64  S.  C. 
82,  41  S.  E.  829,  where  a  debtor 
transferred  his  equitable  interest  in 
land  to  his  wife  without  considera- 
tion, and  she  paid  the  balance  of  the 
purchase  money  and  took  the  legal 
title,  the  conveyance  was  fraudulent 
as  to  her  husband's  creditors  to  the 
extent  the  transfer  was  above  the 
homestead  exemption. 

Tenn, — ^Planters*  Bank  v.  Hender- 
son, H.  Humphr.  75. 

Bng, — ^Barston  v.  Vanheythuysen, 
11  Hare,  126,  45  Eng.  Gh.  127,  18 
Jur.  344,  1  Wkly.  Rep.  429. 

66.  See  Remedies,  chap.  XV,  tn/m. 


134 


Fbauduisht  Covvetahcss. 


filed  hj  a  creditor  to  enforoe  the  paymeat  of  his  judgment  out 
of  «uch  equitable  interest*'  It  is  a  settled  rule  of  law  that  the 
beneficial  interest  of  a  cesttd  que  trust,  whaterer  it  may  be,  is 
liable  in  equity  for  the  payment  of  his  debts.**  This  rule  ap* 
plies  to  the  interest  of  a  cestui  que  trust  in  the  income  of  a  trust 
estate  or  fund.*  In  some  jurisdictions,  by  statutory  proFisions, 
the  surplus  income  of  a  trust  estate  belonging  to  a  debtor,  beyond 
what  is  necessary  for  the  suitable  education,  support^  and  main- 
tenance of  the  cestui  que  trust  and  those  dependent  upon  him, 
is  liable  in  equity  to  the  claims  of  creditors,  whether  the  trust  is 
'created  to  receive  and  pay  over  the  rents  and  profits  of  land 
or  the  income  of  personal  property.^  But  where  an  equitable 
[interest  or  fund  held  in  trust  has  proceeded  from  some  person 
'  other  than  the  cestui  que  trust,  and  the  founder  of  the  trust  has 
secured  the  enjoyment  of  it  to  the  object  of  his  bounty,  by  some 
valid  provision  in  the  deed,  will,  or  other  instrument  creating  the 
trust  that  it  shall  not  be  ali^iable  by  him,  or  be  subject  to  be 
taken  by  bis  creditors,  the  interest  of  the  cestui  que  trust  in  the 
property  or  the  income  thereof  is  rendered  inalienable  and  can- 
not be  (barged  for  his  debts  or  reached  in  equity  by  his  eredi* 
tors." 


67.  RuBsell  V.  Honston,  6  Ind. 
180. 

68.  Nicliols  T.  Levy,  6  Wall.  (U. 
8.)  433,  441,  18  L.  Ed.  696,  'Mt  can- 
not be  so  fenced  about  by  inhibitions 
and  restrictions  as  to  secure  to  it 
tbe  inconsistent  characteristics  of 
right  and  enjoyment  to  the  bene- 
ficiary and  inuniinity  from  his  cred- 
itors." 

69.  Sparhawk  v.  Cloon,  125  Mass. 
263,  this  quality  is  so  inseparable 
from  the  estate,  that  no  provision, 
however  eaqpress,  which  does  not 
operate  as  a  cesser,  or  limitation  of 
the  estate  itself,  can  protect  it  from 
his  debts. 

70.  Wetmore  v.  Wetroore,  149  N. 


Y.  629,  44  N.  B.  169,  62  Am.  St.  Rep. 
762,  33  L.  R.  A.  708;  ToUes  t.  Wood, 
99  N.  Y.  616,  1  K.  E.  261 ;  Williams 
▼.  Thorn,  70  N.  Y.  270;  Graff  ▼. 
Bonnett,  31  K.  Y.  9,  88  Am.  Dee. 
236;  Sillick  y.  Mason,  2  Barb.  Ch. 
79;  Hardenburgh  t.  Blair,  30  K.  J. 
Eq.  646. 

71.  Potter  Y.  Couch,  141  U.  8. 
296,  11  Sup.  Ct.  1006,  36  L.  Ed.  721; 
Spindle  t.  Shreve,  111  U.  8.  642,  4 
Sup.  Ct.  622,  28  L.  Ed.  612;  Hyde  ▼. 
Woods,  194  U.  S.  623;  Nichols  ▼. 
Eaton,  91  U.  S.  716,  23  L.  Ed.  264; 
Spindle  ▼.  Shreve,  4  Fed.  136,  9 
Biss.  199;  Broadway  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Adams,  133  Mass.  170,  43  Am.  Rep. 
604;  Amwine  v.  Carroll,  8  N.  J,  Eq. 


Pbopebtt,  £to.,  which  Cbeditobs  mat  Bsaoh. 


135 


§  27.  Equity  of  redemptioiu — ^An  eqtdty  of  redemption  in 
lands  or  chattels  mortgaged  is  an  equitable  right  which  may  be 
reached  by  creditors  in  equity,"  if  it  have  any  value*"  It  has 
been  held  that  the  court  will  not  enter  into  any  nice  calculation 
of  the  absolute  value  of  the  right  so  reserved,  and  that  such 
equity  in  lands  mortgaged  to  their  full  value  is  a  valuable  right, 
which  may  be  reached  by  creditors.^^  But  an  equity  of  redemiH 
tion  in  an  exempt  homestead  cannot  be  thus  reached  by  credi- 
tors." 


!§  28.  Interest  under  contract  of  purch38e«— <An  assignment 
of  a  debtor's  interest,  by  virtue  of  a  contract  for  the  conveyance 
of  land,  which  assignment  is  made  and  received  for  the  pur- 
pose of  defrauding  the  creditors  of  the  assignor,  is  void  against 
subsequent  creditors,  as  well  as  tboee  whose  debts  were  con- 
tracted prior  to  the  assignment,  and  may  be  reached  in  equity 
and  subjected  by  creditors  to  the  satisfaction  of  their  debts." 

§  29.  Property  purchased  in  name  of  third  person. — Where 
a  debtor  purchases  or  advances  the  purchase  money  of  land,  and 
the  convqrance  is  made  to  another,  for  example,  to  his  wife^ 
child,  or  other  third  person,  the  law  impresses  a  trust  upon  the 
land,  im  favor  of  the  creditors  of  the  debtor,  which  may  be  en- 


620;  Rife  y.  Geyer,  05  Pa.  St.  893; 
Brown  ▼.  WilliamB,  36  Pa.  St.  338; 
Holdflhip  V.  Patterson,  7  Watts 
(P^),  642;  White  ▼.  White,  30  Vt. 
338;  Guernsey  v.  Lacear,  61  W.  Va. 
328,  41  8.  E.  406. 

72.  GampbeU  v.  Fish,  8  Daly  (N. 
Y.),  162;  Watson  t.  Bonfils,  116  Fed. 
167,  33  C.  C.  A.  636;  Johnson  ▼. 
Bumaide,  8  Ohio  S.  &>  C.  PI.  Dec. 
412,  7  Ohio  N.  P.  74;  Pleniy  v. 
Pringle,  26  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  67. 
Compare  Potter  ▼.  Skiles,  114  Ky. 
132,  70  S.  W.  301,  71  S.  W.  627,  24 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  910,  1467,  under  Ken- 
tncky     statute.       See     Chautauqua 


County  Bank  v.  Bisl^,    19  N.   T. 
369. 

73.  See  chap.  IV,  {  4,  tupra. 

74.  Sims  T.  Gaines,  64  Ala.  392. 

75.  Winter  y.  Ritchie,  67  Kan. 
212,  46  Pac.  696,  67  Am.  St.  Rep. 
331.  See  also  Homestead,  chap.  IV, 
S  42,  infra. 

76.  Whitmore  ▼.  Woodward,  28 
Me.  392;  Frost  v.  Reynolds,  39  N.  C. 
(4  Ired.  £q.)  494,  i^ter  payment  of 
the  purchase  price;  McNair  ▼.  Moore, 
64  S.  C.  82,  41  S.  £.  829;  Barton  ▼. 
Vanheythuysen,  11  Hare,  126,  46 
Eng.  Ch.  127,  18  Jur.  344,  1  Wkly. 
Bep.  429. 


136 


Fraudulent  CoNvsTAiroxs. 


forced  in  a  court  of  equity.^  Personal  property  purchased  by 
a  debtor  with  his  own  money  and  for  has  own  benefit,  although 
the  bill  of  sale  is  made  to  a  third  person,  can  be  reached  by  the 
debtor's  creditors." 

§  30.  Reservations  by  debtor. — Any  provision  in  a  transfer 
of  property  by  a  person  indebted  at  the  time  whereby  he  re- 
serves or  secures  a  personal  benefit  to  himself  or  family,  at  the 
expense  of  his  creditors,  may  be  avoided  by  his  creditors  and  the 
property  reached  by  them.'*    A  debtor  cannot  place  his  property 


77.  N.  r.— McCartney  v,  Boet- 
wick,  32  N.  Y.  53,  31  Barb.  300; 
Wood  y.  Bobinson,  22  N.  Y.  564; 
Donovan  v.  Sheridan,  5  J.  &  8p.  266. 

Colo. — Fox  y.  Lipe,  14  Colo.  App. 
268,  59  Pftc.  850. 

Del.— Newell  v.  Morgan,  2  Harr. 

226. 

(7a.— Field  v.  Jones,  10  6a.  229. 

Ind. — ^Demaree  v.  Driskill,  3 
Bladd.  115;  Kipper  v,  Olancey,  2 
Blackf.  356. 

Ky. — ^McLeod'8  Tniatee  v.  McLeod, 
28  Ky.  L.  Rep.  284,  667,  89  S.  W. 
199,  90  S.  W.  5;  Mathews  v.  Ar- 
britton,  83  Ky.  32;  Doyle  v.  Sleeper, 
1  Dana,  531. 

Me* — ^Augusta  Savings  Bank  v. 
Crossman,  7  Ail.  396;  Gray  v. 
Chase,  57  Me.  558. 

Jtfd.— Trego  v.  Skinner,  42  Md. 
426. 

Mass. — Bresnihan  v.  Sheehan,  125 
Mass.  11. 

Minn. — Sumner  v.  Sawtelle,  8 
Minn.  309. 

Miss. — Simmons  v.  Ingram,  60 
Miss.  886;  Bemheim  v.  Beer,  56 
Miss.  149. 

Mo. — Gutzwiller   v.    Laekman,    23 

Mo.  168. 

jfeh. — Cochran  v.  Cochran,  62  Neb. 
450,  87  N.  W.  152. 


N.  J, — ^Hagger^  v,  Nixon,  26  N.  J. 
Eq.  42. 

N.  C. — Gentry  v.  Harper,  65  N.  C. 
177. 

8.  C— <MLbold  V.  Lambert,  8  Rich. 
Eq.  155,  70  Am.  Dec.  192. 

Tenn.— Goff  v.  Dabbs,  4  Bazt.  300. 

Ft.— Corey  v.  Morrill,  71  Vt.  51, 
42  Atl.  976;  Waterman  v.  Cochran, 
12  Vt.  699. 

W.  Fa.— Lockhard  v.  Beckley,  10 
W.  Va.  87. 

Can. — O'Doherty  v.  Ontario  Bank, 
32  U.  C.  C.  P.  285. 

Bng. — Barton  v.  Vanheythnysen» 
11  Hare,  126,  18  Jar.  344,  1  Wkly. 
Rep.  429,  45  Eng.  Oh.  127. 

See  also  Purchase  of  property  in 
name  of  third  person,  chap.  II,  {  5, 
supra. 

78.  Godding  v.  Brackett,  34  Me.  27, 
although  the' debtor  pretended  to  buy 
for  and  the  seller  supposed  he  was 
selling  to  such  third  person. 

79.  N.  Y. — Schenck  v.  Barnes,  166 
N.  Y.  316,  60  N.  E.  967,  41  L.  R.  A. 
395,  affg  26  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  163, 
49  N.  Y.  Supp.  222;  Young  v.  Hear- 
mans,  66  N.  Y.  374;  Ellas  v.  Farley, 
2  Abb.  Dec.  11,  3  Keyes  398,  2 
Transcr.  App.  116,  5  Abb.  Pr.  N.  S. 
39;  Harris  v.  Buchner,  35  App.  Div. 


Pbopsbtt,  etc.,  which  Cbsditobs  may  Beach.       137 

in  trusty  witli  remainder  over,  reserving  to  himself  the  beneficial 
interest  for  his  life,  subject  to  the  expenses  of  the  trust,  and 
thereby  put  his  life  interest  beyond  the  reach  of  his  creditors* 
The  entire  reserved  interest  is  a  fund  to  which  his  creditors  can 
resort^  A  conveyance  in  consideration  of  an  agreement  to 
furnish  a  suitable  home  and  support  to  the  grantor  during  his 
natural  life,  amounts  to  a  mere  gift,  with  agreement  back  for  life 
support^  and  is  not  effectual  if  made  to  defraud  creditors.^ 


§  31.  Property  conveyed  by  debtor  to  equitable  owner.— 
Where  no  question  of  estoppel  is  involved,  a  conveyance  by  a 
debtor  who  holds  property  in  trust,  or  holds  the  bare  legal  title 
to  property  for  another  but  has  no  beneficial  interest  therein,  ia 
not  fraudulent  as  against  his  creditors,  when  made  by  the  debtor 
to  the  equitaible  owner  or  one  already  having  the  beneficial  title 
to  the  property,  or  to  a  third  person  at  the  request  of  the  equita- 
ble owner,  and  the  property  so  conveyed  cannot  be  reached  in 
equity  and  subjected  to  the  payment  of  the  debts  of  the  debtor 
or  grantor,"    The  rule  applies  whore  property  purchased  by  or 


(N.  Y.)  504,  66  N.  Y.  Supp.  172; 
Todd  ▼.  Mondl,  19  Hun,  362. 

U,  8. — ^De  HierapoliB  ▼.  Lawrence, 
115  Fed.  761. 

2V.  C— Webb  ▼.  Atkinflon,  124  N.  G. 
447,  32  S.  E.  737. 

Pa. — Mackason's  Appeal,  42  Pa.  St. 
330,  82  Am.  Dec.  517. 

See  also  Beaervations  and  trusts  for 
grantor,  chap.  X,  infra. 

80.  Schenck  v.  Barnes,  supra,  but 
where  the  property  is  held  in  trust 
for  a  debtor  and  the  fund  proceeds 
from  a  third  party,  the  creditor  can 
only  reach  the  surplus  income,  after 
providing  for  the  proper  support  of 
the  eettui  que  trust;  Williams  y. 
Thorn,  70  N.  Y.  270;  Graff  ▼.  Ben- 
nett, 81  N.  Y.  9,  88  Am.  Dec.  236; 
Raymond  v.  Harris,  84  App.  Dir.  (N. 
Y.)  546,  82  N.  Y.  Supp.  689;  Mack- 


ason's  Appeal,  supra.  And  see  Reser- 
vations and  trusts  for  grantor,  chap. 
X,  infra, 

81.  Bowlus  ▼.  Shanabarger,  19 
Ohio  Cir.  a.  137,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec. 
167.  See  Cloud  v.  Malyin,  108  Iowa, 
52;  Webb  ▼.  Atkinson,  124  N.  C.  447, 
32  S.  E.  737.  See  also  Support  or 
care  of  grantor  and  family,  chap.  X, 
S  7,  infra;  Future  support  of  grantor, 
chap.  X,  S  20,  infra, 

82.  N.  7.— First  Nat.  Bank  of 
Amsterdam  v.  Miller,  24  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)  551,  49  N.  Y.  Supp.  981, 
rev*d  on  other  grounds  in  163  N.  Y. 
164,  57  N.  £.  308,  a  trustee  of  a 
fund  for  the  support  of  himself  and 
family  during  life,  at  his  death  tlie 
residue  to  go  to  his  children,  has  no 
personal  interest  in  the  fund  which 
his  creditors  can  reaph,  and  his  as- 


138 


Fraudulent  Convbtahoes. 


belongmg  to  one  person  is  conveyed  to  another  bj  mistake,  the 
legal  title  thus  conveyed  to  the  one  being  held  in  trust  for  the 
other.  The  subsequent  conveyaitoe  by  the  one  thus  holding  the 
legal  title  to  the  equitable  owner  is  not  fraudulent  as  against 


sigmiieiit  thereof  to  his  children  can- 
not be  questioned  bj  them. 

V.  fif.— Schreyer  ▼.  Scott,  134  U.  S. 
406,  10  Sup.  Ct  579,  33  L.  Ed.  955. 

Conn, — Jarvis  v.  Prentice,  19  Conn. 
272. 

/U.— Seeders  ▼.  Allen,  9S  HI.  46S. 

Ind, — Bremmerman  ▼.  Jennings, 
101  Ind.  263;  Robertson  t.  HuAnan, 
92  Ind.  247. 

/ouxi. — ^McGregor  Bank  t.  Hostet- 
ter,  61  Iowa,  396,  16  N.  W.  289;  Ck>t- 
trell  ▼.  Smith,  63  Iowa,  181,  a  conyey- 
anoe  made  in  consideration  of  a  moral 
obligation  will  not  be  set  aside  at  the 
instance  of  a  creditor  whose  judgment 
was  not  a  lien  on  the  land  when  the 
conveyance  was  made. 

Ky, — Clark  v.  Rucker,  7  B.  Mon. 
583;  Miandy  v.  Mason,  4  Bush.  339. 

Me, — First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Dwelley, 
72  Me.  223,  where  the  debtor  received 
the  title  for  the  specific  purpose  of 
conveying  it  to  another;  Carter  v. 
Porter,  55  Me.  337. 

Mich, — Victor  Sewing  Mach.  Co.  v. 
Jacobs,  46  Mich.  494,  9  K.  W.  532. 

Jfiss. — Gkllman  v.  Perrie,  47  Miss. 
131,  where  one  purchased  land  for 
another  through  an  agent,  in  whose 
name  as  trustee  title  was  taken,  a 
conveyance  of  the  land  by  the  trustee 
to  the  beneficiary  originally  intended, 
when  judgment  was  about  to  be  ren- 
dered against  the  trustee,  was  not 
fraudulent  as  to  the  trustee's  credi- 
tor. 

Mo, — ^Perkins  v.  Meighan,  147  Mo. 
617,  49  S.  W.  498,  71  Am.  St.  Rep. 
586;  Dermott  v.  Carter,  109  Mo.  21, 
18  S.  W.  1121;  Caffee  v.  Smith,  101 


Mo.  229,  13  S.  W.  1050;  Erwin  r. 
Holderman,  92  Mo.  333,  5  S.  W.  36. 

Uev, — Stanton  v.  Crane,  25  Nev. 
114,  58  Pac  53. 

TH.  J.— Carver  v.  Todd,  48  K.  J.  Eq. 
102,  28  Ati.  943,  27  Am.  St  Eep.  466, 
a  conveyance  of  trust  property  by  the 
trustee  to  the  beneficiary  is  not  fraud- 
ulent as  to  the  creditors  of  the  trus- 
tee, though  their  debts  accrued  before 
the  conveyance  was  made. 

y.  O.-^Buie  V.  Kelly,  27  N.  C.  169; 
Runyon  v.  Leary,  20  N.  C.  373. 

Pa, — ^Brown  v.  Williamson,  36  Pa. 
St.  338;  Bancord  v.  Kuhn,  36  Pa.  St. 
883;  Holdship  v.  Patterson,  7  Watts» 
547;  Ashurst  v.  Given,  5  Watts  k 
S.  323. 

Tenn, — ^Allen  v.  Holland,  3  Terg. 
343. 

Tem, — ^Bicocehi  v.  Cas^-Swasey 
Co.,  91  Tex.  259,  42  B.  W.  963,  66  Am. 
St  Rep.  875. 

F*.— White  V.  White,  30  Vt  338. 

WosA.— Samuel  v.  Kittenger,  6 
Wash.  261,  33  Pac.  509. 

Eng, — ^Middleton  v.  Pollock,  45  L. 
J.  Ch.  293,  2  Ch.  Div.  104;  Houston 
V.  Tait»  3  Y.  &  J.  486. 

See  also  Moral  obligation  as  con- 
sideration, chap.  Vni,  S  6,  tfiffv; 
Conveyance  in  execution  of  prior 
agreement^  chap.  VIII,  9  24,  infra, 

A  reeo&Teyaaee  of  laad  by  a 
debtor,  to  whom  it  had  been  con- 
veyed for  the  purpose  of  qualifying 
him  to  vote  at  a  public  election,  is  not 
void  under  the  statute.  Jackson  v. 
Ham,  15  Johns.  261. 

Th»  retmaafer  of  baaik  atook 
by  m  debtor,  to  whom  it  had  been 


PtoPSBTT^  BTO.,  WHICH  CbEDITOBS  ICAT  RbAOH. 


189 


the  creditors  of  the  former.^  If  the  conyeyance  bj  a  debtor  in'* 
eludes  property  of  the  debtor,  asy  for  example,  where  a  judg* 
meat  debtor  conveys  lands  held  in  trust,  upon  which  he  has 
erected  a  building  of  his  own,  to  one  designated  by  the  cestui 
que  trust,  the  conveyance,  as  against  judgment  creditors,  is 
fraudulent  pro  tanto,  that  is  to  say,  it  is  valid  as  to  the  land,  but 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  improvements  made  thereon  by 
the  debtor.^ 

§  32.  Conveyance  in  pursuance  of  parol  trust — Where  the 
consideration  for  real  or  personal  property  is  paid  by  one 
person  and  the  deed  or  title  to  the  property  is  taken  in  the  name 
of  another,  and  the  latter,  in  recogniticm  of  an  express  parol  trust 
or  agreement  to  hold  the  property  in  trust  for  the  former  and 
upon  request  to  convey  the  property  to  the  former,  conveys  the 
property  or  makes  a  declaration  of  trust  in  accordance  with  the 
parol  trust  or  agreement,  in  the  absence  of  any  question  of 
estoppel,  the  creditors  of  the  latter  cannot  assail  and  set  aside 
the  conveyance  as  in  fraud  of  creditors  and  subject  the  prop- 
erty to  the  payment  of  their  claims."^    The  equitable  duty  rest- 


tnuufened  to  enable  him  to  qualify 
as  a  director  in  a  bank,  althoag^ 
without  oonsideration,  is  valid,  and 
protects  the  stock  from  garnishment 
by  a  creditor  of  the  debtor.  Citisens' 
Nat.  Bank  v.  Stnrgis  Nat.  Bank  (Tez. 
Civ.  App.),  81  8.  W.  660. 

88.  Fairhurst  v.  Lewis,  23  Ark. 
436,  deed  of  land  purchased  by  a  son 
executed  to  his  father  by  mistake; 
Petit  V.  Hubbdl,  106  Mich.  406,  63 
N.  W.  407,  where  land  belonging  to  a 
prineipal  has  been  conveyed  to  his 
agent  by  mistake. 

84.  Backs  v.  Tomlinson,  1  St  Rep. 
(N.  Y.)  4S4. 

86.  N.  7.— Dunn  v.  Whalen,  21  N. 
T.  Supp.  S69;  Holden  v.  Bumham,  2 
Hun,  678,  63  N.  T.  74;  DavU  v. 
Graves,  2S  Barb.  480. 


17.  ST.— Moore  v.  Crawford,  180  U. 
8.  122,  32  L.  Ed.  878;  IfiUs  v.  Soott» 
43  Fed.  462. 
/iMf.— Hayes  v.  Bigger,  102  Ind.  624, 
*  1  N.  E.  386. 

/oiMk— De  Vore  v.  Jones,  82  Iowa, 
66,  47  N.  W.  886;  Caffal  v.  Hale,  40 
Iowa,  63. 

Mioh. — ^Desmond  v.  Ityers,  113 
Mich.  437,  71  N.  W.  877,  4  Det  L.  N. 
366. 

Jfo.— DeBeny  ▼.  Wheeler,  128  Mo. 
84,  30  8.  W.  338,  49  Am.  St.  Rep. 
638;  Aultman  v.  Booth,  06  Mo.  383, 
8  S.  W.  742. 

ye5.— OessweU  v.  MoCkig,  11  Neb. 
222,  9  N.  W.  62. 

N.  J. — ^lauch  V.  De  Sooarras,  66  N. 
J.  Eq.  638,  39  Atl.  211 ;  Pitney  v.  Bol- 
ton, 46  N.  J.  £q.  639,  18  Atl.  211; 


140 


Fbaudui^nt  Cokvbtances. 


ing  on  the  latter  is  sufBcient  ocmsideration  for  the  transfer.*^ 
But  where  the  circumstances  are  such  that  the  debtor  cannot  be 
regarded  as  an  equitable  trustee,  the  conveyance  is  invalid." 

§  33.  Conveyance  by  husband  to  or  for  wife. — ^In  the  ab- 
sence of  actual  fraud  or  circumstances  establishing  an  estoppel^ 
where  the  legal  title  to  property  purdiased  with  the  means  of  the 
wife  or  with  her  separate  estate  is  in  the  husband,  and  he  con- 
veys it  to  his  wife,  directly  or  through  a  third  person,  the  con- 
veyance is  valid  as  against  the  creditors  of  the  husband  and  the 
property  cannot  be  reached  in  equity,  and  subjected  to  the  satis- 
faction of  their  claims."    And  where  he  exchanges  it  for  other 


Jamison  v.  MiUer,  27  N.  J.  Eq.  686. 

N,  C— Brisco  ▼.  Norris,  112  N.  0. 
671,  16  S.  E.  860. 

Or, — ^Richmond  v.  Bloch,  36  Or. 
590,  60  Pac.  386. 

Pa, — Sackett  y.  Spenoer,  65  Pa.  89. 

Tea. — CiilzenB'  Nat  Bank  v.  Stur- 
gis  Nat.  Bank  (Civ.  App.),  81  S.  \^. 
660. 

Bng, — Gardner  v.  Rowe,  3  L.  J.  Ch. 
O.  8.  220,  2  Sim.  ft  St.  346,  26  Rev. 
Rep.  214,  1  Eng.  Gh.  346,  67  Eng. 
Reprint,  378,  e/fd  7  L.  J.  Ch.  O.  S. 
2,  5  Ru88.  268,  6  Eng.  Ch.  268,  38 
Eng.  Reprint,  1024. 

But  see  Smith  ▼.  Lane,  3  Pick. 
(Mass.)  205,  where  a  husband  con- 
Teyed  his  life  estate  in  his  wife's 
lands  to  her  father,  who,  being  insol- 
vent, afterwards  conveyed  it  to  the 
wife,  to  avoid  it  being  taken  by  cred- 
itors, the  conveyance  to  the  wife  was 
fraudulent  as  against  creditors,  and 
could  not  be  rendered  valid  by  parol 
evidence  showing  the  first  conveyance 
to  have  been  made  in  trust  for  her 
benefit. 

86.  Davis  v.  Graves,  29  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  480. 

87.  Champlin  v.  Seeber,  66  How. 


Pr.  (N.  Y.)  46,  where  land  volun- 
tarily conveyed  by  a  mother  to  her 
daughter  was  inherited  by  the  mother 
from  her  intestate  father,  but  it  was 
claimed  that  the  conveyance  was,  in 
pursuance  of  his  request  to  the 
mother  shortly  before  his  death,  as- 
sented to  by  her. 

88.  N.  r.— Syracuse  Chilled  Plow 
Co.  V.  Wing,  86  N.  Y.  421 ;  Holden  v. 
Bumham,  6  Thomp.  &  C.  196;  Bald- 
win V.  Ryan,  3  Thomp.  &  C,  261; 
Wickes  V.  Clark,  3  Edw.  Ch.  68. 

U.  8. — ^Voorheis  v.  BUnton,  89  Fed. 
886,  32  C.  C.  A.  384,  83  Fed.  234. 

Fla.'^mn  V.  Meinhard,  39  Fla.  Ill, 
21  So.  806. 

Gkk — ^Rutherford  v.  Chapman,  69 
Ga.  177. 

/«.— Phillips  V.  North,  77  Til.  243; 
McLaurie  v.  Pari^low,  53  111.  340; 
Torrey  v.  Dickinson,  111  111.  App. 
624;  Fleming  v.  Magley,  32  111.  App. 
183. 

Ind, — ^Taylor  v.  Duesterberg,  109 
Ind.  166,  9  N.  E.  907;  Lord  v. 
Bishop,  101  Ind.  334;  Heaton  v. 
White,  86  Ind.  376;  Leonard  v.  Bar^ 
Bett,  70  Ind.  367;  Eagan  v.  Downing, 
56  Ind.  66;  Summers  v.  Hoover,  42 


PSOFEBTY,  ITCv  WHICH  CSEDITOBS  MAT  ReACH.     141 


property,  and  has  the  deeds  of  the  latter  made  to  her^  equity 
will  uphold  her  title  as  against  creditors  not  misled  by  the 
title  standing  in  him.^  The  right  of  the  wife  as  against  her 
husband's  creditors  may  be  determined  by  la<^es  in  asserting 
her  right^  although  the  conveyance  may  have  been  taken  in  her 
husband's  name  by  mistake.^  The  title  to  property  purchased  in 
his  own  name  during  coverture  by  one  who  has  reduced  his  wife's 
personal  property  to  possession,  in  a  state  where  the  title  to 
such  property  rests  by  law  in  the  husband  when  reduced  to  his 


Ind.  153;  Siinms  ▼.  Rickets,  35  Ind. 
181,  9  Am.  Rep.  679. 

Iowa, — Devore  ▼.  Jones,  82  Iowa, 
66,  47  N.  W.  885;  Payne  t.  Wilson, 
76  Iowa,  377,  41  N.  W.  45. 

Kff. — Campbell  v.  CampbeU,  79  Ky. 
395. 

Jfd.— Hinman  ▼.  Silooz,  91  Md.  576, 
46  Atl.  1017. 

M<U8. — ^Bancroft  ▼.  Curtis,  108 
Mass.  47;  Stetson  v.  O'SulUvan,  90 
Mass.  321. 

Miniu — Famham  v.  Kennedy,  28 
Minn.  365,  10  N.  W.  20. 

Mi8S. — Citizens'  Mut.  Ins.  Co.  ▼. 
Foster,  64  Miss.  288,  1  So.  238. 

Mo, — Cooper  v.  Standley,  40  Mo. 
App.  138;  Bangert  v.  Bangert,  13  Mo. 
App.  144. 

Neb, — Jayne  v.  Hymer,  66  Neb. 
785,  92  N.  W.  1019,  where  property 
conveyed  to  the  wife  was  conveyed 
in  payment  of  money  advanced  by  her 
to  her  husband,  the  proceeds  of 
which  had  been  used  in  the  purchase 
of  her  property,  which  was  the  con- 
sideration of  the  conveyance;  Hews 
V.  Kenney,  43  Neb.  815,  62  N.  W. 
204;  Goldsmith  v.  Fuller,  30  Neb. 
663,  46  N.  W.  712. 

N.  J, — Dresser  v.  Zabriskie,  39 
Atl.  1066;  Beck  v.  Schultz,  32  Atl. 
695;  Providence  City  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Hamilton,  34  N.  J.  Eq.  158. 


N.  C— Brisco  v.  Norris,  112  N.  C. 
671,  16  S.  E.  850. 

Pa.^-Heath  v.  Sloeum,  115  Pa.  St. 
549,  9  AU.  259. 

Tenn, — ^Rosenbaum  v.  Davis  (Ch. 
App.),  48  S.  W.  706;  WiUdnson  v. 
Wilkinson,  1  Head.  305. 

TetD. — ^BCatador  Land,  etc.,  Co.  v. 
Cooper  (Civ.  App.  1905),  87  S.  W. 
235;  Citizens'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Sturgis 
Nat.  Bank  (Civ.  App.),  81  S.  W. 
650;  McKamey  v.  Thorp,  61  Tex. 
648;  Aultman  v.  George,  12  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  457,  34  S.  W.  652. 

Va. — Spence  v.  Repass,  94  Va,  716, 
27  S.  E.  583. 

Wash, — ^Kemp  v.  Folsom,  14  Wash. 
16,  43  Pac.  1100. 

W.  Fa.— -Prim  v.  Mcintosh,  44  W. 
Va.  790,  28  S.  E.  742;  Hamilton  v. 
Steele,  22  W.  Va.  348;  McGinnis  v. 
Curry,  13  W.  Va.  29,  but  a  convey- 
ance will  not  be  sustained  where  the 
property  had  been  given  by  the  wife 
to  the  husband. 

Wis, — ^Marsten  v.  Dresen,  85  Wis. 
630,  55  N.  W.  896. 

See  Appropriation  of  wife's  estate, 
chap.  VIII,  S  48,  infra;  Laches  of 
wife  in  asserting  claim,  chap.  VIII, 
S  52,  infra, 

89.  Sweeney  v.  Damron,  47  HI. 
450. 

90.  Hinman  v.  Siloox,  91  Md.  676, 
46  Atl.  1017. 


96 


Fbaudui«£NT  Conveyances. 


§  5.  Interest  of  debtor  in  property  conveyed. — Statutes  pro- 
viding that  gifts,  oanvejanoeSy  etc.,  of  any  estate^  with  intent  to 
delay,  hinder,  and  defraud,  shall  be  void  as  against  creditors, 
have  been  held,  as  a  rule,  to  refer  to  property  owned  by  the 
debtor,  and  not  to  apply  to  property  to  which  he  had  no  title  or 
interest,  legal  or  equitable,  which,  was  liable  to  sale  on  execution, 
or  which  his  creditors  could  reach  and  had  a  right  to  subject  to 
the  payment  of  their  claims."     Such  statutes  do  not  apply  to 


bj  an  iniolTeiit  for  a  moderate 
amount  of  insurance  upon  hie  life  in 
favor  of  his  wife;  Hopkirk  ▼.  Ran- 
dolph, 12  Fed.  Cas.  No.  6,698,  2 
Brock.  (U.  S.)  132;  Emerson  ▼. 
Bemis,  69  111.  537,  reasonable  gift  or 
provision  for  wife  or  child;  French 
V.  Holmes,  67  Me.  186;  Partridge  v. 
Gopp,  Ambl.  596,  27  Eng.  Reprint^ 
388,  1  Eden,  163,  28  Eng.  Reprint, 
647;  Lush  v.  Wilkinson,  5  Ves.  Jr. 
384,  31  Eng.  Repnnt,  642. 

38.  N,  T. — Jackson  v.  Ham,  15 
Johns.  (K.  Y.)  261,  where  a  lot  was 
conveyed  to  the  debtor,  without  con- 
sideration, for  the  purpose  of  qualify- 
ing him  to  vote,  the  grantor  retain- 
ing possession,  and  was  subsequently 
reconveyed  to  the  grantor  while  a 
suit  was  pending  against  the  debtor 
for  a  tort. 

Ala, — ^Dearman  v.  Dearman,  5  Ala. 
202,  where  a  father  joined  with  a 
son  in  the  conveyance  of  property  to 
another  son,  which  property,  before 
the  conveyance  was  not  liable  for  the 
debt  of  the  father,  the  act  of  the 
father  was  not  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors. 

Oal. — Moore  v.  Besse,  43  Cal.  511, 
where  a  judgment  debtor  sold  land 
to  which  he  had  acquired  a  pre-emp- 
tion right,  to  defraud  a  judgment 
creditor,  and  the  purchaser  pre- 
empted the  land  and  obtained  a 
patent  therefor,  such  creditor  cannot 


attack  the  patent  for  fraud,  or  the 
title  held  by  the  purchaser,  since  at 
the  time  of  the  conveyance  the  debtor 
had  only  a  personal  privilege  to  take 
the  necessary  steps  to  procure  title 
and  had  no  interest  in  the  land 
which  was  liable  to  sale  on  execu- 
tion. 

Conn, — Jarvis  v.  Prentice,  19 
Conn.  272,  conveyance  of  property 
held  in  trust. 

Ind, — Bremmerman  v.  Jennings, 
101  Ind.  253,  to  a  complaint  to  set 
aside  an  alleged  fraudulent  deed,  an 
answer  stating  that  the  deed  was 
drawn  up  in  the  debtor's  name  as 
grantee,  that  it  was  never  delivered, 
that  the  grantor  intended  to  give  the 
land  to  his  daughter,  the  debtor's 
wife,  and  that  at  his  request  he  made 
another  deed  coonveying  the  land  to 
her,  was  held  good,  if  for  no  other 
reason  than  that  the  deed  was  never 
delivered  to  the  husband,  and  hence 
he  never  had  any  title  to  the  prop- 
erty which  his  creditors  could  reach. 

Ky, — Louisville  City  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Woolridge,  116  Ky.  641,  25  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  869,  76  8.  W.  542,  it  is  no 
fraud  as  to  his  creditors  for  a  hus- 
band to  consent  to  a  wife's  testa- 
mentary disposition  of  her  person- 
alty. 

JIfd.— Mishler  v.  Finch,  104  Md. 
183,  64  Atl.  945,  conveyance  of  prop- 
erty by  a  debtor  and  his  wife,  con- 


PSOPEBTY,  BTO.^  WHICH  CbBDITOBS  HAT  BbAOH.  143 

§  34.  Reconveyance  by  fraudulent  grantee. — A  court  of 
equity  will  afford  no  relief  to  a  debtor  who  has  transferred  hia 
property  for  the  purpose  of  defrauding  his  creditors^  and  who 
subsequently  seeks,  as  against  the  transferees,  to  recover  back 
the  same.^  Such  a  conveyance  vests  the  title  to  the  property 
transferred  in  the  fraudulent  grantee,**  and  the  property  in  his 
hands  is  subject  to  a  lien  as  against  him  and  to  the  daims  of  his 
creditors,  the  same  as  his  other  property.*^  But  where  the 
grantee  of  a  conveyance  made  to  defraud  creditors  without  con- 
sideration reconveys  the  property  to  his  grantor,  or  a  fraudulent 
assignee  accounts  for  and  pays  over  to  the  debtor  the  proceeds 
of  the  property  assigned,  before  any  creditor  obtains  a  lien 
thereon,  the  reconveyance  is  valid  as  against  his  creditors  and 
he  is  discharged  from  liability  to  them.  A  creditor  at  large  is 
not  within  the  protection  of  the  statute  in  relation  to  fraudulent 
conveyances,  and  the  grantee's  creditors,  who  have  no  lien,  can- 
not attack  the  conveyance  as  fraudulent  as  to  them.**  In  somei 
jurisdictions,  however,  the  rule  is  maintained  that  a  reoonvey* 
ance  by  a  fraudul^it  grantee  or  assignee,  who  is  in  failing  cir- 


95.  See  Rigiit  to  recover  property 
fraudulently  oonveyed,  oihap.  XLV,  {  S, 
infra. 

96.  See  Property  rights,  cEhap. 
XIV,  9  4,  infra. 

97.  See  Rights  of  creditors  of 
grantee,  chap.  XIV,  S  23,  infra. 

98.  y.  7. — Cramer  ▼.  Blood,  48  N. 
T.  684;  Davis  v.  Graves,  29  Barbw 
480;  Jackson  v.  Ham,  16  Johns.  261. 

/ihI.— 'Lafayette  Bank  v.  Brady,  96 
Ind.  498. 

/oiffk— Davidson  v.  Dwyer,  62 
Iowa,  332,  17  N.  W.  576;  First  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Hostetter,  61  Iowa,  396,  16 
K.  W.  289. 

£y.— dark  v.  Rucker,  7  B.  Mon. 
683. 

Mt. — ^BiatthewB  v.  Buck,  43  Me. 
266. 

Mo. — Schneider  v.  Fatten,  174  Mo. 


684,  76  S.  W.  166;  C.  Aultman  ft  Co. 
▼.  Booth,  96  Mo.  383,  8  S.  W.  742. 

N.  C— Fowell  V.  Ivey,  88  N.  C. 
266. 

Oi^io— Swift  ▼.  Goldridge,  10  Ohio, 
230,  36  Am.  Dec.  85. 

Tenn. — Stanton  v.  Shaw,  3  Baxt. 
12. 

Tew, — Biocoochi  v.  Casey-Swasey 
Co.,  91  Tex.  269,  42  S.  W.  963,  66 
Am.  St.  Rep.  876,  where  there  was  an 
actual  fraudulent  intent  known  to 
and  participated  in  by  the  grantee; 
Peck  V.  Jones,  10  Tex.  Civ.  App.  336, 
30  S.  W.  382,  where  the  intent  to  de- 
fraud did  not  appear  but  the  convey- 
ance was  voluntary. 

W.  Fa.— Farmers'  Bank  v.  Gould, 
48  W.  Va.  99,  36  S.  E.  878,  86  Am. 
St  Rep.  24. 

TFif.— Fargo  v.  Ladd,  6  WU,  106. 


144 


Feaudui-ent  Convbyarces. 


cnmBtanceB^  widiout  consideration^  to  his  grantor  or  assignor^  is 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  creditors  of  the  former,  since  he 
could  not,  on  becoming  insolvent,  reconvey  property  the  title  to 
which  had  vested  in  him  absolutely  as  against  the  original  grantor 
or  assignor.^ 

i§  35.  Property  subject  to  power  of  appointment. — It  is  a 

rule  of  equity  in  the  courts  of  England/  and  in  this  country^ 
where  it  has  not  been  abrogated  by  statute/  that  where  a  peis 
son  has  a  general  power  of  appointment  by  will  over  property, 
and  has  exercised  the  power,  the  property  thus  appointed  form? 
a  part  of  his  assets,  and  is  subject  to  the  claims  of  his  creditors, 
in  preference  to  those  of  a  legatee  or  of  the  gratuitous  appointee* 
The  principle  upon  which  the  right  of  the  creditor  rests  is  that 
the  absolute  power  of  conveying  or  disposing  of  property  for 
one's  own  benefit,  makes  the  person  to  whom  it  is  giv^  the  owner. 
The  power  of  absolute  and  beneficial  control  cannot  and  ought 
not  to  be  separated  from  the  ownership.'  The  power  of  appoint- 
ment must,  however,  be  a  general  power,^  and  a  court  of  equity 


99.  Alc-^Keel  y.  Larkin,  83  Ala. 
142,  3  8o.  296,  3  Am.  St.  Rep.  702. 

Conn, — Ghapin  v.  Pease,  10  Ck>]iii. 
69,  26  Am.  Dec.  56. 

Mass. — Smith  v.  Lane,  3  Pick.  205. 

^w.— Walton  ▼.  Tusten,  40  Miss. 
569. 

Pa, — Gerker  ▼.  Bowen,  6  Phila. 
548. 

Can. — Johnson  t.  Kline,  16  Ont. 
129. 

1.  In  re  Harvey,  13  Ch.  D.  216,  49 
L.  J.  Ch.  3,  28  Wkly.  Rep.  73 ;  Shat- 
tock  v.  Shattock,  L.  R.  2  Eq.  182,  35 
Beav.  489,  12  Jur.  N.  S.  405,  35  L.  J. 
Ch.  609,  14  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  452,  14 
Wkly.  Rep.  600,  55  Eng.  Reprint, 
986;  Pack  v.  Bathurst,  3  Atk.  269, 
26  Eng.  Reprint,  957;  4  Kent  Com. 
339;  2  Sugd.  Powers,  29,  {  7,  173, 
«  2. 


2.  V.  7.— Tallmadge  y.  Sill,  21 
Barb.  34. 

U,  8. — ^Brandiea  y.  Cochrane,  112 
U.  S.  344,  5  Sup.  Ct.  194,  28  L.  Ed. 
760, 

Mass. — Olney  v.  Balch,  164  Mass. 
318,  28  N.  E.  258;  Qapp  y.  Ingra- 
ham,  126  Mass.  200. 

N.  H. — Johnson  y.  CUshing,  15  N. 
H.  298,  41  Am.  Dec.  694. 

Pa, — Commonwealth  y.  Duffield,  12 
Pa.  St.  277. 

3.  Tallmadge  y.  Sill,  21  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  34,  53. 

4.  Tallmadge  y.  SUl,  supra,  "  by  a 
general  power  we  miderstand  a  right 
to  appoint  whomsoeyer  the  dxmee 
pleases;  by  a  particular  power  it  is 
meant  that  the  donee. is  restricted  to 
some  objects  designated  in  the  deed 
creating  the  power,  as  to  his  own 


Pbopebty,  etc.,  which  Ckeditobs  may  Reach.        145 

will  not  interfere,  unless  the  donee  of  the  power  has  done  some 
act  indicating  an  intention  to  execute  it^  In  New  York  the 
rule  of  English  equity  subjecting  property  subject  to  a  general 
power  of  appointment  to  the  debts  of  the  donee  of  the  power, 
after  its  exercise,  has  been  abrogated  by  statute,  and  this  assel 
has  been  withdrawn  from  creditors.  The  general  purpose  of  the 
New  York  statute  is  stated  to  have  bean  to  place  the  doctrine  of 
powers  on  rational  {^rounds.  The  rule  of  Engliidi  equity  ^diich 
made  the  estate  embraced  in  a  power  to  appoint  generally  by 
will  liable  to  the  claims  of  creditors,  if  the  power  was  executed, 
but  exempt  therefrom  if  it  was  not  executed,  seemed  so  refined 
a  distinction  that  sound  logic  would  not  tolerate  it.  The  English 
rule  was  based  upon  the  proposition  that  the  right  to  dispose  of 
property  was  equal  to  the  ownership  of  the  property.  The  New 
York  statute  recognizee  that  there  is  no  distinction  between  the 
absolute  power  of  disposition  and  the  absolute  ownership,  but 
it  confines  the  absolute  power  of  disposition  to  a  power  by  which 
the  grantee  is  enabled  in  his  lifetime  to  dispose  of  the  entire  fee 
for  his  own  benefit,  and  does  not  include  tiierein  a  power  to 
appoint  by  will.  There  is  no  provision  that  a  general  and  bene- 
ficial power,  like  a  power  of  appointment  generally  by  will,  shall 
subject  the  estate  embraced  in  it  to  the  claims  of  creditors.* 

§  36.  Separate  estate  or  property  of  debtor's  wife. — ^Neither 
the  equitable  nor  the  statutory  separate  property  or  estate  of  a 
wife  can  be  subjected  by  the  creditors  of  her  husband  to  the 
payment  of  their  claims,  since  they  have  no  interest  in  the 
property,  and  a  conveyance  of  such  property,  by  the  wife  or 
by  the  husband  and  wife  jointly,  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  the 
husband's  creditors  and  cannot  be  avoided  by  them.^    The  act  of 

children;"  Johnson  ▼.  Gushing,  15  K.  Y,  450,  afg  2  Thomp.  k  C.   318; 

H.  298,  41  Am.  Dec.  694.  Strong  v.  Skinner,  4  Barb.  546. 

5.  Johnson  v.  Gushing,  awpra.  V.  8. — ^Davis  v.  Fredericks,  104  U. 

6.  Grooke  ▼.  Kings  Gounty,  97  N.  S.*  618,  26  L.  Ed.  849;  Stewart  v. 
^.  421 ;  Cutting  v.  Cutting,  86  N.  Y.  Piatt,  101  U.  S.  731,  25  L.  E.  816, 
522.  where  the  property  was  appropriated 

7.  y,  7.^-Mape6  v.  Snyder,  59  K.  to  the  payment  of  one  of  the  hus- 

10 


146 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


the  husband  in  joining  in  the  oonveyance  by  his  wife  of  her 
separate  property  is  not  a  fraud  on  creditors^  althou^  he  re- 
ceives no  consideration  for  the  act.'  Equity  will  uphold  the  title 
of  the  wife,  as  against  creditors  of  the  husband,  and  the  validity 
of  a  conveyance  of  such  property  by  the  wife  jointly  with  her 
husband,  although  the  legal  title  to  lands  purchased  with  the 
means  of  the  wife  was  in  the  husband,*  or  was  taken  in  the  names 
of  the  husband  and  wife  jointly/^  or,  without  the  knowledge  or 
consent  of  the  wife,  was  taken  in  the  husband's  name,^  or  the 
properly  was  acquired  through  the  husband  acting  as  the  agent 
of  his  wife  and  otherwise  assisting  her."  F!r(^>erty  which  is 
purchased  by  a  husband,  the  title  to  which  is  taken  in  his  wife's 
name,  cannot  be  reached  by  his  creditors,  vrbere  none  of  his 
property  or  money  goes  to  pay  for  it,  but  it  is  purchased  with 
the  wife's  separate  estate." 


band's  creditors;  Vorhees  ▼.  Blanton, 
83  Fed.  234,  89  Fed.  886,  32  C.  C.  A. 
384. 

Xld.— Wing  v.  Eoswald,  74  Ala. 
346. 

Ga. — Sperry  ▼.  Haslam,  57  Ga.  412. 

Ky. — ^Marshall  v.  Marshall,  2 
Bush.  415;  Eversole  y.  BuUodc,  26 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  1098,  83  S.  W.  556. 

Me, — ^Hubbard  v.  Remick,  10  Me. 
140;  Wilson  v.  Ayer,  7  Me.  173. 

lf(M<.— Stetson  T.  CSuUivan,  8 
Allen,  321. 

Ifo.—Cox  V.  Cox,  91  Mo.  71,  3  S. 
W.  685;  Ault  Y.  EUer,  38  Mo.  App. 
598. 

Neb, — Jayne  ▼.  Hymer,  66  Neb. 
785,  92  N.  W.  1019. 

N.  J. — ^Dresser  v.  Zabriskie  (Ch.), 
39  Atl.  1066;  Quidort  v.  Pergeaux, 
18  N.  J.  Eq.  472. 

8.  C, — ^Davidson  y.  Graves,  Riley 
Eq.  232. 

Tenn, — Smith  v.  Greer,  3  Humph. 
118. 

Tex. — ^McKamey  v.  Thorp,  61  Tex. 
648;  Aultmaa  &  Go.  v.  George,  12 


Tex.  Civ.  App.  457,  34  S.  W.  662; 
Cavil  V.  Walker,  7  Tex.  (^v.  App. 
305,  26  S.  W.  864. 

Woslk.— Kemp  v.  Folsom,  14  Wash. 
16,  43  Pac.  1100. 

W.  Va. — GuMnsey  v.  Lazear,  51 
W.  Va.  328,  41  S.  E.  405;  Hamilton 
V.  Steele,  22  W.  Va.  348. 

See  Purchase  of  property  by  hus- 
band in  name  of  wife,  chap.  II,  §  6, 
«upfu. 

8.  Besser  v.  Joyce,  9  Or.  310. 

9.  Sweeney  v.  Danuron,  47  111. 
450;  McClanahan  v.  Beasley,  56  Ky. 

III.  See  also  chap.  IV,  S  33,  supfXL 

10.  McConnell  v.  Martin,  52  Ind. 
434. 

11.  Eagan  v.  Downing,  55  Ind. 
65;  Snyder  v.  Martin,  52  Ind.  434; 
McConnell  v.  Martin,  52  Ind.  434. 

12.  Bank  of  Tipton  v.  Adair,  172 
Mo.  156,  72  S.  W.  510;  Eagan  v. 
Downing,  55  Ind.  65.  See  Services 
rendered  by  husband  for  wife,  chap. 

IV,  S  13,  supra, 

13.  Popfinger  v.  Yutte,  102  N.  Y. 
38,  6  N.  E.  259;  McLean  v.  Hess,  106 


Pbopebtt^  btOv  whioh  Cbeditobs  mat  Reach.       147 

§  37.  Husband's  curtesy  or  other  interest  in  wife's  property. 
— ^The  voluntary  convejancey  release,  or  surrender  by  a  husband 
of  his  inchoate  estate  or  interest  in  his  wife's  real  estate  as  ten* 
ant  by  the  curtesy,  either  initiate  or  consummate,  is  fraudulent 
and  void  as  against  the  esistiiig  creditors  of  the  husband,  and 
such  estate  or  interest  may  be  reached  by  ereditors,^^  except  in 
those  jurisdictions  where  the  commoa  law*  rule  has  been  changed 
by  statute  so  that  tenancy  by  the  curtesy  is  abolished,"  or  the  hus- 
band has  no  interest  in  the  wife's  separate  estate  by  curtesy 
until  the  death  of  the  wife,^^  or  the  interest  of  the  husband  in 
his  wife's  land  is  made  exempt  during  covertute  from  attach- 
ment or  levy  of  execution  for  the  sole  debts  of  the  husband.^^  A 
husband's  consent  to  his  wife's  devise  of  her  real  estate  to  others 
or  his  acquiescence  therein  after  her  death  does  not  estop  him 
from  claiming  his  statutory  dower  interest  therein,  or  defeat 
the  right  of  the  husband's  creditors  to  reach  this  interest"  But 
an  agreement  by  a  husband  to  relinquish  all  interest  in  his 
wife's  estate  in  consideration  of  her  executing  her  will  in  a 
designated  manner  and  permitting  it  to  become  her  last  will,  is 
valid  as  against  his  judgment  creditors."  Where  the  husband 
while  indebted,  releases  his  dower  interest  in  the  lands  of  his 
deceased  wife  to  his  children,  such  release,  being  in  fraud  of 
creditors,  will  be  set  aside,  and  the  interest  subjected  to  the 
satisfaction  of  his  creditors.^  In  Iowa  a  husband  may  waive 
and  relinquish  his  right  of  dower  in  lands  devised  by  his  wife 


Ind.  556,  7  N.  E.  567.  See  also 
Property  purchased  by  husband  in 
name  of  wife,  chap.  II,  §  6,  supra, 

14.  y.  r.— Wickes  v.  Oarke,  8 
Paige^  161. 

D.  O. — ^National  MetropoUtan 
Bank  v.  Hitz,  1  Mackey,  111. 

/«.— Gay  V.  Gay,  129  111.  221,  18 
N.  E.  813. 

/fid.— Huffman  v.  Copeland,  139 
Ind.  221,  38  N.  E.  861. 

If.  0.— Teague  v.  Downs,  S9  K.  C. 
280. 


15.  Shieds  v.  Keys,  24  Iowa,  298. 

16.  Bessw  T.  Joyce,  9  Or.  310; 
Guernsey  v.  Lazear,  51  W.  Va.  328, 
41  S.  E.  405. 

17.  Ault  y.  Eller,  38  Mo.  App. 
598;  Besser  v.  Joyce,  supra, 

18.  Boach  v.  White,  94  Ind.  510; 
CHarra  v.  Stone,  48  Ind.  417. 

19.  Huffman  v.  Copeland,  139  Ind. 
221,  38  N.  E.  86;  Wright  ▼.  Jones, 
105  Ind.  17,  4  N.  E.  281. 

20.  Maclaren  ▼.  Stone,  18  Ohio 
Cir.  Ct.  854,  9  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  794. 


148 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


to  another^  so  that  the  title  thereto  will  be  unaffected  hj  anji 
liens  of  his  creditors.**  The  fact  that. by  virtue  of  the  marriage 
a  husband  acquired  property  of  his  wife  is  not  sufficient  to  sup- 
port a  conveyance  to  her  or  for  her  use  made  by  the  husband 
in  fraud  of  creditors,  and  where  the  property  of  the  wife  haa 
been  reduced  to  possession  by  the  husband  and  becomes  his  ab- 
solute property,  such  property,  if  fraudulently  transferred  or 
invested  in  other  property,  in  his  own  or  his  wife's  name,  may 
be  reached  and  subjected  by  creditors  of  the  husband  to  the 
payment  of  their  claims.**  But  a  husband  may  waive  or  decline 
to  assert  his  marital  right  to  the  interest  given  him  by  law  in 
his  wife's  personal  property  and  consent  to  her  retaining  and  dis- 
posing of  the  same,  and  a  transfer  of  such  property  where  it 
has  never  been  reduced  to  his  possession  by  the  husbpnd  b  not 


21.  Shields  v.  Keys,  24  Iowa,  298. 

22.  17.  £r.— Lee  ▼.  HoUister,  5  Fed. 
752;  Dick  v.  Hamilton,  7  Fed.  Gas. 
No.  3,890,  Deady,  322;  but  such  a 
conveyance  is  valid,  if  the  husband 
waB  solvent  at  the  time,  and  it  was 
not  made  with  intent  to  defraud 
creditors. 

Ala, — Boiling  v.  Jones,  67  Ala.  608. 

Fla. — ^America  Freehold  Land,  etc., 
Co.  V.  Maxwell,  30  Fla.  480,  22  So. 
751,  there  is  no  implied  trust  for  the 
wife  which  will  support,  as  against 
creditors,  a  conveyance  by  the  hus* 
band  to  the  wife. 

Oa. — Sayre  v.  Floumoy  3  Ga.  541. 

/IZ.— Bridgford  ▼.  Reddell,  55  lU. 
261. 

Ind. — ^Meredith  v.  Citizens'  Nat. 
Bank,  02  Ind.  343;  Westerfield  v. 
Kimmer,  82  Ind.  365;  Brookville  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Kimble,  76  Ind.  105;  Bu- 
chanan V.  Lee,  60  Ind.  117;  Holland 
V.  Moody,  12  Ind.  170. 

Iowa. — ^Boulton  v.  Hahn,  58  Iowa, 
518,  12  N.  W.  560. 


f  y. — ^Lyne  v.  Commonwealth  Bank; 
28  Ky.  545;  Davis  v.  Justice,  14  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  741,  21  S.  W.  520;  Topp  ▼. 
Todd,  16  Ky.  L.  Rep.  382;  Gravey  ▼. 
Moore,  12  Ky.  L.  Rep.  732,  15  S.  W. 
136. 

JfA—Wylie  V.  Basil,  4  Md.  Ch.  327. 

Mass, — ^Pierce  v.  Thompson,  17 
Pick.  301. 

Mo. — Hart  v.  Leete,  104  Mo.  315,  15 
S.  W.  076. 

y.  C— Allen  V.  Allen,  41  N.  C.  203. 

Pa. — Gicker's  Adm'rs  v.  Martin,  50 
Pa.  St.  138. 

8.  C— Suber  v.  Chandler,  36  S.  C. 
344,  15  S.  E.  426. 

Tenn. — Joiner  v.  Franklin,  12  Lea, 
420. 

W.  Vtt.— Clarks  v.  King,  34  W.  Vm, 
631,  12  S.  E.  775. 

TTw.— Howe  v.  Colby,  10  Wis.  583. 

Eng. — In  re  Holland,  70  L.  J.  Ch. 
626,  2  Ch.  145,  86  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S. 
304,  8  Munson,  266,  40  Wkly.  Rep. 
476. 


J 


Fbopesty^  eto.^  which  Creditobs  may  Reach.        149 

fraudulent  as  to  his  creditors.^  A'  liuslMiid  has  no  vested  in- 
terest in.  the  choses  in  action,  or  other  personal  property  of  hia 
wife,  until  he  reduces  them  into  his  possession  by  virtue  of  hia 
marital  rights,  and  his  failure  to  do  so  is  not  fraudulent  asi 
against  his  creditors.^  Creditors  of  the  husband  who  claim  to 
be  subrogated  to  his  rights  can  have  no  other  rights  than  the 
husband  as  against  the  wife's  property.* 

§  38.  Wife's  dower  or  other  interest  in  husband's  property. 

— The  dower  ri^t  of  a  widow  prior  to  its  assignment  or  ad* 
measurement  <m  the  death  of  her  husband  is  a  complete  right 
which  is  a  diose  in  action  within  the  contemplation  of  a  statute, 
or  the  rule  in  equity  in  certain  jurisdictions,  making  choses  in 
action  applicable  to  the  payment  of  debts,  and  a  release  of 
dower  right  without  consideration,  to  avoid  payment  of  debts, 
is  fraudulent,  and  may  be  set  aside  at  the  instance  of  the  credit- 
ors of  the  widow.*    But  an  unassigned  or  imadmeasured  right 


23.  N.  7.— Jayeoz  ▼.  Galdwell,  61 
N.  T.  396. 

Ala, — ^Wing  v.  RoBwald,  74  Ala. 
346. 

JTy.— LouisTille  City  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Wooldridge,  116  Ky.  641,  76  S.  W. 
542,  25  Ky.  L.  Rep.  869;  G«orge  v. 
Bussing,  15  B.  Mon.  558;  McGauley 
Y.  Rhodes,  7  B.  Mon.  462 ;  Bowling  v. 
Winslow,  6  B.  Mon.  29. 

Jfo.— Hart  V.  Leete^  104  Mo.  315, 
15  8.  W.  976;  Cox  v.  Cox,  91  Mo.  71, 
3  S.  W.  586. 

N,  /.—Peterson  v.  Mulford,  36  N". 
J.  It.  481,  gift  1^  husband  to  wife  of 
the  avails  of  her  own  labor. 

24.  N,  T. — Woodworth  v.  Sweet, 
51  N.  Y.  8,  aff'g  44  Barb.  268;  Jay- 
cox  V.  Caldwell,  51  N.  Y.  395,  affff 
37  How.  Pr.  240. 

U.  fif.— Gallego  v.  Chevalie,  9  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  5,200,  2  Brock.  285. 

Ala, — Bradford  v.  Goldsborough 
15  Ala.  311. 


Chi, — Sperry  ▼.  Haslam,  67  Ga. 
412;  Sayre  v.  Ploumoy,  3  Ga.  641. 

Ky. — McClanahan  v.  Beasley,  17  B. 
Mon.  11. 

Ifrf.— Drury  v.  Briscoe,  42  Md.  154, 
wife's  distributive  share  of  her 
father'i  estate. 

Mass, — Gassett  v.  Grout,  4  Mete. 
486,  wife's  distributive  share  of  her 
father's  estate.  ; 

If o.— Terry  v.  Wilson,  63  Mo.  493; 
Hart  V.  Leete,  supra;  Cox  v.  Cox, 
supra. 

Pa. — DcMinelly  v.  Public  Ledger,  2 
Phila.  51;  Smethurst  v.  Thurston, 
Brightly,  127. 

8.  O, — Durr  v.  Bowyer,  2  McCord, 
368;  Higgenbottom  v.  Peyton,  3  Rich. 
Eq.  398;  Perryclear  v.  Jacobs,  2  Hill 
Eq.  604. 

26.  Sayre  v.  Floumoy,  3  Ga.  641. 

26.  Tenbrook  v.  Jessup,  60  N.  J. 
Eq.  234,  46  Atl.  516.  See  Choses  in 
action,  chap.  IV,  §  7,  supra. 


150  FbAUDULBNT  CoNyETANCSS.  I 

of  dower  cannot  be  reached  bj  a  creditor's  bill  in  those  juris* 
dictions  where  choses  in  action  cannot  be  reached  by  creditors,  in 
the  absence  of  any  provision  therefor  by  statute.'^  Under  the 
Indiana  statute  an  interest  in  land  equal  to  one-third  its  value  is,  as 
to  the  wife  of  the  owner,  free  from  a  judgment  against  the  latter, 
and  a  conveyance  thereof  by  her  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  the 
judgment  creditor.*^  A  creditor,  therefore,  is  not  harmed  by  an 
alleged  fraudulent  conveyance  made  by  the  debtor  to  his  wife, 
if  the  value  of  her  inchoate  interest  in  the  property  together  with 
the  debtor's  statutory  exemption,  and  all  liens  senior  to  that  of 
the  creditor,  equal  or  exceed  the  value  of  the  property  trans- 
ferred» 

§  39.  Community  property. — >The  transfer  of  community 
property  from  a  husband  to  his  wife  is  not  even  evidence  of 
fraud  as  to  the  separate  creditors  of  the  husband,  as  no  one  but 
the  community  creditor  can  question  the  good  faith  of  such 
transfer  and  subject  such  property  to  the  payment  of  debts.*^ 
In  Texas  a  married  woman  has  the  right  to  convey  her  property 
in  trust  for  herself  and  her  children,  so  as  to  withdraw  the  renta 
from  the  community  estate,  and  such  conveyance  will  not  be 
fraudulent  as  to  her  husband's  creditors.*^ 

§  40.  Property  of  adopted  child. — ^In  Kentucky  where  a 
statute  places  one  who  adopts  a  child  under  the  same  responsi- 
bilities as  if  the  person  so  adopted  were  his  own  child,  die 
property  of  an  adopted  diild  cannot  be  reached  by  creditors  of 
a  parent  on  the  ground  that  the  child's  maintenance  has  beeo 
borne  by  the  parents,  the  provision  made  for  the  child  not 
being  unreasonable." 

27.  Harper  v.  Clayton,  84  Md.  SiB,  30.  Reed  Bros.  y.  Nicholson,  189 
35  Atl.  1083,  67  Am.  St.  Rep.  407,  35  Mo.  396,  88  S.  W.  71;  Deering  v.  Hol- 
L.  R.  A.  211.  comb,  26  Wash.  688,  67  Pac.  240. 

28.  Isgriflg  V.  Pauley,  148  Ind,  436,  •-    *»    j          rr          .«  m       *«_ 
47  N.  E.%2?,  Taylorv.  Duesfrberg.  ..^\}^^l  VS? 

109  Ind.  166,  9  N.  E.  907.  ^^'  '^*'  32  S.  W.  669. 

29.  Marmon  t.  White,  161  Ind.  445,  99.  Anderson  t.  Hondo  ft  McGraw, 
61  N.  E.  930.  26  Ky.  U  Rep.  1644,  77  8.  W.  926. 


Pbopebtt^  sto.^  whioh  Cbeditobs  mat  Beach.       151 

§  41.  Exempt  property  ingeneraL — As  exempt  property 
cannot  be  takea  and  is  not  subject  to  sale  by  creditors  in  satis- 
faction of  debts,  it  is  evident  that  creditors  cannot  be  hindered, 
delayed,  or  defrauded  by  the  transfer  of  property  ^hich  can^ 
not  be  made  to  contribute,  either  at  law  or  in  equity,  to  the 
satisfaction  of  their  debts.  The  object  of  the  statute  of  Eliza- 
beth and  similar  statutes  being  to  prevent  debtors  from  dealing 
with  their  property  to  the  prejudice  of  their  creditors,  it  is 
obvious  that  dealing  with  that  which  creditors,  irrespective  of 
such  dealing,  could  not  have  touched,  is  not  within  either  the 
letter  or  the  spirit  of  such  statutes."*  Hence  the  general  rule 
that  property  which  is,  by  statute,  exempt  from  execution,  is 
not  susceptible  of  fraudulent  alienation^  and  a  oonveyance  thereof 
is  not  invalid  because  voluntary,  nor  because  it  was  executed 
with  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  and  defraud  creditors.**    It  is  also 


38.  Central  Nat.  Bank  v.  Hume, 
128  U.  8.  195,  0  Sup.  Ct.  41,  32  L. 
Ed.  370;  McLeod's  Trustee  ▼.  McLeod, 
28  Ky.  L.  Rep.  284,  667,  89  S.  W. 
199,  90  S.  W.  5. 

34.  N,  T.— Smillie  ▼.  Quinn,  90  N. 
T.  493;  McGivney  v.  Childs,  41  Hun, 
607;  Whiting  v.  Barrett,  7  I^ans.  106; 
.Spaulding  v.  Keyes,  1  Silv.  Sup.  203, 
6  N.  Y.  Supp.  227;  Youmans  v.  Boom- 
bower,  3  Thomps.  &  C.  21, 

U.  flf.— In  re  Wilson,  123  Fed.  20, 
69  C.  C.  A.  100;  Daugherty  v.  Bogy, 
104  Fed.  938,  44  C.  C.  A.  266. 

Ala, — Skinner  v.  Jennings,  137  Ala. 
295,  34  So.  622;  Cross  v.  Beny,  132 
Ala.  92,  31  So.  36;  Brinson  v.  Ed- 
wards, 94  Ala.  447,  10  So.  219; 
Myers  v.  Conway,  90  Ala.  109,  7  So. 
639;  Nance  v.  Nance,  84  Ala.  375,  4 
So.  699,  5  Am.  St.  Rep.  378;  Alley  v. 
Daniel,  75  Ala.  403;  Wright  v.  Smith, 
66  Ala.  514;  Garner  v.  Bridges,  38 
Ala.  276. 

Ark. — ^Hinkle  v.  Broadwater,  84  S. 
W.  610;  Wilks  V.  Vaughan,  83  S.  W. 


913;  Sims  v.  Phillipe,  64  Ark.  193,  15 
S.  W.  461;  Sannor  v.  King,  49  Ark. 
299,  5  S.  W.  327,  4  Am.  St.  Rep.  49, 
where  the  total  valuation  of  a  judg- 
ment debtor's  property,  including 
property  fraudulently  transferred  to 
his  wife,  is  less  than  the  amount  ex- 
empt by  law,  his  creditors  cannot 
seize  the  transferred  property  in  the 
hands  of  the  transferree;  Bennett  r. 
Hutson,  33  Ark.  762. 

Conn. — ^Ketchum  ▼.  Allen,  46  Conn. 
414;  Patten  ▼.  Smith,  4  Conn.  450,  10 
Am.  Dec.  166. 

D.  C. — Ckssin  y.  Bozzle,  6  D.  C. 
260. 

lU. — ^Berry  v.  Hanks,  28  111.  App. 
51;  Vaughan  v.  Thompson,  17  HI. 
78;  Vinton  v.  Felts,  71  111.  App.  630, 
a  conveyance  by  a  husband  to  his 
wife  of  property  exempt  from  execu- 
tion, when  no  execution  exists  against 
him,  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  subse- 
quent execution  creditors.  See  also 
Washburn  v.  Goodheart,  88  111.  229. 

/ntf.— Hedrick  v.  Hall,  155  Ind.  871, 


152 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


generally  maintained  that  a  fraudulent  conveyance,  or  an  at^ 
tempted  fraudulent  conveyance,  of  personal  property,  does  not 
defeat  the  debtor's  right  to  claim  his  exemptions  therein  and 


68  N.  E.  257;  Marmon  ▼.  White,  151 
Ind.  445,  51  N.  £.  930;  Fulp  v.  Bea- 
ver, 136  Ind.  319,  36  N.  £.  250;  Pbe- 
nix  Ins.  Go.  v.  Fulder,  133  Ind.  567, 
33  N.  E.  270;  Citizens  Bank  ▼.  Bolen, 
121  Ind.  301,  23  N.  E.  146;  Ray  v. 
Yarnell,  118  Ind.  112,  20  N.  E.  705; 
Goudy  V.  Werbe,  117  Ind.  154,  19  N. 
E.  764,  3  L.  R.  A.  114;  Phelps  y. 
Smith,  116  Ind.  387,  17  N.  E.  602,  19 
N.  E.  156;  Dumbould  v.  Rowley,  113 
Ind.  263,  15  N.  £.  463;  Barnard  ▼. 
Brown,  112  Ind.  53,  13  N.  E.  401; 
Burdge  v.  Bolin,  106  Ind.  175,  6  N. 
E.  140;  Kolb  v.  Raisor,  17  Ind.  App. 
551,  47  N.  E.  177.  As  a  general  rule, 
a  voluntary  conveyanoe,  made  by  an 
insolvent  debtor  who  has  not  suffi- 
cient other  property  subject  to  execu- 
tion to  pay  his  debts,  is  construc- 
tively fraudulent  as  against  existing 
creditors ;  but  this  is  true  only  where 
the  property  so  disposed  of  was  not 
at  the  time  exempt  from  execution, 
but  such  as  the  creditor  mi^t  have 
reached  in  the  hands  of  the  debtor. 
Faurote  v.  Carr,  103  Ind.  123,  9  N. 
E.  350. 

Iowa. — Foreman  v.  Citizens'  State 
Bank,  128  Iowa,  661,  105  N.  W.  163; 
Gollobitsch  V.  Rainbow,  84  Iowa,  567, 
51  N.  W.  48;  Beyer  v.  Thoeming,  81 
Iowa,  517,  46  N.  W.  1074;  Payne  v. 
Wilson,  76  Iowa,  377,  41  N.  W.  45; 
Brainard  v.  Simmons,  67  Iowa,  646, 
26  N.  W.  844. 

Kan. — Mull  v.  Jones,  33  Kan.  112, 
5  Pac.  388;  Arthur  v.  Wallace,  8  Kan. 
267. 

Ky. — ^McLeod's  Trustee  v.  McLeod, 
28  Ky.  L.  Rep.  284,  667,  89  S.  W. 
199,  90  S.  W.  6;  Morton  v.  Reagan, 


68  Ky.  334;  Anthony  v.  Wade,  64 
Ky.  110;  Berry  v.  Ewen,  27  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  467,  85  S.  W.  227,  under  a 
statute  exempting  certain  moneys  of 
the  husband  from  execution  for  his 
debts,  a  creditor  of  the  husband  can- 
not complain  if  the  husband  gives 
such  exempt  mon^  to  his  wife,  or  in* 
vests  it  in  land,  the  title  to  which  is 
taken  in  her  name;  Minor  v.  Sharps 
17  Ky.  L.  Rep.  992,  33  S.  W.  411. 

Me. — ^Pulsifer  v.  Waterman,  73  Me. 
233;  Legro  v.  Lord,  10  Me.  161.  Com- 
pare Nason  v.  Hobbs,  75  Me.  396. 

Maaa. — ^Mannan  v.  Merritt,  11  Al- 
len, 582;  Bean  v.  Hubbard,  4  Cush. 
86.  Compare  Tuealey  v.  Robinson, 
103  Mass.  568,  4  Am.  Rep.  575. 

Mich. — Bresnahan  v.  Nugent,  92 
Mich.  76,  52  N.  W.  736;  Dull  v.  Mer- 
rUl,  69  Mich.  49,  36  N.  W.  677; 
Fisher  v.  Mclntyre,  66  Mich.  6Sl,  3a 
N.  W.  762;  Emerson  v.  Bacon,  68 
Mich.  526,  26  N.  W.  603 ;  Buckley  v. 
Wheeler,  52  Mich.  1,  17  N.  W.  216  ^ 
Anderson  v.  Odell,  51  Mich«  492,  la 
N.  W.  870;  Rosenthal  v.  Scott,  41 
Mich.  632,  2  N.  W.  909. 

Minn. — Horton  v.  Kelly,  40  Minn.. 
193,  41  N.  W.  1031 ;  Furman  v.  Tenny, 
28  Minn.  77,  9  N.  W.  172. 

Miss. — Williamson  v.  Wilkinson,  81 
Miss.  503,  33  So.  282;  O'Connor  v. 
Ward,  60  Miss.  1026;  Smith  v.  Allen,. 
39  Miss.  469. 

Ifo.—Stam  V.  Smith,  183  Mo.  464,. 
81  S.  W.  1217;  Versailles  Bank  v. 
Buthrey,  127  Mo.  189,  29  S.  W. 
1004;  48  Am.  St  Rep.  621;  Davis  ▼. 
Land,  88  Mo.  436;  Megehe  v.  Draper, 
21  Mo.  510,  64  Am.  Dec.  246;  Kiely 
V.  Hickox,  70  Mo.  App.  617;  Stotes- 


J 


Peopbbty,  etc.,  which  Cbeditobs  may  Reaoh.        158 

to  establish  and  entorce  them."    A  contrary  rule,  however,  pre- 
vails in  some  jurisdictions,"  and  it  is  held  by  some  authorities 


l>ui7  V.  Kirtland,  35  Mo.  App.  148; 
Hombs  y.  Corbin,  34  Mo.  App.  393; 
Kulage  V.  Schueler,  7  Mo.  App.  250. 

^Ted.— Munson  v.  Garter,  40  Neb. 
417,  68  N.  W.  931;  Bloedom  v. 
Jewell,  34  Neb.  649,  52  N.  W.  367; 
GiUespie  v.  Brown,  16  Neb.  457,  20 
N.  W.  632;  Boggs  v.  ThcHnpson,  13 
Neb.  403,  14  N.  W.  393.  Fraud  is  an 
immaterial  issue  in  an  action  by  the 
vendee  of  esempt  property-  to  quiet 
his  title,  as  against  judgment  cred- 
itors of  the  vendor.  Smith  v.  Neu- 
feld,  61  Neb.  699,  85  N.  W.  898. 

:^e9.— Bailey  y.  Littell,  24  Nev.  294, 
53  Pac.  308. 

y.  J. — ^Dresser  ▼.  Zabrislde  (Ch.), 
39  Atl.  1066. 

y.  Jf .— Heisch  v.  Bell,  70  Pac.  572. 

y.  a— Arnold  v.  Estis,  92  N.  C. 
162;  Gaster  v.  Bardie,  75  N.  C. 
460;  Montgomery  Ck>unty  v.  Riley, 
75  N.  C.  144;  Winchester  ▼.  Gaddy, 
72  N.  C.  115;  Duvall  v.  Rollins,  71  N. 
C.  218. 

y.  DaJb.->Kyello  v.  Taylor,  5  N.  D. 
76,  63  N.  W.  889. 

0**a.— Tracy  v.  Cover,  28  Ohio  St. 
61. 

S.  C— Bridgers  v.  Howell,  27  S.  C. 
425,  3  S.  £.  790. 

flf.  i>.~.Noyes  v.  Belding,  5  S.  D. 
603,  59  N.  W.  1069;  First  Nat.  Bank 
▼.  North,  2  S.  D.  480,  61  N.  W.  96. 

Tenn. — ^Leslie  v.  Joyner,  2  Head. 
514;  lAyman  v.  Denton  (Gh.  App.), 
42  S.  W.  153. 

T&B, — Conner  v.  Hawkins,  66  Tex. 
639,  2  S.  W.  520;  Wood  v.  Chambers, 
20  Tex.  247,  70  Am.  Dec.  382;  Mc- 
Clelland V.  Barnard,  36  Tex.  Civ. 
App.  118,  81  S.  W.  591;  Heidelbach 
V.  Carter,  34  Tex.  Civ.  App.  579,  79 


S.  W.  346;  Eaves  v.  Williams,  10 
Tex.  av.  App.  423,  31  S.  W.  86. 

F*.— Darling  v.  Ricker,  68  Vt.  471, 
35  Atl.  376;  Wolcott  v.  Hamilton,  61 
Vt.  79,  17  Atl.  39;  Premo  v.  Hewitt, 
55  Vt  362;  Leavitt  v.  Jones,  54  Vt. 
423,  41  Am.  Rep.  849;  Prout  v. 
Vaughn,  52  Vt.  451;  Hayward  v. 
Clark,  50  Vt.  612;  Jewett  v.  Guyer, 
38  Vt.  209;  Foster  v.  McGregor,  11 
Vt  595,  34  Am.  Dec.  713. 

Wis, — Chicago  CofiSn  Co.  v.  Max- 
well, 70  Wis.  282,  35  N.  W.  733 ;  Al- 
len V.  Perry,  56  Wis.  178,  14  N.  W. 
3;  Carhart  v.  Harshaw,  45  Wis.  340, 
30  Am.  Rep.  752;  Pike  v.  Miles,  23 
Wis.  164,  99  Am.  Dec.  148;  Dreutiser 
V.  Bell,  11  Wis.  114;  Bond  v.  Sey- 
mour, 2  Pinn.  105,  1  Chandl.  40. 

See  Reservation  of  exempt  property, 
ohap.  X,  §  13,  infra, 

35.  17.  jSf.— Naumburg  v.  Hyatt^  24 
Fed.  898. 

Ark, — Sannoner  v.  King,  49  Ark. 
299,  5  S.  W.  327,  4  Am.  St  Rep.  49. 

Jfioft.— Rosenthal  v.  Scott,  41  Mich. 
632,  2  N.  W.  909. 

Mo. — ^Megehe  v.  Draper,  21  Mo. 
510,  64  Am.  Deo.  245;  State,  Nie- 
mann V.  Koch,  47  Mo.  App.  269. 

2^.  C— Gaster  v.  Hardie,  75  N.  C. 
460;  Duvall  v.  Rollins,  71  N.  C.  218. 

Ofcio.— Tracy  v.  Cover,  28  Ohio  St 
61. 

T«p.— King  v..Harter,  70  Tex.  579, 

8  S.  W.  308. 

86.  Ill—Bohn  v.  Weeks,  50  111. 
App.  236. 

/nd — Chandler  v.  Jessup,  132  Ind. 
351,  31  N.  E.  1109,  where  a  convey- 
ance of  land  is  set  aside  as  fraudu- 
lent, and  the  property  sold,  the 
debtor  cannot  claim  a  portion  of  the 


154 


FSAXJDULENT   CONVETAITOES. 


that  the  debtor  may  lose  the  benefit  of  the  exemption  laws,  bjf 
conoealment  of  his  property  or  other  f raud,  as  against  his  credi- 
tors." The  disposition  of  properly  exempt  from  execution  of 
which  creditors  cannot  complain,  and  to  which  the  general  rale 
stated  above  applies,  includes  the  assignment  or  transfer  of  life 
insurance  policies^f*  in  some  jurisdictions  pension  or  bounty 
checksi  drafts,  or  moneys,**  and  exempted  earnings  or  wages.* 


proceeds  as  exempt  from,  ezecution; 
Holman  ▼.  Martin,  12  Ind.  553 ;  Mand- 
love  y.  Burton,  1  Ind.  30.  See  also 
Jones  ▼.  Dipert,  123  Ind.  594,  23  N. 
£.  944. 

Me, — ^Wyman  ▼.  Gay,  90  Me.  86,  37 
Atl.  325,  60  Am.  St.  Rep.  238;  Nason 
Y.  Hobbs,  75  Me.  396. 

Mobs. — Stevenson  ▼.  White,  5  Allen, 
148. 

lfiM.->WilIiamson  ▼.  Wilkinson,  81 
Miss.  503,  33  So.  282. 

N^  ff .— Tilton  V.  Sanborn,  59  N.  H. 
290. 

Pa.— Moore  ▼.  Baker,  2  Pa.  Dist. 
142;  Carl  v.  Smith,  8  Phila.  569. 

37.  /».— Cassell  v.  Williams,  12 
lU.  387;  Cook  v.  Scott,  6  111.  333. 

Pa.— Kreider's  Estate,  136  Pa.  St. 
584,  19  Atl.  1073;  Imho^s  Appeal, 
119  Pa.  St.  350,  13  Atl.  279;  ^mith 
v.  Emerson,  43  Pa.  St.  456;  Strouse 
▼.  Beeker,  38  Pa.  St.  190;  Gilleland 
T.  Rhoads,  34  Pa.  187;  Freeman  v. 
Smith,  30  Pa.  St.  264;  Dieffenderfer 
V.  Fisher,  3  Grant,  30;  Carl  t. 
Smith,  8  Phila.  569;  Larkin  ▼.  Mc- 
Annally,  5  Phila.  17. 

Fa.— Rose  v.  Shatpless,  33  Gratt. 
153. 

38.  N.  r.— Smillie  v.  Quinn,  90  N. 

Y.  492. 

Fla, — ^Eppinger  v.  Canepa,  20  Fla. 
262. 

ilfe.— Pulsifer  v.  Hussey,  9  Am.  B. 
R.  657,  97  Me.  434,  54  Atl.  1076,  con- 
struing certain  sections  of  the  Fed- 


eral Bankruptcy  Act  of  1898  and 
Me.  Bey.  St.,  chap.  49,  |  75,  chap.  75, 
8  10.  But  see  Wyman  y.  Gay,  90  Me. 
36,  37  Atl.  325,  60  Am.   Rep.  238. 

ifd.—- Elliott  ▼.  Bryan,  64  Md.  368, 
1  AU.  614. 

8.  O.— Barron  v.  \^lliams,  58  S.  G. 
280,  36  S.  E.  561,  79  Am.  St.  Rep. 
840. 

Tenn, — ^Rose  ▼.  Wortham,  95  Tsnn. 
605,  32  S.  W.  458,  80  L.  R.  A.  609; 
Harvey  y.  Harrison,  89  Tenn.  470,  14 
S.  W.  1083. 

See  also  chap.  IV,  S  20,  9upra, 

39.  N.  7. — A  pension  granted  by 
the  United  States  for  military  ser- 
yice  is  exempt  by  Code  Ciy.  Proc, 
S  1393,  until  it  ceases  to  be  a  pen- 
sion, although  it  is  not  protected  by 
the  U.  S.  Rey.  Stat.,  except  while  in 
course  of  transmission.  Hence,  it  has 
been  held  to  be  exempt  when  it  has 
been  deposited  in  a  bank  on  interest, 
after  having  been  received  into  the 
possession  of  the  pensioner.  Stock- 
well  y.  National  Bank  of  Malone, 
36  Hun,  583.  And  when  deposited 
subject  to  check.  Burgett  y.  Faneher, 
35  Hun,  647.  Where  the  receipts  from 
a  pension  can  be  directly  traced  to 
the  purchase  of  property  necessary  or 
convenient  for  the  support  and  main- 
tenance of  the  pensioner  and  his  fam- 
ily, such  property  is  exempt  from  ez- 
ecution to  the  amount  of  the  pension 
money  put  into  the  property.  Yates 
County    Nat.    Bank    y.    Carpenter, 


Pbopebtt,  stc,  whioh  Crsditobs  mat  Beaoh.       155 
And  it  has  also  beea  held  to  include  the  transfer  of  growing 


119  N.  T.  550,  23  N.  E.  1108,  16  Am. 
St.  Rep.  855,  30  Bt.  Rep.  121,  7  L. 
R.  A.  557;  Ck>u]iti7iiia]i  v.  Ck>untr]r- 
nmn,  28  N.  Y.  Supp.  258,  23  Civ. 
Pro.  161.  But  wliere  the  proceeds  of 
a  peneion  have  been  embarked  in 
trade,  oommeroe  or  speculation,  and 
become  mingled  with  other  funds  so 
as  to  be  incapable  of  identification  or 
separation,  the  pensioner  loses  the 
benefit  of  the  statutory  exemption. 
Id.  The  pensioner  may  relinquish  the 
pension  by  transfer  to  another.  Frits 
V.  Worden,  20  App.  Div.  241,  46  N. 
Y.  Supp.  1040;  Burgett  v.  Fancher, 
35  Hun,  647.  Neither  under  the  State 
or  the  Federal  statute  is  pension 
money  exempt,  after  the  pensioner's 
death,  from  liability  for  his  debts,  in 
favor  of  descendants  other  than  a 
family  for  whom  the  pensioner  pro* 
Tided.   In  re  Winans,  5  Dem.  138. 

Bovaty  moaoy  reoeiTed  by  a 
debtor  for  enlistment  in  the  army, 
being  exempt  from  the  claim  of 
creditors  under  9  1303,  Code  Ciy. 
Proc.,  may  be  given  to  the  wife  with- 
out any  ifraud  on  them.  Spaulding 
y.  K^es,  1  Silv.  Sup.  203,  5  N.  Y. 
Supp.  227;  Whiting  v.  Barrett,  7 
Lans.  106;  Youmans  ▼.  Boomhower, 
3  ThcHnps.  &  C.  20. 

Iawa» — ^Under  Iowa  acts,  exempt- 
ing pension  moneys  from  execution, 
one  who  invests  pension  money  in 
colts,  in  paying  for  the  services  of  a 
stallion,  has  a  property  interest  in 
them  which  is,  to  that  extent,  ex- 
empt. Diamond  v.  Palmer,  78  Iowa, 
578,  44  N.  W.  819.  Such  laws  have 
no  application  to  the  money  of  a  pen- 
aioner  who  died  before  the  enactment. 
Baugh  V.  Barrett,  69  Iowa,  405. 

Ky. — A  check  received  by  a  veteran 
as  a  pension  for  his  military  services 


is  absolutely  free  from  the  claims  of 
his  creditors,  and  may  be  disposed  of 
by  him  in  such  manner  as  he  deems 
proper.  Falkenburg  v.  Johnson,  102 
Ky.  543,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1606,  44  8. 
W.  80,  80  Am.  St.  Rep.  369.  Land 
in  which  a  pensioner  has  invested 
his  pension  is  not  exempt  from  seiz- 
ure for  his  debts,  and  a  conveyanoe 
thereof  made  to  the  pensioner's  wife 
does  not  exempt  it  from  liability  for 
his  debts,  under  U.  S.  Rev.  Stat,  § 
4747.  Johnson  v.  Elldns,  90  Ky.  163, 
13  Ky.  L.  Rep.  967,  13  S.  W.  448,  8 
L.  R.  A.  552;  Robion  ▼.  Walker,  82 
Ky.  60,  56  Am.  Rep.  880;  Sims  v. 
Walsham,  9  Ky.  L.  Rep.  912,  7  S.  W. 
557;  Hudspeth  v.  Harrison,  0  Ky.  L. 
R^.  304. 

Me. — ^Pensi<m  mon^  actually  in 
the  hands  of  the  pensioner  is  not  exr 
empt  from  execution.  Friend  v. 
Garoelon,  77  Me.  25,  52  Am.  Rep. 
739;  Crane  v.  Linnens,  77  Me.  59. 

Pa. — Under  Pension  Laws  U.  S. 
Rev.  St.,  §  4747,  providing  that  "  no 
sum  of  money  due  or  to  become  due 
to  any  pensioner  shall  be  liable  to 
attachment,  levy,  or  seizure  by  or 
under  any  legal  or  equitable  process 
whatever,  whether  the  same  remains 
with  the  pension  office,  or  any  officer 
or  agent  thereof,  or  is  in  course  of 
transmission  to  the  pensioner  en- 
titled thereto,  but  shall  inure  wholly 
to  the  benefit  of  such  pensioner,"  it 
is  not  a  fraud  upon  creditors  for  the 
pensioner  to  give  his  pension  money 
to  his  wife  for  the  purpose  of  pur- 
chasing a  home,  in  her  name,  for 
their  joint  benefit.  Holmes  v.  Tal- 
lada,  125  Pa.  St.  133,  17  Atl.  238,  11 
Am.  St  Rep.  880,  3  L.  R.  A.  219,  23 
Wkly.  Notes  Cas.  463.  Pension 
money   cannot   be   attached   on   the 


166 


FRAUDULENT   CONVEYANCES. 


crops/^  and  exempt  improvements  on  Indian  agricultural  lands 


ground  tliat  it  lias  been  fraudulentlj 
assigned  by  the  pensioner.  Clark  ▼. 
Ingraham,  15  Phila.  646,  36  Leg. 
Iht.  393.  The  proceeds  of  a  pension 
check  deposited  with  a  bank  for  col- 
lection are  not  liable  to  attachment. 
Reiff  y.  Mack,  160  Pa.  St  265,  28 
Atl.  699,  40  Am.  St.  Hep.  720.  Real 
estate  bought  by  a  pensioner  in  the 
name  of  his  wife,  with  his  pension 
money,  is  liable  to  seizure  and  sale 
for  his  debts.  Burteh  v.  Burtoht  14 
Pa.  Co.  Ct.  482,  11  Lane.  L.  Rev. 
237. 

"Ft — A  pension  draft,  being  ex- 
empt from  execution,  may  be  made 
the  subject  of  a  gift  by  the  pensioner 
without  fraud  upon  his  creditors. 
Hayward  v.  Clark,  60  Vt.  612. 

Can. — ^Money  received  by  a  debtor 
from  the  crown  for  'contract  work 
cannot  be  gamisheed  before  being 
paid  by  the  crown,  but  a  gift  of  them 
after  payment  is  fraudulent  imder 
the  statute  of  Elizabeth.  Nicholson 
V.  Shannon,  28  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.) 
378. 

40.  /da.~Elliot  v.  Hall,  3  Ida. 
421,  31  Pac.  796,  35  Am.  St.  Rep. 
285,  18  L.  R.  A.  586. 

Iou3a. — Ehlers  v.  Blumer  (1905), 
105  N.  W.  406;  Nash  v.  Stevens,  96 
Iowa,  616,  65  N.  W.  826;  Robb  v. 
Brewer,  60  Iowa,  539,  15  N.  W.  420; 
Patterson  v.  Johnson,  59  Iowa,  397, 
13  N.  W.  416. 

JSTy.—Wallaoe  v,  Mascm,  100  Ky. 
560,  38  S.  W.  887,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
935. 

Mo, — Jarboe  v.  Jarboe,  106  Mo. 
App.  459,  79  S.  W.  1162;  Furth  v. 
March,  101  Mo.  App.  329,  74  8.  W. 

147. 

Mont, — Cushing  v.  Quigley,  11 
Mont.  577,  29  Pac.  337. 


Veh. — ^Union  Pac.  R.  Co.  v.  Smersh. 
22  Neb.  751,  36  N.  W.  139,  3  Am.  St. 
Rep.  290. 

N,  H, — Provencher  v.  Brocks,  64 
N.  H.  479,  13  Atl.  641. 

Ohio, — Stump  V.  Frary,  13  Ohio 
Cir.  Ct  619,  6  Ohio  dr.  Dec  357,  it 
is  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  for 
a  husband  to  give  his  exempt  wages 
to  his  wife,  who  applies  then»  in  part 
to  paying  for  a  home,  taking  the  title 
in  her  name. 

Wis, — Bloodgood  v.  Meissner,  84 
Wis.  452,  54  N.  W.  772,  moneys  of  a 
debtor  in  his  wife's  hands  are  not 
exempt  under  the  Wisconsin  statute 
exempting  the  earnings  of  a  married 
person  with  dependent  family  for 
three  months  next  preceding  the  is- 
suing of  garnishment  process,  to  the 
amount  of  $60  for  each  month,  where 
they  have  been  accumulated  for  three 
years  in  payments  of  less  than  $60 
per  month,  although  they  were  ex- 
exempt  at  the  time  th^  were  paid 
over  to  her. 

41.  Layman  v.  I>enton  (Tenn.  Ch. 
App.),  42  S.  W.  153,  creditors  can- 
not complain  of  a  mortgage  given  by 
a  debtor  to  secure  another  creditor 
on  a  growing  crop  before  November 
15,  but  which  creditors  under  the 
Tennessee  statute  are  not  allowed  to 
levy  upon,  as  fraudulent  as  a  matter 
of  law. 

Orops  gi'owii,  on  laada  pu- 
ohaaed  wltJi  pension  money  are, 
however,  not  exempt  fromi  execution, 
under  the  Iowa  statute,  providing 
that  the  homestead  of  a  pensioner 
purchased  and  paid  for  with  pension 
money,  or  the  proceeds  and  accumu- 
lations of  such  pension  money,  shall 
be  exempt  from  execution  or  attach- 
ment.    Haefer  v.   Mullison    (Iowa), 


J 


Pbopbbty,  etc.,  which  Cbeditobs  may  Beach.        157 


when  conveyed  by  a  citizen  of  an  Indian  tribe.^  The  rule  does 
not  apply,  however^  where  the  right  to  an  exemption  arises  after 
a  fraudulent  conveyance,  or  the  pr(^>erty  was  not  exempt  at  the 
time  of  the  conveyance.^  For  example,  where  the  exemption 
does  not  attach  to  the  particular  property  until  it  is  claimed 
or  selected,^  or  where  exempt  property  designed  and  procured, 
and  necessary  for  carrying  on  the  debtor's  trade  or  business, 
and  intended  to  be  used  therein,  and  no  part  of  which  has  been 
set  aside  for  that  purpose,  is  conveyed,  by  the  debtor  because 
he  has  changed  his  original  design  and  abandoned  such  intended 
use  of  the  property,^  or  where  the  debtor  never  intended  or  made 


57  N.  W.  893w    See  also  Crops  grown 
on  homestead,  chap.  IV,  9  44,  infra, 

42.  Daugherty  y.  Bogy,  104  Fed. 
938,  44  C.  C.  A.  266. 

43.  Fritz  v.  Worden,  20  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)  241,  46  N.  Y.  Supp.  1040; 
Phoenix  Ins.  Ga  ▼.  Fielder,  133  Ind. 
557,  33  N.  £.  270;  Luce  v.  Bamum, 
19  Mo.  App.  359;  Alt  t.  Lafayette 
Bank,  9  Mo.  App.  91;  Martin  ▼. 
Crosby,  11  Lea  (Tenn.),  198. 

44.  N,  Y, — Field  v.  Ingreham,  15 
Misc.  Rep.  529,  37  N.  Y.  Supp.  1135. 

Ala.'— Ctom  v.  Berry,  132  Ala.  92, 
31  So.  36,  where  the  value  of  prop- 
erty mortgaged  exceeded  the  amount 
of  exemption  allowed,  the  rule  that  a 
conveyance  of  exempt  property  is  not 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  being  ap- 
plicable "only  in  cases  where  the 
property  conveyed  constitutes  all 
that  is  owned  and  possessed  by  the 
grantor,  and  does  not  exceed  in  value 
his  exemption  under  the  law."  Skin- 
ner V.  Jennings,  137  Ala.  295,  34  So. 
622,  but  where  the  property  conveyed 
was  worth  less  than  the  exemption 
allowed,  the  creditors  are  not  in  a 
position  to  question  the  debtor's  right 
to  convey;  Alley  v.  Daniel,  75  Ala. 
403. 

(7a2._Barton  v.  Brown,  68  Cal.  11. 


/U.— Bohn  V.  Weeks,  50  111.  App. 
236. 

Me, — ^Wyman  v.  Gay,  90  Me.  36, 
37  Atl.  325,  60  Am.  St  Bap.  238,  the 
debtor  waives  a  personal  privilege 
when  he  convejrs  exempt  property  to 
another,  and  if  the  conveyance  works 
a  fraudulent  preference  under  the  in- 
solvent law,  the  assignee  may  recover 
the  property  or  its  value;  Nason  v. 
Hobbs,  75  Me.  396. 

Ifo.— Garrett  v.  Wagner,  125  Mo. 
450,  28  S.  W.  762;  Stewart  v. 
Stewart,  65  Mo.  App.  663;  Stotes- 
bury  V.  Kirtland,  35  Mo.  App.  148; 
Hombs  V.  Corbin,  34  Mo.  App.  393; 
Alt  V.  Lafayette  Bank,  9  Mo.  App. 
91. 

Pa. — ^Hney's  Appeal,  29  Pa.  St. 
219;  Larkin  v.  McAnnally,  5  Phila. 
17. 

46.  Rayner  v.  Whicher,  6  Alleji 
(Mass.),  292;  Stevenson  v.  White,  5 
Allen  (Mass.),  148,  if  made  and  re- 
ceived with  intent  to  defraud  cred- 
itors. But  see  Ketchum  v.  Allen,  46 
Conn.  414,  the  fact  that,  if  the  sale 
was  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  the 
property  would  be  no  longer  pro- 
tected by  the  statute  as  the  seller's, 
because  not  now  used  by  him  in  his 
business,  does  not  affect  the  case. 


158 


FSAUDULEKT   CoNVETA17CE8. 


such  use  of  tlie  property  as  was  required  to  render  it  exempt,^ 
the  conveyance  of  the  property  is  fraudulent  as  against  creditors. 
So,  a  conveyance  of  exempt  property  which  a  statute  provides 
shall  not  be  exempt  from  execution  issued  upon  a  judgment  for 
the  purchase  money  thereof  is  fraudulent  as  against  a  judgment 
for  the  purchase  price,  and  the  failure  of  the  vendor  to  file  a 
notice  required  by  the  statute  will  not  prevent  him  from  follow* 
ing  the  property  into  the  hands  of  a  fraudulent  transferee.^ 
The  owner  of  property  exempt  from  execution  may  sell  it  or  give 
it  away ;  and  if  the  transfer  is  fully  completed,  the  property  will 
not  thereafter  be  liable  to  his  creditors,  whatever  may  have  been 
his  motive  in  making  the  gift;^  and  the  fact  that,  after  a  sale 
or  gift  of  exempt  'property,  valid  when  made,  the  debtor,  from 
some  change  in  his  circumstances,  could  no  longer  hold  the  prop- 
erty as  exempt,  if  the  sale  or  gift  were  avoided,  is  immaterial.^ 
But  though  one  may  give  away  exempt  property,  his  creditors 
may  attack  as  fraudulent  a  transaction  by  whidi  he  sells  exempt 
property  and  wi&  the  proceeds  buys  non-exempt  property,  taking 
title  in  another  to  put  it  beyond  the  reach  of  creditors.^  It  is 
not  a  fraud  upon  creditors  for  an  insolvent  debtor  to  purchase 
with  his  own  money  property  exempt  from  levy  on  execution, 
even  though  he  does  so  with  the  purpose  of  putting  it  beyond 
their  reach.^  He  exercises  a  privilege,  which  the  law  gives  him 
and  wirongs  no  ona    If  he  buys  provisions  for  his  family,  or  a 


46.  CoimerB  v.  Hawkins,  66  Tex. 
639,  2  S.  W.  620. 

47.  Lillibridge  v.  Walsh,  97  Mich. 
459,  66  N.  W.  864. 

48.  Colbert  v.  Sutton,  5  Del.  Oh. 
294;  Pearson  ▼.  Quist,  79  Iowa,  64, 
44  N.  W.  217. 

40.  Carhart  v.  Hershaw,  46  Wis. 
340,  30  Am.  Rep.  762,  sale  of  his 
library  bj  a  professional  man. 

50.  HcLeod's  Trustee  v.  McLeod, 
28  Ky.  L.  Rep.  284,  667,  89  S.  W. 
199,  90  S.  W.  5. 

51.  Cipperly    v.    Rhodes,    63    111. 


346,  where  the  debtor  purchased  a 
homestead  in  the  name  of  his  wife; 
O'Donnell  y.  Segar,  26  Mich.  367,  the 
fact  that  the  debtor  had  disposed  of 
all  the  property  he  had  which  was 
subject  to  the  execution,  for  the  very 
purpose  of  investing  the  proceeds  in, 
or  converting  themi  into,  tiu&t  kind  of 
property  which  was  exempt  under 
the  statute,  does  not  deprive  him  of 
the  exemption,  so  long  as  his  occupa- 
tion is  really  such  as  the  statute  re- 
quires, and  the  particular  property 
is  needed  in  that  occupation. 


Pbopebtt^  xtOv  whioh  Cbsditobs  may  Beaoh. 


159 


cow,  or  neoeesary  clothing,  he  merely  puts  his  property  in  a 
shape  which  the  humanity  of  the  law  authorizes."  But  if  an 
insolvent  debtor  sells  property  subject  to  execution  and  with  the 
proceeds  immediately  purchases  exempt  property,  the  only  rem- 
edy of  the  creditor  is  by  attacking  and  overturning  the  sale  of 
the  non-exempt  properly." 

%  42.  Homesteads  in  generaL — As  a  debtor's  exempt  home« 
stead  is  not  subject  to  the  demands  or  remedies  of  his  creditors, 
a  conveyance  thereof,  whether  made  with  or  without  considera- 
tion, and  irrespective  of  the  intent  of  the  parties,  or  whether 
the  conveyance  be  to  the  wife  or  to  a  third  person,  is  not  fraudu- 
lent, and  cannot  be  set  aside  as  fraudulent,  as  against  creditors, 
and  the  property  so  conveyed  reached  in  the  hands  of  the 
grantee."    And  a  fraudulent  conveyance  or  an  attempted  f raudu- 


52.  Tucker  ▼.  Drake^  11  Alien 
(Mass.)*  146. 

53.  Comstock  v.  Beehtel,  63  Wl». 
656,  24  N.  W.  46S. 

54.  U.  Sf.-— In  re  Wilmm,  123  Fed. 
20,  59  C.  C.  A.  100;  Thomson  v. 
Crane,  73  Fed.  327;  Green  v.  Root, 
62  Fed.  191 ;  Farwell  v.  Kerr,  28  Fed. 
345;  Volentine  v.  Hurd,  21  Fed.  749; 
Cox  ▼.  Wilder,  6  Fed.  Gas.  No.  3,308, 
2  DUl.  45;  Smith  ▼.  Kehr,  22  Fed. 
Gas.  No.  13,071,  2  Dill.  50. 

Ala.— Steiner  v.  Bemey,  130  Ala. 
289,  30  Sa  570;  First  Nat  Bank  v. 
Browne,  128  Ala.  557,  29  So.  552,  86 
Am..  St  Bep.  156;  Fuller  v.  Whilr 
lode,  99  Ala.  411,  13  So.  80;  Hodges 
▼.  Winston,  95  Ala.  514,  11  So.  200, 
36  Am.  St.  Bep.  241;  Lehman  t. 
Biyan,  67  Ala.  558;  FelloEWS  ▼.  Lewis, 
65  Ala.  343,  39  Am.  Bep.  1. 

Ariff.— Luhrs  ▼.  Hancock  (1899), 
57  Pae.  605. 

ArJb.— Isbell  ▼.  Jones  (1906),  88  S. 

W.     593;     Hinkle    t.     Broad!water 

(1905),    84    S.    W.    510;    Wilks    v. 


Vanghan  (1904),  83  S.  W.  913; 
Gray  ▼.  Paterson,  65  Ark.  273,  46  S. 
W.  730,  1119,  67  Am.  St  Bep.  937; 
Pipkin  V.  Williams,  57  Ark.  242,  21 
S.  W.  433,  38  Am.  St  Bep.  241; 
Campbell  ▼.  Jones,  52  Ark.  493,  12 
S.  W.  1016,  6  L.  B.  A.  783;  Stenley 
y.  Snyder,  43  Ark.  429;  Flask  ▼.  Tin- 
dall,  39  Ark.  571;  Bennett  ▼.  Hutson, 
33  Ark.  762. 

Cal.— Wetherly  v.  Strauss,  93  Cal. 
283,  28  Pac.  1045. 

Colo.— Bamett  v.  Knight,  7  Colo. 
365,  3  Pac.  747,  the  sale  of  a  home- 
stead entirely  exempt  from  execu- 
tion, in  consideration  of  the  future 
support  of  the  insolvent  grantor, 
cannot  be  set  aside  at  the  suit  of  his 
creditors,  since  they  were  not  injured 
thereby. 

Fto.— MurjAy  v.  Farquhar,  39  Fla. 
350,  22  So.  681. 

/U.— First  Nat  Bank  v.  Bhea,  155 
lU.  434,  40  N.  E.  551;  Moore  ▼. 
Flynn,  135  111.  74,  25  N.  B.  844; 
Boyd  ▼.  Bamett,  24  111.  App.  199; 


160 


Fbaudulent  Convetakoes. 


lent  conveyance  of  lands  does  not  defeat  the  homestead  right  of 


Shacklcford  r.  Todhunter,  4  111.  App. 
271;  Lytle  v.  Scott,  2  lU.  App.  646. 
Ztid.— Iflgrigg  V.  Pauley,  148  Ind. 
436,  47  N.  E.  821;  Nichols,  etc.,  Co. 
V.  Burch,  128  Ind.  324,  27  N.  H.  737 ; 
Blair  v.  Smith,  114  Ind.  114,  16  N.  £. 
817,  6  Am.  St*  Rep.  693;  Taylor  v. 
Duesterberg,  109  Ind.   166,  9  N.  £. 

907. 

/ouMi.— RichardJB  v.  Orr,  118  Iowa, 
724,  92  N.  W.  666;  Sfttate  Ina.  Co.  v. 
Prestage,  116  Iowa,  466,  90  N.  W. 
62;  Wheeler,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Bjel- 
land,  97  Iowa,  637,  66  N.  W.  886; 
Clark  y.  Raymond,  86  Iowa,  661,  53 
N.  W.  364;  Officer  t.  Evana,  48 
Iowa,  657;  Hugunin  v.  Dew^,  20 
Iowa,  368. 

2[an.— Winter  v.  Ritchie,  67  Kan, 
212,  46  Pac.  695,  57  Am.  St.  Rep. 
331;  Wilson  v.  Tiiylor,  49  Kan.  774, 
31  Pac.  697. 

Ky. — Deweeee  v.  Deweese,  28  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  726,  90  S.  W.  256;  Roark  v. 
Bach,  116  Ky.  457,  25  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
699,  76  S.  W.  340;  Davis  v.  H.  Felt- 
man  Co.,  112  Ky.  293,  23  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1510,  65  S.  W.  615,  95  Am.  St. 
Rep.  289 ;  Morrow  v.  Bailey,  109  Ky. 
359,  22  Ky.  L.  Rep.  861,  59  S.  W.  2, 
95  Am.  St.  Rep.  382;  Carroll  v.  Daw- 
son, 103  Ky.  736,  20  Ky.  L.  Rep.  349, 
46  S.  W.  222;  Baker  v.  Hines,  102 
Ky.  329,  10  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1354,  43  S. 

•  W.  452 ;  Snapp  v.  Snapp,  87  Ky.  554, 

•  10  Ky.  L.  Rep.  598,  9  S.  W.  705. 

La, — Cottingham's  Succession,  29 
La.  Ann.  669. 

ife.— Legro  v.  Lord,  10  Me.  161. 

Mass, — Castle  y.  Palmer,  6  Allen, 
401,  conveyance  by  a  husband  to  a 
third  person,  and  by  the  latter  to  the 
wife. 

Mich, — Oasser  v.  Crittenden,  140 
Mich.  301,  103  N.  W.  601;  Michigan 


Trust  Co.  V.  Comstock,  130  Mich. 
672,  90  N.  W.  331;  Dickey  v.  Cbn- 
verse,  117  Mich.  449,  457,  76  N.  W. 
80,  72  Am.  St  Rep.  568;  Nash  v. 
Gmighty,  105  Mich.  382,  63  N.  W. 
437 ;  Riggs  v.  Sterling,  60  Mich.  643, 
27  X.  W.  705,  1  Am.  St.  Rep.  554; 
Vermont  Sav.  Bank  v.  Elliott,  53 
Mich.  256,  18  N.  W.  805. 

Minn, — ^Blake  v.  Boisjoli,  51  Minn. 
296,  53  N.  W.  637 ;  Horton  y.  Kelly, 
40  Minn.  193,  41  N.  W.  1031;  Fur- 
man  V.  Tenny,  28  Minn.  77,  9  N.  W. 
172;  Morrison  ▼.  Abbott,  27  Minn. 
116,  6  N.  W.  466. 

Miss. — ^Wilcher  v.  Thompson 
(1893),  12  So.  828;  Hodges  v.  Hick- 
ley,  67  Miss.  715,  7  So.  .404;  O'Oon- 
ner  v.  Ward,  60  Miss.  1025. 

ifo. — ^Reed  Bros.  v.  Nicholson,  189 
Ma  396,  88  S.  W.  71;  Stam  v.  Smith, 
183  Mo.  464,  81  S.  W.  1217;  Spratt 
V.  Early,  169  Mo.  357,  69  S.  W.  13; 
Moore  v.  Wilkerson,  169  Mo.  334,  68 
S.  W.  1035;  Hart  v.  Leete,  104  Mo. 
315,  15  S.  W.  967;  Grimes  v.  Port- 
man,  99  Mo.  229,  12  S.  W.  792; 
Muenks  v.  Bunch,  90  Mo.  500,  3  S. 
W.  63 ;  Davis  y.  Land,  88  Mo.  436. 

Neh. — ^Wheatley  v.  Chamberlain 
Banking  House  (1904),  101  N.  W. 
1135;  National  Bank  of  Commeroe 
V.  Chamberlain  (1904),  100  N.  W. 
943;  Brown  v.  Campbell  (1903),  93 
N.  W.  1007;  Plummer  v.  Rohman,  62 
Neb.  145,  84  N.  W.  600,  87  N.  W.  11 ; 
Smith  V.  Neufeld,  61  Neb.  699,  85  N. 
W.  898 ;  Mundt  v.  Hagadom,  49  Neb. 
409,  68  N.  W.  610;  Munson  v.  Car- 
ter, 40  Neb.  417,  58  N.  W.  981. 

yet?.— Bailey  v.  Littell,  24  Nev. 
294,  53  Pac.  308. 

N.  if.— Heisch  v.  Bell  (1902),  70 
Pac.  572. 

N.  C— Dortch  v.  Benton,  98  N.  C. 


Peopbety,  etc.,  which  Cbeditobs  may  Beach.        161 

the  grantor  therein^"  although^  in  some  cases,  it  is  lield  that  the 
homestead  exemption  may  be  forfeited  or  lost  by  a  conveyance 


100,  3  S.  £.  638,  2  Am.  Rep.  381; 
Cnimmen  v.  Bennet,  68  N.  C.  404. 

N,  D. — ^Dalrymple  v.  Security  Imp. 
CJo.,  11  N.  D.  66,  88  N.  W.  1033; 
Olson  V.  O'Connor,  0  X.  D.  604,  84 
K.  W.  360,  81  Am.  8t.  Rep.  606. 

OAto.^Prosek  v.  Kuchta,  0  Ohio 
Bee.  120,  11  Cine.  L.  Bui.  66; 
Stewart  v.  Wooley,  2  Ohio  Dec.  341, 

2  West.  L.  Month.  471. 

8.  C— McNair  v.  Moore,  64  S.  C. 
82,  41  8.  E.  820;  Barrow  v.  Wil- 
liams, 68  S.  C.  280,  36  S.  E.  661,  70 
Am.  St.  Rep.  840;  Aultman  v.  Sa- 
linas, 44  S.  G.  200,  22  S.  E.  466. 

8,  Z>. — Commercial  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Kendall   (1006),  106  N.  W.  63. 

T«».— Jolly  V.  Diehl  (Civ.  App. 
1006),  86  8.  W.  066;  King  v.  Barter, 
70  Tex.  670,  8  S.  W.  308;  Scheuber  v. 
Ballow,  64  Tex.  166;  Martel  v. 
Somers,  26  Tex.  651;  Wood'  t. 
Chambera,  20  Tex.  247,  70  Am.  Dec. 
382;  Heidelbach  v.  Carter,  34  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  670,  70  S.  W.  346 ;  Finn  v. 
Kent,  13  Tex.  Civ.  App.  36,  34  S.  W. 
1013;  Brown  v.  Moore  (Civ.  App. 
1001),  64  S.  W.  781. 

F#.— Darling  v.  Ricker,  68  Vt.  471, 
36  Atl.  376;  Pease  v.  Shirlock,  63  Vt. 
622,  22  Atl.  661 ;  Piemo  v.  Hewitt,  65 
Vt.  362;  Prout  v.  Vaughn,  62  Vt. 
451;  Danforth  v.  Beattie,  43  Vt  138; 
Jewett  V.  Guyer,  38  Vt.  200. 

Va. — ^Mahoney  v.  James,  04  Va. 
176,  26  S.  E.  384;  Williams  v.  Lord, 
75  Va.  300. 

Wis, — Bank  of  Commerce  v.  Fowler, 

03  Wis.  241,  67  N.  W.  423;  Rozek  v. 
Redzinski,  87  Wis.  625,  68  N.  W. 
202;  Shawano  County  Bank  v.  Koep- 
pen,  78  Wis.  633,  47  N.  W.  723 ;  Hoff- 
man V.  Junk,  61  Wis.  613,  8  N.  W. 

11 


403;  Pike  v.  Miles,  23  Wis.  164,  00 
Am.  Dec.  148. 

Wyo.— North  Platte  Milling,  etc., 
C6.  V.  Price,  4  Wyo.  203,  33  Pac.  664. 

Wliere  teiuutta  in  eomaftoik  oo« 
ovpy  la&d  aa  a  homeateadU  a  con- 
veyance by  one  of  them  of  his  interest 
therein  to  his  co-tenant  is  not  void 
as  to  their  creditors,  though  it  be 
without  consideration.  Fordyce  v. 
Hicks,  80  Iowa,  272,  46  N.  W.  760. 
And  where  a  tenant  in  common  of 
a  homestead  conveys  his  interest 
therein  to  his  adopted  children,  who 
had  lived  with  him  and  rendered  him 
valuable  service,  such  conveyance  can- 
not be  set  aside  as  fraudulent  as  to 
his  creditors.  Eagle  v.  Smylie,  126 
Mich.  612,  86  N.  W.  1111,  86  Am.  St. 
Rep.  662. 

Where  a  debtor  takea  title  ia 
tke  amine  of  liia  wife  of  real  es- 
tate acquired  as  a  homestead,  the 
fact  that  other  property  owned  by 
him,  and  more  than  sufficient  to  pay 
his  debts,  was  his  homestead  prior 
to  the  purchase,  does  not  render  it 
fraudulent  as  to  his  creditors.  Lang 
V.  Williams,  166  Mo.  1,  66  S.  W. 
1012. 

Where  the  equity  of  rodeaftp- 
tioa  in  a  homestead  is  worth  less 
than  one  thousand  dollars,  its  con- 
veyance is  not  fraudulent  as  against 
the  creditors  of  the  grantor.  Palmer 
V.  Bray  (1004),  08  N.  W.  840,  10 
Det.  L.  N.  074;  Balz  v.  Nelson,  171 
Mo.  682,  72  S.  W.  627. 

Where  a  traot  of  land,  iaolmd- 
ins  a  homestead,  is  subject  to  a 
mortgage  and  judgments  for  a  sum 
larger  than  the  value  of  the  portion 
of  the  land  which  is  not  included  in 


162 


F&AUDULBNT    Coi^VXYANCBS. 


made  with  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  creditors.^  The 
title  of  the  purdiaser  or  grantee  of  a  homestead,  as  against  the 
creditors  of  his  grantor,  is  not  affected  by  the  grantor's  purpose 


the  homestead,  a  voluntary  oonrey- 
anee  by  the  owner  to  his  wife  is  not 
fraudulent.  Stubblefield  v.  Oadd,  112 
Iowa,  681,  84  N.  W.  917. 

ESqiiitable  mortsAse* — Since  a 
debtor's  homestead  is  not  subject  to 
the  claims  of  creditors,  an  absolute 
conveyance  of  it  for  the  purpose  of 
placing  it  beyond  their  reach  does  not 
preclude  him  from  having  the  deed 
declared  a  mortgage,  if  the  circum- 
stances justify  such  relief.  Patnode 
V.  Darveau,  112  Mich.  127,  70  N.  W. 
439,  71  N.  W.  1095;  O'Connor  v. 
Ward,  60  Miss.  1025,  1037. 

Acrienltiiral  liomestead*  —  A 
debtor  may,  although  not  residing 
upon  an  agricultural  homestead,  in- 
crease it  to  the  maximum  area,  in 
order  to  protect  a  conveyance  from 
being  adjudged  fraudulent  as  against 
creditors.  Wilks  v.  Vaughan  (Ark. 
1904),  83  S.  W.  913. 

Tke  Bood  faith  of  a  husband  in 
deeding  a  homestead  to  his  wife  can- 
not be  inquired  into  by  a  creditor  of 
the  husband.  Merchants'  Nat.  Bank 
V.  Kopplin,  1  Kan.  App.  599,  42  Pac. 
263;  and  other  cases  cited  above,  this 
note. 

55.  17.  flf.— Farwell  v.  Kerr,  28  Fed. 
345;  McParland  v.  Goodman,  16  Fed. 
Gas.  Noi  8,789,  6  Biss.  111. 

Ate.— Kennedy  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
107  Ala.   170,   18  So.  396,  36  L.  R. 

A.  308. 

jirk. — Garmack  v.  Lovett,  44  Ark. 

180. 

/U.— Quinn  v.  People,  146  111.  275, 
34  N.  E.  148;  Ammondson  v.  Ryan, 
111  111.  606;  Bell  v.  Devore,  96  111. 
217;  Leupod  v.  Krause,  95  111.  440; 


Hartwell  v.  McDonald,  69  HI.  293; 
Redden  v.  Potter,  16  III.  App.  265. 

Ky. — ^Kuevan  v.  Specker,  11 
Bush.  1. 

Maes, — Gastle  v.  Palmer,  6  Allen*. 
401. 

Minn. — ^Baldwin  v.  Rogers,  2S 
Minn.  544,  11  N.  W.  77. 

Misa. — ^Edmonson  v.  Meaehan^'  50' 
Miss.  34.  Where,  after  a  conveyance 
of  land  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  haa 
been  adjudged  fraudulent  as  to  cer- 
tain creditors  of  the  husbaand,  he 
moves  on  to  the  land  with  his  family, 
and  makes  it  his  home,  he  is  enti- 
tled to  homestead  rights  therein,  and 
a  sale  thereof  under  such  judgment 
should  be  enjoined.  Dulion  v.  Hark- 
ness,  80  Miss.  8,  31  So.  416,  92  Am. 
St.  Rep.  663. 

Ifo.— State  V.  Diveling,  66  Mo.  375 ; 
Vogler  V.  Montgomery,  54  Mo.  577. 

Ifeh, — Stubendorf  v.  Hoffman,  23 
Neb.  360,  36  N.  W.  581. 

N,  C— Rankin  v.  Shaw,  94  N.  G. 
405;  Arnold  v.  Estis,  9^  N.  G.  162. 

OAio.— Roig  V.  Schults,  42  Ohio  St. 
165;   Bills  v.  Bills,  41  Ohio  St  196; 
Sears  v.  Hanks,  14  Ohio  St.  298,  84 
Am.  Dec.  378. 

8,  C— Wood  V.  Timmerman,  29  S. 
C.  175,  7  S.  E.  74. 

Te«.— Beard  v.  Blum,  64  Tex.  59. 

Va. — ^Hatcher  v.  Grews,  83  Va.  371, 
5  S.  E.  221;  Marshall  v.  Sears,  79 
Va.  49;  Boynton  v.  McNeal,  31  Gratt. 
456;  Shipe  v.  Repass,  28  Gratt.  716. 
Compare  Rose  v.  Sharpless,  33  Gratt. 
153. 

Wis, — ^Murphy  v.  Grouch,  24  Wis. 
365. 

56.    17.   fif.— Minor   v.    Wilson,   58- 


Pbopebtt^  btCv  which  Cbbditobs  mat  Reach.        163 

in  making  the  conveyance."  The  motive  may  he  bad  but  the  act 
is  not  illegal."  No  fraud  can  be  predicated  of  the  conveyance 
of  a  homestead^"  since  the  creditor  has  no  right  to  look  to  prop- 
erty so  exempted.*^  It  is  only  by  disposing  of  such  of  his  prop- 
erty as  his  creditors  have  a  legal  right  to  look  to  for  the  satis- 
faction of  their  claims  that  a  debtor  can  commit  a  fraud  upon 
his  creditors,  and  therefore  he  cannot  defraud  them  by  dispos- 
ing of  his  homestead.^^  The  conveyance  of  a  homestead  even 
though  made  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  the  payment  of  the 
grantor's  debts,  and  with  intent  to  defraud  creditors  is  not 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  since  the  debtor  may  deal  as  he  pleases 
with  exempt  property.**  A  fraudulent  conveyance  does  not  en- 
large the  rights  of  creditors,  but  merely  leaves  them  to  enforce 
their  rights  as  if  no  conveyance  had  been  made."  The  volimtary 
conveyance  made  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  of  the  proceeds  of  a 
sale  of  Iheir  homestead,  or  a  gift  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  of 
such  proceeds  as  an  inducement  to  her  to  join  in  the  sale,  is  not 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors.^     The  sale  of  his  homestead  by  a 


Fed.  616;  Pratt  ▼.  Burr,  19  Fed.  Cm. 
No.  11^72,  2  Biss.  36. 

ArJb.— Chambers  ▼.  SaUie,  29  Ark. 
407. 

Minn. — Piper  ▼.  Johnston,  12  Minn. 
60. 

N,  H, — Currier  ▼.  Sutherland,  54 
N.  H.  476,  20  Am.  Dec  143. 

8.  D, — ^Kettleschlager  v.  Ferrick,  12 
S.  D.  466,  61  N.  W.  889,  76  Am.  St. 
Rep.  623. 

Tetin. — ^Nichol  ▼.  Davidson  County, 
8  Lea,  389.  Compare  Ruohs  ▼.  Hooke, 
3  Lea,  302,  31  Am.  Rep.  642. 

Wm.— Barker  v.  Dayton,  28  Wis. 
367. 

Where  Bftomey  !•  obtained  by  a 
loam  on  the  bomostead  standing  in 
the  name  of  the  wife,  a  purchase  of 
personalty  in  the  name  of  the  wife, 
paid  for  by  a  portion  of  the  money  so 
obtained,  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  the 


creditors  of  the  husband.  Farmers' 
Trust  Co.  V.  Linn,  103  Iowa,  169,  72 
N.  W.  496. 

57.  Roser  v.  Fourth  Nat.  Bank,  66 
Kan.  129,  42  Pac.  341.  ^ 

58.  Began  v.  Cleveland,  62  Ark. 
101,  12  S.  W.  169,  20  Am.  St.  Rep. 
168. 

60.  Gibson  ▼.  Barrett  (Ark.  1906), 
87  S.  W.  436. 

60.  Nichols  V.  Eaton,  91  U.  S.  716, 
23  L.  Ed.  264. 

61.  Hixon  y.  George,  18  Kan.  253. 

62.  Wilson  v.  Taylor,  49  Kan.  774, 
31  Pac.  697;  Jolly  v.  Diehl  (Tex. 
Civ.  App.  1905),  86  S.  W.  966. 

63.  Keuvan  v.  Specker,  11  Bush 
(Ky.),  1. 

64.  Cal. — ^Wetherly  v.  Straus,  93 
Cal.  283,  28  Pac.  1046. 

Mo, — Harris  v.  Meredith,  106  Mo. 
App.  686,  81  S.  W.  203. 


164 


Fraudulent  Convbyawces. 


debtor  and  the  investment  of  the  proceeds  in  other  lands,  or  the 
convejance  bj  the  debtor  to  his  wife  or  another  of  real  estate 
received  in  exchange  for  the  homestead,  is  not  fraudulent  as 
against  creditors.^  But  where  the  land  was  not  at  the  time 
of  its  convejance  exempt'  because  of  the  debtor's  failure  to  select, 
occupy,  or  claim  the  same  as  a  homestead,^  or  because  of  its 
abandonment  by  the  debtor  as  a  homestead,"^  a  conveyance  thereof 


Tex. — Blum  y.  Light,  81  Tex.  414, 
16  8.  W.  1090;  Gatewood  v.  Scurlock, 
2  Tex.  Civ.  App.  98,  21  S.  W.  66; 
Montgomery  y.  Brown,  1  Tex.  App. 
Civ.  Cas.,  S  1305;  Allen  v.  Hall,  1 
Tex.  App.  Div.  Caa.,  %  1279. 

F*.— Keyes  v.  Rines,  37  Vt.  260,  76 
Am.  Dec.  707. 

65.  Iowa, — Jones  v.  Brandt,  59 
Iowa,  332,  10  N.  W.  854,  13  N.  W. 
310;  Officer  v.  Evans,  48  Iowa»  557. 

A'an.— Winter  v.  Ritchie,  67  Kan. 
212,  45  Pac.  595,  57  Am.  St.  Rep.  331. 

^y.— Whitt  V.  Kendall,  11  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  116,  11  S.  W.  592. 

Mo, — Stinde  v.  Behrens,  81  Mo.  254. 

A'e6. — Scheel  v.  Lackner,  4  Neb. 
(Unoff.)  221,  93  N.  W.  741. 

66.  ArA;.—Reeves  v.  Slade,  71  Ark. 
611,  77  S.  W.  54. 

CaL — ^La  Point  v.  Blanchard,  101 
Cal.  549,  36  Pac.  98,  and  the  fact  that 
the  property  is  of  such  a  nature  that 
it  could,  and  probably  would,  have 
been  set  aside  to  the  debtor  as  a 
homestead,  does  not  render  the  con- 
veyance any  the  less  a  fraud  on 
creditors. 

/nd.— Phoenix  Ins.  Co.  v.  Fielder, 
133  Ind.  557,  33  N.  E.  270. 

Mo, — Stewart  v.  Stewart,  65  Mo. 
App.  603,  such  selection  cannot  be 
made  after  the  sale  of  the  property. 

A\  H. — Currier  v.  Sutherland,  64  N. 
H.  475,  20  Am.  Rep.  143. 

fex, — Gaines  v.  National  Exch. 
Bank,    64    Tex.    18,    and    where    the 


transfer  is  made  before  judgment  on 
a  debt  existing  at  the  time,  the  debtor 
cannot  defeat  the  rights  of  a  creditor 
by  securing  a  reoonveyanoe  of  the 
land,   f 

The  xiffht  of  •zemptios  of  » 
liaiiteateAd  in  Alabama  attaches 
without  any  act  on  the  part  of  the 
exemptioner,  as  if  the  particular 
property  were  specially  claimed  and 
designated  as  exempt,  where  the  area 
and  value  of  the  homestead  do  not  ex- 
ceed the  limit  allowed  as  exempt,  and 
it  is  not  a  part  or  parcel  of  a  larger 
portion  of  land.  Pollack  v.  McNeil, 
100  Ala.  203,  13  So.  937. 

67.  U,  8, — ^Thompson  v.  McConnell, 
107  Fed.  33,  46  C.  C.  A.  124. 

Arik.--Chambers  v.  Sallie,  29  Ark. 
407. 

Iowa, — ^Belden  v.  Younger,  76  Iowa, 
567,  41  N.  W.  317. 

Miss, — ^Edmonson  v.  Meacham,  60 
Miss.  34. 

2Ve5.-^Edwards  v.  Reid,  39  Neb. 
645,  58  N.  W.  202,  42  Am.  St.  Rep. 
607. 

N,  H, — Currier  v.  Sutherland,  64 
N.  H.  475,  20  Am.  Rep.  143. 

8,  D, — Kettleschlager  v.  Ferrick. 
12  S.  D.  455,  81  N.  W.  889,  76  Am. 
St.  Rep.  623,  a  transfer  of  the  home- 
stead from  husband  to  wife,  without 
consideration,  to  prevent  creditors 
from  subjecting  such  premises  to  the 
satisfaction  of  their  claims,  in  case 
the  debtor  should  remove  therefrom* 


Pbopebty,  xtOv  which  Cbsditobs  mat  Reach. 


165 


is  within  the  statute  in  relation  to  fraudul^it  conveyances  and 
invalid  as  to  creditors  of  the  debtor.  A  debtor  forfeits  his  rights 
under  the  homestead  law  by  a  conveyance  to  defraud  his  credi- 
tors,  where,  by  statute,  their  judgments  would  be  a  lien  on  the 
land.**  The  statutes  usually  permit  a  change  of  homesteads,  and 
the  owner  of  a  homestead  may  acquire  an  entirely  new  home- 
stead on  a  sale  of  the  old  and  a  reinvestment  of  the  proceeds.^ 
The  homestead  being  a  limited  estate  under  certain  statutes, 
there  may  be  a  fraudulent  conveyance  of  the  homestead  by  the 
party  entitled  thereto  so  far  as  the  fee  after  the  expiration  of 
the  limited  estate  is  concerned,  and  the  fee  in  the  homestead  may 


and  with  other  funds  purchase  and 
ooenpy  other  premises  as  a  homestead, 
is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors. 

TesB, — ^Taylor  v.  Ferguson,  87  Tex. 
1,  26  S.  W.  46;  Baines  v.  Baker,  60 
Tex.  139,  a  conveyance  of  homestead 
by  husband  to  wife,  after  its  abandon- 
menty  to  protect  it  from  the  claims 
of  creditors,  is  fraudulent  as  to  the 
husband's  creditors,  and  will  be  an- 
nulled at  their  instance;  Cox  ▼. 
Shropshire,  26  Tex.  113;  Willis  y. 
Pounds,  6  Tex.  Civ.  App.  512,  26  S. 
W.  716;  Rives  v.  Stephens  (Tex.  Civ. 
App.),  28  S.  W.  707. 

TFi».^Barker  v.  Dayton,  28  Wis. 

367. 
A  boBMstead  is  mot  alimadomed 

unless  there  is  an  intent  to  make  a 
change  of  residence  and  an  actual 
change.  Mallard  v.  First  Nat.  Bank 
(Neb.),  69  N.  W.  767;  Edwards  v. 
Reid,  39  Neb.  646,  68  N.  W.  202,  42 
Am.  St.  Rep.  607.  See  also  Carroll  v. 
Dawson,  103  Ky.  736,  46  S.  W.  222, 
20  Ky.  L.  Rep.  349;  Willis  v.  Pounds, 
6  Tex.  av.  App.  512,  25  S.  W.  716. 

The  leffftl  title  to  a  honieotoad 
dooeoada,  on  the  death  of  the  owner 
intestate,  to  his  widow  and  children, 
and  gives  such  children  a  valuable  in- 


terest, which  they  cannot  convey  in 
fraud  of  their  creditors;  and  a  volun- 
tary conveyance  of  its  interest  therein 
by  a  child  not  occupying  it  to  the 
widow  who  continues  to  occupy  it,  in 
fraud  of  creditors  of  such  child,  will 
be  set  aside.  HoUinger  v.  Boatman's 
Bank,  69  Kan.  619,  77  Pae.  263. 

A  eowt  of  equity  will  emmoel  a 
tmat  deedy  at  the  instance  of  a 
creditor  of  one  of  the  heirs  of  a 
grantor,  where  it  was  made  without 
consideration  and  with  intent  to  de- 
fraud the  grantor's  creditors,  and  was 
kept  apparently  alive  after  the 
grantor's  death,  with  intent  to  de- 
fraud creditors  of  her  heirs,  by  collu- 
sion between  her  heirs  and  her 
grantee.  Dorroh  v.  Holberg  (Miss.), 
26  So.  661. 

68.  Piper  v.  Johnston,  12  Minn.  60. 

60.  In  re  Johnson  (U.  S.  D.  C. 
Iowa),  118  Fed.  312;  Richards  v.  Orr, 
118  Iowa,  724,  92  N.  W.  656;  Greene 
V.  Root  (U.  S.  D.  C.  Iowa),  62  Fed. 
191 ;  Winter  v.  Ritchie,  67  Kan.  212, 
46  Pac.  595,  67  Am.  St.  Rep.  331; 
Harris  v.  Meredith  (Mo.  App.),  81 
S.  W.  203;  Scheel  v.  Lackner,  4  Neb. 
(Unoff.)  221,  93  N.  W.  741. 


106 


Fraudulent  Convetakces. 


be  subjected  to  the  payment  of  the  debts  of  its  owner,  subject  ta 
the  homestead  right.^ 

§  43.  Homestead  included  in  conveyance  of  other  property. 
— ^Where  a  debtor  conveys  lands  which  include  property  occupied 
by  him  as  a  homestead  and  exempt  as  such  and  other  property 
which  is  not  exempt,  the  conveyance  is  valid  as  to  the  homestead 
as  against  the  creditors  of  the  debtor,  although  void  in  respect 
to  such  other  land.  The  creditors  may  reach  the  property  so 
conveyed  which  is  not  exempt,  if  the  conveyance  thereof  is 
fraudulent  as  to  them.^^  Where  the  property  conveyed  by  the 
debtor  is  of  greater  area  or  value  than  the  homestead  exemption 
to  which  he  is  entitled  imder  the  statute,  the  excess  in  area  or 
surplus  in  value  over  the  exemption  may  be  reached  and  sub- 
jected by  his  creditors.^    Where  the  property  conveyed  exceeds 


70.  Chambers  v.  Sallie,  29  Ark. 
407;  Younger  v.  Ritchie,  116  N.  C. 
782,  21  8.  E.  Oil;  Miller  ▼.  Leeper, 
120  Mo.  466,  25  S.  W.  378;  Hannah 
V.  Hannah,  109  Mo.  236,  19  S.  W.  87 ; 
Schaffer  v.  Beldsmeier,  107  Mo.  314, 
17  S.  W.  797;  Kirksville  Sav.  Bank 
v.  Spangler,  59  Mo.  App.  172.  But 
see  Bank  of  Versailles  t.  Guthrey, 
127  Mo.  189,  29  8.  W.  1004,  48  Am. 
St.  Rep.  621,  overruling  the  preced- 
ing Missouri  cases  and  holding  that 
the  homestead  includes  the  fee  and 
that  they  are  not  two  separable  and 
devisible  interests. 

71.  U,  fif.— Thompson  v.  McDon- 
nell, 107  Fed.  33,  46  A.  C.  124;  Far- 
well  V.  Kerr,  28  Fed.  345. 

/ZL— Bell  V.  Devore,  96  111.  217. 

ye6.— Brown  v.  CampbeU  (1903), 
93  N.  W.  1007. 

y,  C. — Crummeo  v.  Bennet,  68  N. 
C.  494. 

8,  C— McNair  v.  Moore,  64  8.  O. 
82,  41  8.  E.  829. 

Tenn, — Gibbs  v.  Patten,  2  Lea,  180. 

Tew, — Freeman  v.  Hamblin,  1  Tex. 


Civ.  App.  157,  21  8.  W.  1019,  a  part 
of  homestead  included  by  mistake. 

F^.— Danforth  v.  Beattie,  48  Vi. 
138. 

72.  U.  8, — ^Thompson  v.  McOob> 
nell,  107  Fed.  33,  46  G.  G.  A.  124,  ex- 
cess inadvertently  included. 

Arh. — Gampbell  v.Jmies,  52  Ark. 
493,  12  8.  W.  1016,  6  L.  R.  A.  783. 

/U.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Rhea,  155 
ni.  434,  40  N.  E.  551;  Quinn  t. 
People,  146  lU.  275,  34  N.  E.  148; 
MuUer  ▼.  Inderreiden,  79  III.  382. 

Ky, — Gincinnati  Tobacco  Ware- 
house Go.  V.  Matthews,  24  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  2445,  74  8.  W.  242;  WUson  t. 
Galvert,  15  Ky.  L.  Rep.  489,  24  S. 
W.  3. 

Minn, — Baldwin  y.  Rogers,  28 
Minn.  544,  11  N.  W.  77. 

Jfeh, — Brown  v.  Gampbell  (1903), 
93  N.  W.  1007;  Hicks  y.  Black,  If 
Neb.  339,  27  N.  W.  230. 

N.  C— Dortch  v.  Benton,  98  N.  C. 
190,  3  S.  E.  638,  2  Am.  8t.  Rep.  331. 

8,  O, — Aultman  y.  8alinas,  44  S.  G. 
299,  22  8.  £.  465. 


FftOPEBTT,  ETC.,  WHIOH  CbEDITOBS  HAY  ReAOH.  167 

the  amount  of  Uie  homestead  exemption^  the  creditors  can  subject 
it  and  sell  the  entire  tract,  if  indivisible,  or  allot  the  homestead 
to  the  extent  of  the  exemption  and  subject  the  balance.^ 

§  44.  Crops  grown  on  homestead. — Where  growing  crops  or 
crops  grown  on  the  homestead  of  a  debtor  are  exempted  by 
statute  from  levy  and  sale  on  execution,  a  conveyance  of  them 
cannot  be  fraudulent  as  against  creditors.''*  Though  growing 
crops,  unless  reserved,  pass  under  a  conveyance  of  the  land,  they 
are  subject  to  levy  and  sale  the  same  as  other  personal  property ; 
and,  where  a  debtor  conveys  land  which  at  the  time  is  exempt 
as  a  homestead,  without  consideration  or  with  intent  to  defraud 
creditors,  the  latter  may  subject  to  their  claims  the  growing 
crops  which  were  on  the  land  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance, 
where  they  are  not  exempted  by  statute.''^  But,  although  crops 
grown  on  the  homestead  owned  by  the  husband  are  subject  to  his 
debts,  the  fact  that  a  transfer  of  the  homestead  from  the  hus- 
band to  the  wife  passes  title  to  subsequent  crops  to  her  does  not 
make  sudi  transfer  fraudulent  as  to  the  husband's  creditors, 
since  it  merely  passes  title  to  the  land,  the  subsequent  crops 
having  no  value  in  law." 

%  45.  Purchase  of  homestead  and  payment  of  liens. — ^The 


yt.^Danforth   t.   Beattle,   43   Vt. 

138. 
Fa.— Hatcher  v.  Crews,  83  Vt.  871, 

5  S.  E.  221. 

Wia. — Commerce  Bank  ▼.  Fowler, 
5)3  Wis.  241,  67  N.  W.  423;  Bozek  v. 
Reddnaki,  87  Wis.  625,  58  N.  W. 
262. 

"BwtehMwe  momey  credited  iipom 
homestead  allowAaee. — Where  a 
frauduleiit  grantor  is  unlawfullj 
paid  a  portion  of  the  purchase 
money,  and,  in  an  action  to  marshal 
liens  and  for  a  sale  on  execution  of 
grantor's  remaining  interest^  an  al- 
lowance in  lien  of  homestead  is  made 


to  such  grantor,  the  amount  so  un- 
lawfully paid  may  be  credited  upon 
such  homestead  allowance.  Johnson 
T.  Bumside,  7  Ohio  N.  P.  74,  8  Ohio 
S.  &  C.  P.  Dec.  412. 

73.  Wilson  v.  Calvert,  15  Ky.  L. 
Eep.  489,  24  S.  W.  3 ;  Doyle  v.  First 
Nat  Bank  (Tex.  Civ.  App.)  50  8.  W. 
480. 

74.  Eaves  v.  Williams,  10  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  423,  31  8.  W.  86,  unpicked 
cotton  growing  on  homestead. 

76.  Erickson  v.  Patterson,  47 
Minn.  525,  50  N.  W.  699. 

76.  Olson  V.  O'Conner,  9  N.  D.  604, 
84  N.  W.  359,  81  Am.  8t  Rep.  696. 


168 


FbAUBULBNT   CoNVSYAlfOSS. 


rule  is  well  established  tliat  it  is  not  frauduleD^  as  against  credi- 
tors, either  existing  or  subsequent,  for  a  debtor,  althouj^  insol* 
vent,  to  exercise  his  right  to  create  a  homestead  out  of  his  prop- 
erty, or  to  purchase,  with  his  non-exempt  money  or  other  non- 
exempt  property,  other  property  with  the  intent  to  hold  it  as 
a  homestead,^  even  though  he  procures  the  legal  title  to  be  in- 
vested in  his  wife.^  The  transfer  by  one  partner,  although  in 
failing  circumstances,  of  all  his  firm  interest,  constituting  all  his 
available  assets,  to  his  copartners,  in  exchange  for  a  homeeteadt 
or  other  use  of  non-exempt  partnership  property  in  purchasing 
a  homestead,  is  not  a  fraud  upon  creditors.^  The  rule  does  not 
apply  as  to  existing  creditors,  where  the  statute  does  not  exempt 


77.  U,  flr.— In  re  Wilson,  123  Fed. 
20,  50  C.  G.  A.  100;  In  re  Stone,  116 
Fed.  35,  moving  into  &  building  after 
insolyencv  and  in  contemplation  of 
bankmptcy  doea  not  defeat  the  right 
to  a  homestead  exemption  therein; 
Kelly  y.  Sparks,  54  Fed.  70. 

Ato.— Kelley  v.  Connell,  110  Ala. 
543,  18  So.  9. 

Cal, — Simonson  v.  Burr,  121  Cal. 
582,  64  Pac.  87 ;  Fitzell  ▼.  Leaky,  72 
Cal.  477,  14  Pfcc.  198. 

Colo.— McPhee  v.  OHourke,  10 
Colo.  301,  15  Pac.  420,  3  Am.  St. 
Bep.  579. 

III.— <:;ipperly  ▼.  Rhodes,  53  111. 
346. 

Kan, — ^Hixon  y.  George,  18  Kan. 
253. 

Mass. — ^Tucker  y.  Drake,  11  Allen, 
145. 

JTiolk.— Meigs  y.  Dibble,  73  Mich. 
101,  40  N.  W.  935. 

Minn, — Jacoby  y.  Falkland  Distil- 
ling Co.,  41  Minn.  227,  43  N.  W.  52. 

Miss. — Edmonson  y.  Meacham,  50 
Miss.  34. 

2^ed.— Paxton  y.  Sutton,  53  Neb. 
81»  73  N.  W.  221,  68  Am.  St.  Bep. 
589. 


N.  ff.— Gknre  y.  Oampbell,  62  N.  H. 
401. 

Tew. — Chase  y.  Swayne,  88  Tex. 
218,  30  S.  W.  1049,  53  Am.  St  Rep. 
742;  North  y.  Sheam,  15  Tex.  174; 
Finn  y.  Knit,  13  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  36, 
34  S.  W.  1013. 

Wis. — ^Kapemidc  y.  Louk,  90  Wis. 
232,  62  N.  W.  1057. 

Contra. — ^In  re  Boothroyd,  3  Fed. 
Cas.  Na  1,652;  Pratt  y.  Bnrr,  19 
Fed.  Cas.  No.  11,372,  5  Biss.  36;  In 
re  Sauthoff,  21  Fed.  Cas.  No.  12,380, 
8  Biss.  36;  In  re  Wright^  30  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  18,067,  3  Biss.  359. 

78.  U.  fif.— First  Nat.  Bank  y. 
Glass,  79  Fed.  706,  25  C.  C.  A.  151; 
Backer  y.  Meyer,  43  Fed.  702. 

Ala. — ^Beeyes  y.  Petennan,  109 
Ala.  366,  19  So.  512. 

/tt.— Cipperly  y.  Rhodes,  53  111. 
346. 

Kan. — ^Monroe  y.  May,  9  Kan.  466. 

N.  H. — Goye  y.  Campbell,  62  N.  H. 
401.  See  also  Discharge  of  mortgage 
on  homestead,  chap.  XI,  S  18,  infra. 

Contra. — ^Rogers  y.  McCauIey,  22 
Minn.  384;  Simmer  y.  SawteUe,  8 
Minn.  309. 

79.  Bell  y.  Beadey,  18  Tex.  Qiy. 


Pbopebtt^  etc.^  whioh  Crbditobs  may  Risaoh. 


169 


tbe  homeetead  from  liability  for  debts  contracted  before  its  ac- 
qnisition.*^  On  the  principle  of  tlie  rule  first  above  stated,  the 
creditors  of  a  debtor  cannot  subject  his  homeetead  to  the  pay- 
ment of  their  claims  because  the  debtor,  while  insolvent,  appro- 
priated money  or  other  property  in  his  hands  to  the  payment  of 
a  debt  which  was  a  lien  on  the  homestead,  by  mortgage  or  other- 
wise." 

§  46.  Improvements. — ^The  fact  that  a  person,  knowing  him- 
self to  be  insolvent,  invests  money  in  improvements  on  his  home- 
stead, so  as  to  keep  it  from  his  creditors,  will  not  prevent  the 
exemption  of  the  homestead  from  forced  sale  for  payment  of 
his  debts,  or  subject  such  improvements  to  the  claims  of  his 
creditors,  where  the  value  does  not  exceed  the  ezemption,"  unless 
there  is  a  statutory  provision  to  the  contrary.^  The  head  of  a 
family,  although  insolvent  and  largely  indebted,  may  invest  his 
money  or  property  in  homestead  improvements  to  any  extent, 
and  have  the  same  exempt  from  execution,  under  the  provisions 
of  the  Texas  constitution,  placing  no  limit  on  the  value  of  such 
improvements.^ 


App.  639,  45  8.  W.  401.  See  also 
Blancliard  v.  Paechal,  68  Ga.  32,  45 
Am.  Rep.  474 ;  Hunnicutt  v.  Summey, 
63  Oa.  586.  Contra. — ^In  re  Booth- 
royd,  supra;  In  re  Sauthoff,  supra, 

80.  Fish  ▼.  Hunt,  81  Ky.  584,  a 
debtor  will  not  be  permitted  to  ex- 
pend his  money  in  improving  land 
which  he  hae  nev«r  occupied  as  a 
homestead,  to  the  injury  of  cred- 
itors whose  claim  existed  prior  to  the 
expenditure. 

81.  U.  K.— In  re  Wilson,  123  Fed. 
20,  59  C.  C.  A.  100;  In  re  Henkel, 
11  Fed.  Gas.  No.  6,362,  2  Sawy.  305. 

Ark, — Flash  v.  Tindall,  39  Ark. 
571. 

Ca<.— Randall  v.  BnfBington,  10 
OaL  491. 


Kan. — Sproul  y,  Atdiison  Nat. 
Bank,  22  Kan.  336. 

TFmT^.— Bradley  ▼.  Gotdan,  12 
Wash.  71,  40  Pac.  623. 

Wis. — ^Palmer  v.  Hawes,  80  Wis. 
474,  50  N.  W.  341. 

82.  Kelly  v.  Sparks,  54  Fed.  70; 
In  re  Parks,  18  Fed.  Gas.  No.  10,765 ; 
Chase  v.  Swayne,  88  Tex.  218,  30  S. 
W.  1049,  53  Am.  St.  Rep.  742,  rev'g 
29  8.  W.  418. 

S3.  Fish  y.  Hunt,  81  Ky.  584; 
Butler  ▼.  Davis,  15  Ky.  L.  Rep.  273, 
23  S.  W.  220.  Compare  Nichols  v. 
Sennitt,  78  Ky.  630;  Thomas  v.  Lucas 
(Ky.  1898),  45  S.  W.  68. 

84.  Chase  y.  Swayne,  supra. 


170 


Fbaudulbnt  Contbtakoxs. 


§  47.  Insurance  on  homestead. — It  is  not  a  fraud  upon  credi- 
tors^ under  the  homestead  law,  for  a  debtor  to  use  his  means  to 
procure  insurance  upon  his  homestead.^  Insurance  money  de- 
rived from  a  policy  on  homestead  improvements,  which  imder 
the  Texas  constitution  are  exempt  from  forced  sale,  is  likewise 
exempt,  and  the  amount  of  money  derived  from  suoh  an  in- 
surance policy  which  may  be  protected  from  the  owner's  debts 
cannot  be  limited  to  an  amount  reasonably  sufficient  to  build  a 
house  for  the  family  to  live  in,  there  being  no  limit  on  the  value 
of  improvements  which  shall  be  exempt** 


§  48.  Change  in  character  of  property  and  following  pro- 
ceeds.— The  property  of  a  debtor,  as  a  general  rule^  cannot  be 
placed  beyond  the  reach  of  his  creditors  by  changing  its  form 
or  character,  or  by  substituting  other  property,  since  the  sub- 
stituted property  will  stand  in  the  place  of  the  property  fraudu- 
lently conveyed  and  be  liable  in  the  same  manner  to  the  creditors 
of  the  vendor.*^  For  example,  though  one  may  give  away  exempt 
property,  his  creditors  may  attack  as  fraudulent  a  transaction  by 
which  he  sells  exempt  property  and  with  the  proceeds  buys  non- 
exempt  property,  taking  title  in  another  to  put  it  beyond  the 
reach  of  his  creditors."  Where  property  fraudulently  conveyed 
has  been  transferred  to  a  corporation  in  exchange  for  corporate 
stock,  such  stock  is  subject  to  the  claims  of  the  grantor's  oredi« 
tors.**     The  defrauded  creditor  may  either  affirm  the  sale  and 


85.  Bemheim-  v.  Davitt,  9  Ey.  L. 
Kep.  229,  6  S.  W.  103. 

86.  Chase  ▼.  Swayne,  8S  Tex.  21S, 
30  a  W.  1049,  63  Am.  St.  Hep.  742, 
rev*g  29  8.  W.  418,  insurance  money 
on  costly  house  as  a  homestead  held 
exempt  to  the  extent  of  $60,000. 

87.  Abney  ▼.  Kingsland,  10  Ala. 
366,  44  Am.  Deo.  491 ;  Brown  t.  Mat- 
thaus,  14  Minn.  206;  Fleury  ▼. 
Pringle,  26  Grant  Ch.  (U.  0.)  67; 
and  other  oases  cited  in  the  following 
notes. 


See,  at  to  Properly  porehaaed  in 
the  name  of  a  third  person,  chap.  11, 
S  5,  supra,  chap.  IV,  {  29,  s«pra;  as 
to  Improvements  on  property  of  third 
person,  chap.  II,  {  S,  supn,  chap. 
IV,  S  24,  supra;  as  to  Change  to  ex- 
empt property,  chap.  IV,  S  41,  supra. 

88.  McLeod  v.  McLsod,  2S  Ky.  L. 
Kep.  284,  89  S.  W.  199,  90  S.  W.  6. 

89.  Beidler  t.  Crane,  136  El.  92, 
26  N.  E.  666,  26  Am.  St.  Rep.  349, 
ajf  ^  22  ni.  App.  638. 


Pbopbbty,  btc,  which  Cbkditoes  mat  Ebaoh,       171 

go  for  the  price,  or  he  may  impeach  it  aa  fraudulent  and  follow 
the  goods  or  their  proceeds.*^  A  creditors'  suit  will  lie  to  reach 
personal  property  fraudulently  transferred,  and  it  will  bind  other 
articles  purchased  to  supply  the  waste  of  ordinary  wear  and 
tear.*^  A  complaining  creditor  has  Ihe  right  to  follow  the  fund 
or  proceeds  of  a  fraudulent  sale  or  conveyance  into  any  prop- 
erty in  which  it  may  have  been  invested,  so  far  as  it  can  be 
traced,  and  into  the  possession  of  any  person  not  a  bona  fide 
owner  or  holder  thereof.**    The  proceeds  of  sales  under  f raudu- 


OO.  NicholBon  v.  Leavitt,  6  N.  Y. 
Super.  Ct  262,  but  he  cannot  hold 
the  buyer  liable  for  the  proceeds 
when  he  has  received  neither. 

91.  McCloakey  v.  Stewart,  «3 
How.  Pr.   (N.  Y.)   137. 

92.  N.  y.— MandevUle  ▼.  Avery, 
124  N.  Y.  376,  29  N.  E.  961,  21  Am. 
St.  Rep.  678,  reVg  57  Hun,  78,  10  N. 
Y.  Supp.  323;  Durand  v.  Hankerson, 
39  N.  Y.  287,  the  court  may  order 
the  payment  of  a  mortgage,  given  l>y 
the  grantee  for  the  price,  to  a  re- 
ceiver, to  be  applied  on  plaintiflTs 
judgment;  Lawrence  v.  Bank  of  Be- 
public,  86  N.  Y.  320;  McConihe  v. 
Derby,  62  Hun,  90,  16  N.  Y.  Supp. 
474;  Hedges  v.  Polhemus,  9  Misc. 
Rep.  680,  30  N.  Y.  Supp.  566.  Com-^ 
pare  McCaffrey  v.  Hlckey,  66  Barb. 
489 ;  Henderson  v.  Brooks,  3  Thomps. 
A  G.  445. 

17.  flf.— Stewart  v.  Piatt,  101  U.  S. 
731,  26  L.  Ed.  816;  Clements  v. 
Nicholson,  6  Wall.  299,  18  L.  Ed.  786. 

AlOw— Metcalf  v.  Arnold  (1902), 
32  So.  763;  Weingarten  v.  Marcus, 
121  Ala.  187,  25  So.  862;  Birming- 
ham Shoe  Co.  V.  Torrey,  121  Ala.  89, 
25  So.  763;  Diddnson  v.  National 
Bank  of  Republic,  98  Ala.  646,  14 
So.  660;  Bryant  v.  Young,  21  Ala. 
264;  Carville  v.  Stout,  10  Ala.  796. 


Ark, — ^Bryant-Brown  Shoe  Co.  v. 
Block,  52  Ark.  458,  12  S.  W.  1073. 

Colo, — ^Forrester  v.  Gill,  11  Colo. 
App.  410,  53  Pac.  230. 

Fte.—Mayer  v.  Wilkins,  37  Fla. 
244,  19  So.  632. 

lU. — French  v.  Commercial  Nat. 
Bank,  199  lU.  213,  66  N.  E.  262, 
aifg  97  ni.  App.  633;  HaU  v. 
Stroufe,  52  HI.  421;  Steere  v.  Hoag- 
land,  50  111.  377,  39  HI.  264. 

/fid— Phelps  V.  Smith,  116  Ind. 
387,  17  N.  E.  602,  19  N.  E.  156;  Blair 
V.  Smith,  114  Ind.  114,  16  N.  E.  817, 
6  Am.  St.  Rep.  693,  where  a  husband 
having  no  property  subject  to  execu- 
tion, invests  his  funds  in  his  wife's 
lands,  colluding  with  her  to  defraud 
his  creditors  thereby,  and  his  wife 
afterwards  sells  the  land,  and  retains 
the  proceeds,  she  will  be  regarded  in 
equity  as  trustee  for  the  husband's 
judgment  creditors. 

Iowa, — Shumaker  v.  Davidson,  116 
Iowa,  669,  87  N.  W.  441,  but  he  can- 
not take  both  the  land  and  the  con- 
sideration therefor;  Davis  v.  Gibbon, 

24  Iowa,  267. 

ITy.— Treadway  v.  Turner,  10  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  949,  10  S.  W.  816. 

If 0._Sparrow  v.  Chesley,   19  Me. 

79. 
KoM.— Robinson  v.  Bliss,  121  Mass. 

428. 


172 


Fkai7dui«bht  Convstasgbs. 


lent  judgments  are  within  this  mla**  But  if  the  property  has 
been  destrojed  bj  time  or  accident,  or  sold  and  delivered  to  an 
innocent  person,  for  a  valuable  consideration,**  or  has  been  ob- 
tained in  good  faith  by  the  creditors  of  the  transferee  on  executitm 
sale^**  or  has  been  reconveyed  or  paid  over  to  the  fraudulent 
grantor,^  or  to  his  other  creditors,*'  the  creditor's  remedy  is  gone. 
So,  where  the  judgment  creditor  has  a  plain  and  adequate  remedy 
at  law,**  or  his  rigjht  to  readi  and  subject  the  land  or  other 


Mieh, — Brennahan  v.  Nugent,  92 
Mich.  76,  92  N.  W.  735;  Kinter  t. 
Pickard,  67  Mich.  125,  34  N.  W.  535. 

Mis9, — ^Bemheim  ▼.  Beer,  56  MUs. 
149;  EdiiM»80ii  v.  Meacham,  50  Mibs. 
34;  Carlisle  v.  Tindall,  49  Miss.  229. 

Veh.SeU  y.  Hocknell,  62  Neb. 
101,  S6  N.  W.  905,  63  Neb.  503,  8S 
N.  W.  767. 

y.  ^.— Outterson  t.  Morse,  58  N. 
H.  529;  Coolidge  ▼.  Melyin,  42  N.  H. 
510. 

Po.— Heath  ▼.  Page,  63  Pa.  St.  108, 
3  Am.  Bep.  533. 

reiMt.— wmiamaon  v.  Williams,  79 
Tenn.  355. 

Tm, — Schultze  ▼.  Schultse  (Civ. 
App.  1901),  66  S.  W.  56;  Heath  v. 
First  Nat.  Bank,  19  Tex.  Civ.  App. 
63,  46  8.  W.  123,  so  far  only  as  pro- 
ceeds of  a  fraudulent  conveyance  of 
property  go  to  the  purchase  of  other 
lands  by  the  fraudulent  grantee  can 
such  lands  be  subjected  to  the  debts 
of  the  grantor. 

Fa.^Burbridge  ▼.  Higgins,  6  Qratt. 
119. 

Wi#. — ^Bank  of  Commerce  ▼.  Fow- 
ler, 93  Wis.  241,  67  N.  W.  423. 

Can, — ^Bfasuret  v.  Stewart,  22  Out. 
290.  See  also,  as  to  Rights  and  lia- 
bilities of  the  grantee  and  those  claim- 
ing under  him,  chap.  XIV,  S  24,  infra, 

93.  Taggart  v.  Phillips,  5  Del.  Ch. 
237;     French    t.    Commercial    Nat. 


Bank,  199  HI.  213,  65  N.  E.  252; 
Phelpe  V.  Smith,  116  Ind.  387,  17  N. 
E.  602,  10  N.  E.  156;  Kohl  ▼.  Sulli- 
van, 140  Pa.  St.  35,  21  Atl.  247.  See 
also  Judgments,  chap.  II,  S  10,  Miprti. 

04.  Mandeville  v.  Aveiy,  124  N.  Y. 
376,  26  N.  £.  951,  21  Am.  St.  Rep. 
678;  Heath  v.  Page,  63  Pa.  St  108. 
3  Am.  Rep.  533;  Richards  v.  Ewing, 
30  Tenn.  327;  Simpson  v.  Simpson,  26 
Tenn.  275;  and  other  cases  cited  in 
last  preceding  note.  See  also  Rights 
and  liabilities  of  bona  fide  purchas- 
ers from  grantee,  chap.  XIV,  S  54, 
infra. 

06.  Standard  Nat  Bank  v.  Gar- 
field Nat  Bank,  70  App.  Dfv.  (N.  T.) 
46,  75  N.  T.  Supp.  28.  See  also 
Rights  and  liabilities  of  grantees  as 
to  creditors,  chap.  XIV,  {  24,  ir^ra. 

96.  Schneider  v.  Pktton,  175  Mo. 
684,  75  S.  W.  155.  See  also  Rights 
and  liabilities  of  grantees  as  to  credi- 
tors and  subsequent  purchasers,  chap. 
XIV,  SS  24-48,  infra, 

97.  Steerav.Hoagland,50  111.  377; 
Kitts  V.  Willson,  140  Ind.  604,  39  N. 
E.  313.  See  also  Rights  and  liabili- 
ties of  grantees  aa  to  creditors  and 
subsequent  purchasers,  chap.  XIV,  ${ 
24-48,  infra, 

98.  Davis  v.  Tonge  (Ark.  1905), 
85  S.  W.  90.  See  also  Rnnedies  in 
equity,  chap.  XV,  S  23,  infra. 


Fbopbbtt^  bto.>  whioh  Cseditobs  may  Beaoh.       173 

property  conveyed  in  fraud  of  creditors  is  barred  by  his  laches 
or  by  the  statute  of  limitations,^  he  cannot  sue  to  subject  other 
land  or  property  purchased  with  the  property  originally  con- 
veyed or  the  proceeds  of  said  property.  The  creditor  cannot 
reach  and  subject  to  the  payment  of  his  claim  money  or  prop* 
erty  which  is  the  result  of  the  capital  or  labor  of  the  grantee,  al- 
though applied  in  the  use  of  the  property  fraudulently  trans- 
ferred.^ The  fact  that  the  purchase  of  a  ^tore  and  stock  of 
goods  is  constructively  fraudulent  does  not  affect  the  title  of  the 
purchaser  to  other  goods  which  he  has  afterwards  purchased 
with  the  proceeds  of  sales  from  the  store  and  put  into  the  stock, 
and  they  cannot  be  reached  and  subjected  by  creditors.'  It  has 
been  held  that  the  statutes  of  Elizabeth  and  similar  statutes  en- 
able creditors  to  subject  the  specific  properly  fraudulently  con- 
veyed, while  in  the  hands  of  the  fraudulent  donee  or  vendee,  to 
the  satisfaction  of  their  claims,  but  they  do  not  enable  them  to 
subject  the  proceeds  of  a  sale  of  the  property,  or  other  property, 
purchased  therewith,  since  the  statutes  only  apply  to  property 
conveyed  by  the  debtor,  and,  therefore,  any  trust  resulting  in 
favor  of  the  creditors  of  the  debtor  must  be  worked  out  in  equity, 
and  the  remedy  of  the  creditors  to  reabh  such  proceeds  or  prop- 
erty is  in  equity.* 

§  49.  Stock  in  trade  sold  in  bulk. — ^Where  a  sale  of  merchan- 
dise in  bulk  is  not  in  compliance  with  a  statute  requiring  notice 
to  creditors  of  a  proposed  sale,  it  is  void  as  to  creditors  on  the 
ground  of  fraud,  and  a  creditor  of  the  vendor  may  proceed  by  at- 
tachment against  his  fraudulent  vendor.^    Such  a  statute  has  been 


00.  Mickel  v.  WalraTen,  92  Iowa, 
423,  60  N.  W.  683. 

1.  Peters  ▼.  Light,  76  Pa.  St.  289. 
See  also  Crops  and  other  products, 
chap.  IV,  S  26,  Bupra. 

ft,  Capron  v.  Porter,  43  Conn.  383; 
Lucas  ▼.  Birdsej,  41  Conn.  367. 

3.  Kinier  v.  Pickard,  67  Mich.  126, 
34  N.  W.  636;  Henderson  v.  Hoke,  21 


N.  C.  119;  Richards  ▼.  Ewing,  30 
Tenn.  327;  Tubb  ▼.  VtTilliams,  26  Tenn. 
366. 

4.  W.  B.  Parham  ft  Co.  v.  Potts- 
Thompson  Liquor  Co.,  127  Oa.  303,  56 
S.  E.  460 ;  CSarstarphen  Warehouse  Co. 
V.  Fried,  124  Ga.  644.  A  sale  bj  a 
storekeeper  at  private  sale  of  all  but 
a  few  dollars'  worth  of  the  balance  of 


174 


FSAUDULENT   CoWVEYAHOBS, 


held  to  apply  to  the  sale  of  a  stock  of  goods  by  a  debtor  to  a 
creditor  in  extinguishment  of  his  debt,  and  a  sale  made  in  dis- 
regard of  the  act  to  be  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  other 
creditors  of  the  common  debtor.^    On  the  other  hand  it  has  been 
held  that  where  the  stock  of  a  debtor  transferred  to  a  creditor  was 
insufficient  to  satisfy  the  creditor's  debt,  there  was  no  occasion 
for  the  creditor's  demanding  an  affidavit  and  list  of  creditors  as 
provided  by  a  statute  regulating  sales  in  bulk.*    Where  the  sale 
and  delivery  of  goods  is  not  a  sale  in  bulk  outside  of  the  ordinary 
course  of  business,  prohibited  by  the  statute,  and  the  buyer  is  a 
purchaser  for  value  and  in  good  faith,  the  transaction  cannot  be 
impeached  by  the  seller's  creditors.*^    The  purchaser  of  a  stock  of 
goods  in  bulk  without  complying  with  the  provisions  of  the  statute 
becomes  a  trustee  of  the  property  purchased  and  responsible  to 
the  seller's  creditors  for  the  disposition  of  it.^    A  sale  of  all  the 
property  belonging  to  a  livery  stable  business  has  been  held  not 
to  be  a  sale  of  goods,  wares,  and  merchandise  within  the  meaning 
of  such  a  statute,*  and  a  sale  by  a  saloonkeeper,  holding  a  lease 
of  a  saloon  for  a  year,  with  the  right  to  renew  the  same  from 
year  to  year  so  long  as  he  bought  beer  from  the  landlord  who 
owned  the  building  and  fixtures,  of  his  business  and  sto(&  of 
goods,  has  been  held  not  to  be  a  sale  of  a  stock  of  merchandise  in 
bulk  within  the  meaning  of  such  a  statute.^^    But  the  sale  of  a 
drug  store  and  business  conducted  as  a  business  separate  and  in- 


his  fltock,  after  selling  at  auction  part 
of  it,  18  witiiin  the  statute.  Fitz 
Henry  ▼.  Hunter,  33  Wash.  629,  74 
Pac.  1003. 

A  seller  of  coocU  does  not  be* 
eome  »  ereditor  of  the  buyer 
within  the  meaning  of  the  statute 
until  the  goods  sold  or  a  portion  of 
them  have  been  delivered.  Hardwick 
V.  Gettier,  43  Wash.  644,  86  Pac.  943. 

5.  Sampson  v.  Brandon  Grocery  Oo., 
127  Ga.  454,  66  S.  E.  488. 

6.  Petersen  v.  Doak  (Wash.  1906), 
86   Pac.    663,     since   an    indiyidual, 


though  insolvent  or  in  failing  circum- 
stances, is  entitled  to  pay  or  secure 
one  of  his  creditors  to  the  ezdusioo 
of  others,  even  if  in  so  doing  he  ex- 
hausts the  whole  of  his  property. 

7.  Hart  v.  Brierley,  189  Mass.  598, 
76  N.  E.  286. 

8.  Kohn  V.  Fishbach,  36  Wash.  69, 
78  Pac.  199. 

0.   Everett  Produce  Go.  v.  Smith 
Bros.,  40  Wash.  566,  82  Pac  906. 

10.  Pritz  V.  Jones,  117  App.  Div. 
(N.  T.)  643,  102  N.  T.  Svpp.  641. 


Pbopsbtt,  stOv  which  Cseditobs  1£At  Reaoh.       176 


dependent  from  a  general  store  conducted  by  the  debtor/^  and  the 
sale  of  the  business  and  appliances  of  a  boarding  house  and 
restaurant,^  has  been  held  within  the  provisions  of  such  a  statute. 
Such  a  statute  has  been  held  not  to  apply  to  a  merchant's  fixtures 
not  intended  for  sale  in  the  usual  course  of  his  business/'  to  a 
^ash  register  which  is  not  a  part  of  the  goods  kept  for  sale/^  or 
to  the  sale  of  the  entire  product  of  a  bakery,  the  business  being 
such  as  to  require  frequent  sales  of  the  entire  stock  in  order  to 
prevent  the  product  becoming  stale  and  unsalable.^^  Such  a  stat- 
ute has  no  application  to  a  sale  of  a  stock  of  goods  imder  a  duly 
recorded  mortgage  of  the  stock,  given  for  a  valuable  considera- 
tion and  free  from  fraud."  Such  statutes  apply  to  and  protect 
all  the  creditors  of  the  vendor,"  but  a  sale  by  a  partnership,  with- 
out compliance  with  the  terms  of  the  statute,  although  void  as 
against  firm  creditors,  is  not  void  as  against  the  creditors  of  a 
partner."  Such  statutes  are  not  to  be  construed  as  simply  casting 
the  burden  of  proving  the  good  faith  of  the  transaction  on  the 
purchaser,  but  are  to  be  construed  as  meaning  that  noncompliance 
by  the  purchaser  with  the  provisions  of  the  act  shall  make  the 
sale  voidable  as  to  creditors  without  regard  to  the  intent  of  the 
parties  to  it." 


11.  Young  T.  Lemieux,  79  Conn. 
434,  65  Atl.  436,  600. 

12.  Plass  V.  Morgan,  36  Wash.  160, 
78  Pae.  784,  and  a  failure  to  oomplj 
therewith  renders  the  sale  invalid  as 
to  the  seller's  creditors. 

13.  Gallus  y.  Elmer,  103  Mass.  106, 
78  N.  E.  772;  Kolander  v.  Dunn 
(Minn.  1905),  104  N.  W.  371,  483. 
Contra,  W.  B.  Parham  &  Co.  v.  Potts- 
Thompson  Liquor  Co.,  127  Oa.  303, 
56  S.  E.  460,  bar  fixtures,  desks,  cash 
re^sters,  pool  tables,  refrigerators 
and  the  like,  used  in  connection  with 
the  business  in  which  they  are  ap- 
propriate, are  a  part  of  a  "stock  of 
goods,  wares  and  merchandise" 
within  the  meaning  of  the  statute. 

14.  Kent  v.  Liverpool,  etc.,  Ins.  Co., 


26  Ind.  204,  89  Amer.  Bee.  463;  Van 
Patten  ft  Marks  v.  Leonard,  55  Iowa, 
520,  8  N.  W.  334;  Albrecht  v.  Cudihee 
(Wash.  1905),  79  Pac.  628. 

15.  Hart  v.  Brierl^,  189  Mass.  698, 
76  N.  E.  286. 

16.  Wasserman  ▼.  McDonald,  190 
Mass.  326,  76  N.  E.  959;  Hannah  ft 
Hogg  v.  Richter  Brewing  Co.  (Mich. 
1907),  112  N.  W.  713.  But  see  Cal- 
kins y.  Howard  (Cal.  App.  1905),  83 
Pac.  280. 

17.  Eklund  ▼.  Hopkins,  36  Wash. 
179,  78  Pac.  787. 

18w  Whitehouse  v.  Nelson  (Wash. 
1906),  86  Pac.  174. 

19.  Wilson  ▼.  Edwards,  32  Pa. 
Super.  Ct.  295. 


176  FSAUDUIJSNT   CONYBTASOXS. 


CHAPTER  V. 
Who  Mat  Attack  Vaudity  of  CoNvxTAiro& 

Seetioii   1.  Persons  who  may  attack  oo&TCjaiioe  gtnerally. 

2.  Pre-existing  creditors. 

3.  Subsequent  creditors. 

4.  Effect  of  fraud  as  to  pre-existing  creditors. 

5.  Effect  of  prior  and  continuing  indebtedness. 

6.  Knowledge  or  notice  of  fraudulent  transactions. 

7.  Creditors  whose  claims  are  barred  or  satisfied. 

8.  Nature  of  claims  of  creditors. 

9.  Claims  for  torts. 

10.  Claims  for  alimony. 

11.  Persons  representing  creditors. 

12.  Receivers  in  supplementary  proceedings. 

13.  Sureties  and  endorsers. 

14.  Purchasers  at  judicial  sales. 

15.  Officers  levying  attachment  or  execution. 

16.  Personal  representatives. 

17.  Estoppel  and  waiver. 

18.  Knowledge  or  assent. 

19.  Affirmance  or  ratification. 

20.  Participation. 

21.  Receipt  of  benefit  under  conveyance* 

22.  Subsequent  purchasers  in  generaL 
23»  Who  are  subsequent  purchasers. 
24.  Bona  fide  purchasers  for  value. 
26.  Effect  of  notice. 

Section  1.  Persons  who  may  attack  conveyance  generally. — 

Since  the  statute  of  13  Elizabeth^  and  statutes  based  thereon 
avoid  conveyances  made  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  creditors 
only  as  against  those  intended  to  be  hindered,  delayed^  or  de- 
frauded, and  no  others  are  within  its  protection,  a  conveyance 
made  in  fraud  of  creditors  is  valid  as  to  all  other  parties,^  and 
can  be  attacked  and  impeached  only  by  creditors,  or  those  who 
hold  the  rights  of  creditors.'     A  creditor  cannot  maintain  an 

1.  See  Rights  and  liabilities  of  2.  N,  7.~-Graser  v.  Stellwagen,  25 
parties  and  purchasers— original  par-  N.  T.  315,  the  question  of  fraud  can- 
ties,  chap.  XIV,  infra.  not  be  raised    by    one    claiming  ad* 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyance. 


177 


action  to  set  aside  a  conveyance  as  fraudulent,  unless  lie  shows 
that  he  has  been  injured  thereby  by  losing  his  remedy  at  law, 
or  by  the  fact  that  the  same  has  been  rendered  unavailing  or 


Tersely  to  the  sale,  who  does  not  by 
the  pleadings  show  himself  to  be  a 
creditor  or  purchaser;  Newton  ▼. 
Manwarring,  56  Hun,  645,  10  N.  T. 
Supp.  347;  Butler  v.  Viele,  44  Barb. 
166;  Clute  ▼.  Fitch,  25  Barb.  428. 

V.  8, — ^Voorheis  v.  Blanton,  89  Fed. 
885,  32  C.  C.  A.  384. 

Ala, — Grisham  v.  Bodman,  111  Ala. 
194,  20  So.  514;  Anderson  v.  Ander- 
son, 64  Ala.  403,  the  term  ''credi- 
tors," as  used  in  the  Alabama  statute, 
construed. 

Ar&.— King  v.  Clay,  34  Ark.  291; 
Jordan  v.  Fenno,  13  Ark.  593. 

Cal, — Brown  v.  Cline,  109  Gal.  156, 
41  Pac.  862;  Sexey  v.  Adklnson,  34 
Cal.  346,  91  Am.  Dec  698;  LAbish  v. 
Hardy,  23  Pac.  123. 

iU. — City  of  Chicago  ▼.  McGraw, 
75  111.  666;  Currier  v.  Ford,  26  111. 
488. 

/nd.— Clendening  v.  Ohl,  118  Ind. 
46,  20  N.  E.  639;  Etter  v.  Anderson, 
84  Ind.  333;  Bentley  v.  Dunkle,  57 
Ind.  374;  CNeil  v.  Chandler,  42  Ind. 

471. 

jTy.—jones  v.  Hill,  72  Ky.  692; 
Warren  v.  Hall,  36  Ky.  450;  Ander- 
son V.  Bradford,  28  Ky.  69. 

La, — Johnson  v.  Mayor,  30  Ia. 
Ann.  1203;  Keane  v.  Goldsmith,  14 
La.  Ann.  349. 

If 0.— Hatch  y.  Bates,  54  Me.  136; 
Thompson  v.  Moore,  36  Me.  47; 
Woodman  v.  Bodfish,  25  Me.  317. 

If «*.— Perry  v.  Hayward,  66  Mass. 

344. 

JffoA.— Richardson  v.  Welch,  47 
Mich.  309,  11  N.  W.  172;  McAuliffe 

12 


V.  Farmer,  27  Mich.  76;  Morey  ▼.  For- 
syth, Walk.  465. 


V.  Millsape,  50  Miss. 
380;  Whitney  y.  Freeland,  26  Miss. 
481. 

Mo, — ^Larimore  y.  T^ler,  88  Mo. 
661;  McLaughlin  y.  McLaughlin,  16 
Mo.  242. 

ATeft.— Baldwin  v.  Burt,  43  Neb. 
245,  61  N.  W.  601. 

N,  J, — ^Evans  v.  Herring,  27  N.  J. 
L.  243;  Garretson  y.  Kane,  27  N.  J. 
L.  208. 

N,  C, — Smith  y.  Bowen,  3  N.  C. 
206,  there  must  be  a  creditor  to  be 
defrauded. 

Ohio. — ^Burgett  y.  Burgett,  1  Ohio, 
469,  13  Am.  Dec.  634;  Union  Cent.  L. 
Ins.  Co.  y.  Eckert,  5  Ohio  Dec.  528, 
6  Am.  L.  Eec.  452. 

Pa, — ^Phipps  y.  Boyd,  54  Pa.  St. 
342;  Brown  y.  Scott,  51  Pa.  St.  357. 

R,  /.—Hudson  y.  White,  17  R.  I. 
519,  23  Atl.  57. 

8.  C. — Swanzy  y.  Hunt,  2  Nott  ft 
M.  211;  Kid  y.  Mitchell,  1  Nott  ft  M. 
334,  9  Am.  Dec.  702. 

Tenn, — Bayless  y.  Elcan,  41  Tenn. 
96. 

Tea?.— Shields  y.  Ord  (Ciy.  App. 
1899),  51  S.  W.  298;  Texarkana  Nat. 
Bank  y.  Hall  (Ciy.  App.  1895),  30 
S.  W.  73. 

Ft.— Boutwell  y.  Mcaure.  30  Vt. 
674,  must  be  a  bona  fide  creditor. 

Wi».— Remington  y.  WiUitrd,  15 
Wis.  646;  Norton  y.  Kearney,  10 
Wis.  443;  Schettler  y.  Brunette,  7 
Wis.  197 ;  Eaton  y.  White,  2  Wis.  292. 

Eng. — Strong  y.  Strong,  18  Beay. 
408,  52  Eng.  Reprint,  161. 


178 


F&AUBUUBNT  Convetaucbs. 


other^vise.*  But  the  fact  that  the  complainant  had  not  ezpeiided 
money  or  altered  his  situation  on-  the  strength  of  defendant  hav* 
ing  any  ownership  in  the  property  conveyed  is  not  in  itself 
suflScient  to  defeat  complainant's  rij^t  to  relief.^  Since  a  fraud- 
ulent conveyance  is  voidable  by  those  who  are  injured  thereby^ 
the  only  persbns  who  can  avoid  a  fraudulent  conveyance  are 


3.  N,  7.— CiiBhmaii  v.  Addison,  52 
N.  Y.  628;  Fidelity  Tniat^  etc.,  Co.  t. 
Bell,  63  App.  Div.  523,  71  N.  Y.  Supp. 
661;  Spicer  v.  Ayers,  63  How.  Pr. 
405;  King  ▼.  Clarke,  2  Hill  Eq.  611. 

U,  iSf. — ^ProTidenoe  Say.  Bank  v. 
Huntington,  10  Fed.  871. 

Ala.— Pickett  v.  Pipkin,  64  Ala. 
520. 

CoZ.— Harris  v.  Taylor,  15  Cal.  348. 

Ootifi. — Graves  v.  Atwood,  52  Conn. 
512,  52  Am.  Rep.  610;  Barney  v.  Cut- 
tUnr,  1  Root,  480. 

Flo, — ^Howse  V.  Judson,  1  Fla.  133. 

Ga. — Weed  v.  Davis,  25  Qa.  684. 

ill.— Mullen  T.  O'Shay,  86  111.  App. 
385. 

Jnd, — Emerson  v.  Opp,  130  Ind.  27, 
38  N.  £.  330;  Brumbaugh  y.  Rich- 
creek,  127  Ind.  240,  26  N.  E.  664,  22 
Am.  St.  Rep.  649;  Bentl'ey  y.  Dunkle, 
57  Ind.  374. 

Kan, — Hunt  v.  Spencer,  20  Kan. 
126;  Bradley  v.  Larkin,  5  Kan.  App. 
11,  47  Pac.  315. 

JTy. — Hanby  v.  Logan,  1  Duv.  242. 

La. — ^Mendelsohn  v.  Blaise,  52  La. 
Ann.  1104,  27  So.  707;  Willis  y. 
Scott,  33  La.  Ann.  1026;  Meche  y.  La- 
lamie,  30  La.  Ann.  1136;  Berens  v. 
Dupre,  6  La.  Ann.  494;  Le  Blanc  y. 
Dubroca,  6  La.  Ann.  360;  Weder- 
strandt  y.  Marsh,  11  Rob.  533;  La- 
fleur  y.  Hardy,  11  Rob.  493. 

JfdL — Christopher  y.  Christopher, 
64  Md.  583,  3  Atl.  296. 

JfioK.— Bodine  y.  Simmons,  38 
Mich.  682. 


Jftfift. — Johnston  y.  Piper,  4  Minn. 
192. 

Jfist.— Edmunds  y.  Mister,  68  Miss. 
765;  Cowen  v.  Alsop,  51  Miss.  158; 
Henderson  y.  Thornton,  37  Miss.  448, 
75  Am.  Dec.  70;  Everett  v.  Winne, 
8m.  &  M.  Ch.  67. 

jro.^Updegraff  v.  Theaker,  57  Mb. 
App.  45. 

2feh. — ^Lewis  v.  Holdrege,  56  Neb. 
379,  76  N.  W.  890;  Anthes  v.  Sehroe- 
der,  3  Neb.  (Unoff.)  604,  92  N.  W. 
196. 

N,  C— Amett  v.  Wanett»  28  N.  C. 
41 ;  Jones  v.  Young,  18  N.  C.  352,  28 
Am.  Dec.  569. 

Ohio, — ^Brannon  v.  PurceU,  8  Ohio 
Dec.  159,  6  Cine.  L.  Bui.  67. 

Pa.— Miner  y.  Warner,  2  Onuit» 
448. 

8,  C. — ^Buchanan  v.  McNinch,  3  S. 
C.  498. 

Tenn. — ^Levis  Zukoski,  Mercantile 
Co.  v.  Bowers,  105  Tenn.  138,  58  S. 
W.  287;  Burkey  v.  Self,  36  Tenn. 
121. 

Tew, — ^Walker  v.  Loring  (Civ.  App. 
1806),  34  S.  W.  405. 

Vt, — Durkee  v.  Mahoncy,  1  Aik. 
116. 

Wi».— Frei  v.  McMurdo,  101  Wis. 
423,  77  N.  W.  915. 

See  Prejudice  to  oreditors,  ehap. 
Ill,  S  9,  Mipra.  Remedies  in  e^ty, 
chap.  XV,  iwfra, 

4.  lauch  y.  De  Socarras,  56  N.  J. 
£q.  538,  39  Atl.  370. 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyakgb. 


179 


those  ^o  mi^t  take  the  property  from  the  grantor  or  from  liis 
heirsy  if  no  conveyance  had  been  mada^  It  has  been  held  also 
that  fraud  on  a  creditor  not  a  party  to  the  proceeding  to  set 
aside  a  conveyance  cannot  be  set  up.  The  question  is  whether, 
on  all  the  facts,  there  Tvas  fraud  as  against  the  plaintiffs.*  A 
creditor  cannot  annul  a  sale,  "whose  avoidance  would  exclusively 
benefit  another  creditor  having  priority  by  an  anterior  seizura^ 
The  creditors  of  a  purchaser  of  personal  property  under  a 
fraudulent  sale  cannot  object  thereto,  the  creditors  of  the  o^wner 
being  the  only  ones  who  have  a  right  to  complain.* 

§  2.  Pre-existing  creditors. — Any  pre-existing  or  prior  credi- 
tor, as  a  general  rule,  can  take  advantage  of  fraud  in  a  convey- 
anoe  and  hsB  the  right  to  attack  a  conveyance  made 
by  a  debtor  as  having  been  made  in  fraud  of  his 
creditors.*    Pre-existing  creditors  are  those  to  whom  the  debtor 


6.  Cook  T.  Lee,  72  N.  H.  669,  5S 
Ail.  611. 

6.  Burke  v.  Adams,  SO  Mo.  604, 
60  Am.  Rep.  610;  Steadman  ▼.  Unyei, 
SO  Mo.  310. 

7.  Lott  ▼.  Gray,  6  Rob.  (La.)  162. 

8.  Bell  v.  Greenwood,  21  Ark.  249; 
CGonnell  ▼.  Cruise,  12  Ohio  Dec.  81, 
1  Handy,  164. 

0.  V.  y.— Dygert  v.  Remerschnider, 
32  N.  T.  629;  Wright  v.  Douglass,  3 
Barb.  654;  Botts  v.  Cozine,  1  Hoff.  Ch. 
79. 

U,  8. — ^Thompson  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Cor- 
wine,  89  Fed.  774. 

Ala. — ^Donley  ▼.  McKieman,  62 
Ala.  34;  Jacobson  ▼.  Simmons,  60 
Ala.  185;  Snodgrass  v.  Decatur 
Branch  Bank,  25  Ala.  161,  60  Am. 
Dec.  606. 

ArJk.— Stiz  v.  Chaytor,  65  Ark.  116, 
17  8.  W.  707. 

/|{.— Chicago  Daily  News  Co.  t. 
Siegel,  212  HI.  617,  72  N.  E.  810; 
Campbell,  etc.,  Co.  ▼.  Ross,  187  HI. 


663,  68  N.  E.  606;  Highley  ▼.  Ameri- 
can Exch.  Nat.  Bank,  186  111.  665, 
67  N.  E.  436;  Springer  ▼.  Bingford, 
160  111.  405,  43  N.  E.  751;  Croarkin 
v.  Hutchinson,  108  111.  633,  68  N.  E. 
678;  Wooldridge  ▼.  Gage,  68  111.  157; 
Moore  ▼.  Montelius,  29  111.  App.  197; 
Ives  V.  Hulce,  14  111.  App.  389; 
Shackleford  ▼.  Todhunter,  4  111.  App. 
271. 

lotca. — ^Baboock  ▼.  Hamilton,  64 
Iowa,  558,  21  N.  W.  33;  Day  v.  Ken- 
dall, 60  Iowa,  414,  14  N.  W.  234; 
Fifield  v.  Gaston,  12  Iowa,  218; 
Whitescarver  v.  Bonney,  9  Iowa,  480. 

Ky, — ^Ahlering  ▼.  Speckman,  30 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  940,  99  S.  W.  973 ;  John- 
son ▼.  Skaggs,  8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  601,  2 
S.  W.  493. 

La, — ^Meche  ▼.  Lalamie,  30  La.  Ann. 
1136;  Lopes  v.  Bergel,  12  La.  197. 

Me, — American  Agricultural  Chem- 
ical Co.  ▼.  Huntington,  99  Me.  361, 
69  Atl.  615. 

ifd.— Kipp  T.  Hanna,  2  Bland,  26. 


180 


Fbaudttlent  Convetakces. 


wan  indebted  at  the  time  of  the  fraudulent  conveyance  or  other 
diapoaition  of  his  property,  although  their  claims  may  not  have 
matured,  or  the  particular  form  of  the  indebtedness  may  have 
been  subsequently  changed  by  being  reduced  to  judgment  or 
otherwise  legally  established.^^    Creditors  whose  debts  were  con- 


Mioh, — Bodine  ▼.  SimnKms,  38 
Mich.  682. 

Minn, — Irish  ▼.  Daniek,  100  Minn. 
189,  110  K.  W.  968;  Schmitt  v.  Dahl, 
,  88  Minn.  506, 93  N.  W.  666, 67  L.  R.  A. 
i  690;  First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Burkhardt, 
171  Minn.  185,73N.  W.858;  Stone  v. 
.  Myers,  9  Minn.  303,  86  Am.  Dec.  104; 
.  Zimmerman  v.  Lamb,  7  Minn.  421. 

Mis8, — ^Armfleld  y.  Armfleld,  1 
Freem.  Ch.  311. 

ifo.— Headley  Grocer  Co.  ▼.  Wal- 
ker, 69  Mo.  App.  553. 

N.  F.— Russell  y.  Dyer,  33  N.  H. 
186. 

N.  J. — lauch  y.  De  Socarras,  66  N. 
J.  Eq.  538,  39  Atl.  370. 

y.  C. — ^Hoke  y.  Henderson,  14  N.  0. 
12. 

Or.— Seed  y.  Jennings  (1905),  83 
Pac.  872. 

Pa. — ^Ketner  y.  Donten,  15  Pa. 
Super.  Ct.  604,  a  conyeyance  fraudu- 
lent as  to  one  creditor  is  fraudulent 
as  to  all  creditors  existing  at  the  time 
of  the  conyeyance;  Miner  y.  Warner, 
2  Grant  Gas.  448. 

8.  D. — ^Meyer  Boot»  etc.,  Co.  y. 
Shenkberg  Co.,  11  8.  D.  620,  80  N.  W. 
126. 

Tenn, — Lippman  y.  Boals,  16  Lea, 
283. 

Te9. — ^DeGarca  v.  GaWan,  65  Tex. 
53;  Riske  y.  Rotan  Grocery  Co.  (Ciy. 
App.)  84  S.  W.  243;  Monday  y. 
Vance  (Ciy.  App.),  51  S.  W.  346. 

F^— Farmers'  Nat  Bank  v.  Thomp- 
son,  74   Vt.   442,  52  Atl.   961;    Fair 


Hayen  Marble,  etc..  Slate  Co.  y. 
Owens,  69  Vt.  246,  37  Atl.  749. 

Tra«A.~-Goodfellow  y.  Le  May,  15 
Wash.  684,  47  Pac.  25. 

10.  .V.  r.—Baker  y.  Gilman,  52 
Barb.  26,  an  attorney  who  was  t«- 
tained  to  defend  a  ease  and  rendered 
some  slight  service  therein  a  few  days 
before  his  client  made  a  voluntary 
conveyance  of  his  property,  and  who^ 
knowing  of  such  assignment,  con- 
tinued to  render  his  service  in  said 
case,  and  afterwards  obtained  a  sin- 
gle judgment  for  the  value  of  all  his 
services,  was  a  subsequent  creditor 
with  reference  to  said  conveyance. 

U.  fif.— Schreyer  v.  Piatt,  134  U. 
S.  405,  10  Sup.  Ct.  579,  33  L.  Ed.  955; 
Horbeck  v.  Hill,  112  U.  8.  144,  5 
Sup.  Ct.  81,  28  L.  Ed.  670;  Thomson 
V.  Crane,  73  Fed.  327. 

Ark, — James  y.  Mallory  (1906),  89 
S.  W.  472. 

Col, — Calkins  v.  Howard  (App. 
1905),  83  Pac.  280,  a  mortgagee  is  a 
creditor  of  the  mortgagor. 

D,  C— Smith  v.  Sook,  10  App.  Gas. 
487. 

Iowa, — O'Brien  v.  Stambach,  101 
Iowa,  40,  69  N.  W.  1133,  53  Am.  St. 
Rep.  368,  judgments  are  prima  faeie 
evidence  of  the  existence  of  indebted- 
ness. 

Ifeh, — Omaha  Brewing  Assoc,  t. 
Zeller,  4  Neb.  (Unoff.)  198,  93  N.  W. 
762,  the  indebtedness  will  relate  bade 
to  its  original  inception  as  regards 
the  question  of  constituting  the  claim- 
ant an  existing  creditor. 


Who  May  Attack  Valbditt  of  Convbyancb. 


181 


tracted  after  the  execution  of  conveyancee  constituting  a  secret 
trust  for  the  benefit  of  the  grantor,  but  during  the  continuance 
thereof,  are  existing  creditors.^  A  party  bound  by  a  contract 
upon  which  he  may  become  liable  for  the  payment  of  money, 
although  his  liability  be  contingent,  is  a  debtor,  and  the  person 
to  whom  he  is  bound  is  a  creditor,  within  the  meaning  of  the 
statutes  as  to  fraudulent  conveyances,  and  a  contingent  liability 
or  an  obligation  or  indebtedness  which  has  not  ripened  into  an 
absolute  liability  at  the  time  of  a  fraudulent  or  voluntary  con- 
veyance, is  protected  by  the  statutes,  as  well  as  debts  absolutely 
fixed  at  the  time  of  the  oonveyanca  A  creditor  whose  claim  or 
demand  arises  out  of  or  is  foimded  upon  a  pre-existing  contract, 
although  it  may  be  contingent,  and  whose  rights  are  affected  by 
a  fraudulent  or  voluntary  conveyance,  can  avoid  such  convey- 


N.  J, — ^Perrine  v.  Perrine  (Ch. 
1901),  50  All.  694,  it  is  Bufficient  to 
show  that  the  judgment  debt  or  the 
debt  upon  which  the  judgment  was 
based  was  in  existence  at  the  time  of 
the  conveyance;  Mason  v.  Somers,  69 
N.  J.  Eq.  461,  46  Atl.  602,  but  an 
indorser  who  lends  his  name  to  give 
credit  to  a  note  does  not  thereby  be- 
oome,  like  the  payee,  a  creditor  of  the 
maker,  so  as  to  raise  a  presumption 
that  the  maker's  subsequent  volun- 
tary conveyance  of  his  property  is, 
as  to  such  indorser,  fraudulent; 
Severs  v.  Dodson,  63  N.  J.  Eq. 
633,  34  Atl.  7,  61  Am.  St.  Rep. 
641,  an  accommodation  endorser 
of  a  promissory  note  which  is 
not  dishonored  is  not  a  present 
debtor. 

Tenn. — Wilson  v.  Vanden,  99  Tenn. 
224,  42  S.  W.  6,  but  a  person  will  be 
held  to  be  a  subsequent  creditor,  al- 
though the  grantor  owed  htm  a  large 
amount  at  the  time  of  the  execution 
of  the  conveyance,  where  such  debt 
was  afterwards  fully  paid,  notwith- 


standing the  subsequent  contraction 
of  other  debts  of  the  grantor. 

Eng. — ^Bennett  v.  Musgrove,  2  Ves. 
61,  28  Eng.  Reprint,  34;  Rider  v.  Kid- 
der, 10  Ves.  Jr.  360,  32  Eng.  Reprint, 
884,  a  wife  is  a  creditor  under  13 
Eliz.,  chap.  6,  in  a  case  where  her 
husband  covenanted  with  the  trustees 
to  pay  her  a  sum  of  money  after  his 
death;  Adames  v.  Hallett,  L.  R.  6 
Eq.  468,  18  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  789,  a 
creditor  under  a  voluntary  poat'Obit 
bond  is  entitled  to  the  benefits  of  13 
Eliz.,  chap.  6. 

The  dlfferemee  between  ezist- 
inc  and  snbaeqiieait  debts,  in 
reference  to  voluntary  conveyances,  is 
this — as  to  the  former  the  fraud  is 
an  inference  of  law,  but  as  to  the 
latter  there  must  be  fraud  in  fact. 
Cook  V.  Johnson,  12  N.  J.  Eq.  61, 
72  Am.  Dec.  381.  But  see  Gordon  v. 
Reynolds,  114  lU.  123. 

11.  Bowluq  V.  Shanabarger,  19 
Ohio  Cir.  Ct  137,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec. 
167.  See  A.  Landreth  ft  Go.  v.  Scheve- 
nel,  102  Tenn.  486. 


182 


FbAUDULENT   CONVBYAirCES. 


ance  vfhea  tlie  contingency  happens  upon  which  the  daim  of 
demand  depends,  and  such  liability  becomes  absolute  and  fixed.^ 


12.  y.  7. — Young  v.  Heermans^  66 
K.  Y.  374;  McLaggan  ▼.  Smith,  86 
Misc.  Rep.  564,  71  N.  Y.  Supp.  1121; 
Moosbrugger  v.  Walsh,  89  Hun,  564, 
35  N.  Y.  Supp.  550,  the  holder  of  a 
claim  against  a  corporation  assigned 
to  him  after  dissolution;  Citizens 
Nat.  Bank  v.  Fonda,  18  Misc.  Rep. 
114,  41  K.  Y.  Supp.  112,  the  holder  of 
a  note  is  a  creditor  of  the  indorser 
though  the  note  is  not  due;  Van 
Wyck  V.  Seward,  18  Wend.  375;  Jack- 
son ▼.  Seward,  5  Cow.  67. 

U.  8. — McLaughlin  ▼.  Potomac 
Bank,  7  How.  220,  12  L.  Ed.  675; 
Thomson  y.  Crane,  73  Fed.  327; 
Yardley  v.  Torr,  67  Fed.  857. 

Ala, — Washington  y.  Norwood,  128 
Ala.  338,  30  So.  405;  Yeend  ▼.  Weeks, 
104  AU.  331,  16  So.  165,  53  Am.  St. 
Rep.  50;  Bragg  y.  Patterson,  85  Ala. 
233,  4  So.  716;  Keel  y.  Larkin,  72 
Ala.  493;  Feam  y.  Ward,  65  Ala. 
33;  Anderson  y.  Anderson,  64  Ala. 
403;  Bibb  y.  Freeman,  59  Ala.  612; 
Gannard  y.  Eslaya,  20  Ala.  732,  the 
warrantee  in  a  deed  is  a  creditor  of 
the  warrantor;  Foote  y.  Cobb,  18  Ala. 
585. 

ArA;.— Williams  y.  Bizzell,  11  Ark. 
716. 

Fto.— Reel  y.  Liyingston,  34  Fla. 
377,  16  So.  284,  43  Am.  St.  Rep.  202. 

Oa. — ^Banks  y.  McC^ndless,  119  6a. 
793,  47  S.  E.  332. 

/{{.—Hatfield  y.  Merod,  82  HI.  113; 
Choteau  y.  Jones,  11  111.  300,  50  Am. 
Dec.  460;  Sanderson  y.  Snow,  68  111. 
App.  384;  Dunphy  y.  Gorman,  29  111. 
App.  132. 

/nc2.— Bowen  y.  State,  121  Ind.  235, 
23  N.  £.  75;  Wright  y.  Nipple,  92 
Ind.  310. 


Zy.^Poynier  ▼•  Mallorj,  20  Kj.  I*. 
Bep.  284,  45  a  W.  1042;  J<^uiflOB  y. 
Harrison,  6  Ky.  L.  Rep.  591.  But 
see  Doty  y.  Louisyille  Banking  Co., 
10  Ky.  L.  Rep.  898,  11  S.  W.  78. 

Me. — ^Whitehouse  y.  Bolster,  95  lie. 
458,  50  Atl.  240;  Sargent  y.  Salmond, 
27  Me.  539;  Thompson  y.  Tbompaoii, 
19  Me.  244,  36  Am.  Dec  751 ;  Howe  y. 
Ward,  4  Me.  195. 

JtftoA.— Pashby  y.  Maadigo,  42 
Mich.  172,  3  N.  W.  927. 

JftiMi.— Stone  y.  Myers,  9  Miuu 
303,  84  Am.  Dec  104. 

M%88, — ^Loughridge  y.  Bowland,  02 
BCiss.  546;  Pennington  t.  Seal,  49 
Miss.  518,  warrantee  in  deed. 

N.  JET.— Parsons  y.  McKnii^t,  8  K. 
H.  35. 

y,  /.—Long  Branch  Banking  Cou  t. 
Dennis,  56  N.  J.  Eq.  549,  29  AtL  689; 
Soden  y.  Soden,  34  N.  J.  Eq.  115; 
Post  y.  Stiger,  29  N.  J.  Eq.  554,  a 
claim  arising  from  a  tort;  Oamer  t. 
Reford,  17  N.  J.  Eq.  367,  90  Am.  Dee. 
594,  endorser  on  a  note  of  lessee  for 
rent  in  adyance;  Cook  y.  Johnson,  12 
N.  J.  Eq.  51,  72  Am.  Dec  381. 

N.  C— Tatum  y.  Tatom,  36  N.  C. 
113. 

Pa.— Heath  y.  Page,  63  Pa.  St  108, 
3  Am.  Rep.  533,  claim  for  usury  pen- 
alties; Shouts  y.  Brown,  27  Pa.  St. 
123;  a  claim  arising  from  a  tori; 
Hamet  y.  Dundass,  4  Pa.  St.  178. 

7enn.— Ridout  y.  Williams,  75 
Tenn.  59;  Greene  y.  Stamea,  1  Heisk. 
582;  Shapiro  y.  Paleta  (Ch.  App.), 
59  S.  W.  774. 

Fa.— Curd  y.  Miller,  7  Oratt.  185. 

W.  Va, — Hawker  y.  Moore,  40  W. 
Va.  49,  20  a  S.  848. 


Who  Mat  Attack  Validity  of  Cokveyahcb, 


183 


The  right  of  a  preexisting  creditor  to  impeach  a  oonvejanoe  id 
not  affected  by  a  renewal  of  the  debt  or  change  of  form  of  the 
evidence  of  debt,  although  such  renewal  or  change  of  form 
was  made  subeequent  to  the  conveyance.^  In  cases  of  running 
account,  the  earlier  indebtedness  being  paid  by  the  proceeds  of 
the  later,  the  continuing  indebtedness  stands  upon  the  same  foot- 
ing as  an  indebtedness  existing  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance 
attacked  as  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.^*    Prior  lien  creditors  or 


TTit.— Crocker  ▼.  Huntzicker,  113 
T^.  181,  SS  N.  W.  232. 

Wyo. — Calver  v.  Graham,  3  Wyo. 
211,  21  Pae.  694,  purchaser,  after 
volontary  conveyance,  of  debtor's  out- 
standing notes.  But  see  Fkles  ▼. 
Thompson,  1  Mass.  134;  Henderson 
▼.  Dodd,  Bailey  £q.  (S.  C.)  138. 

13.  y,  Y, — ^Loeschigk  v.  Addison, 
19  Abb.  Pr.  169. 

Ala, — ^Moore  v.  Spence,  6  Ala.  606. 

/tid.— Stout  V.  Stout,  77  Ind.  537. 

Kan. — Kellogg  v.  Douglass  County 
Bank,  58  Kan.  43,  48  Pac.  587,  62  Am. 
8t.  Rep.  696. 

JTy.— LoWiy  v.  Fisher,  2  Bush.  70, 
92  Am.  Dec.  476 ;  Buffington  ▼.  Moeby, 
17  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1307,  34  S.  W.  704. 

lf<l.— Spuck  V.  Logan,  97  Md.  152, 
64  Atl.  989,  99  Am.  St.  Rep.  427, 
property  conveyed  to  prevent  satisfac- 
tion of  any  judgment  that  might  be 
recovered  against  the  grantor  in  an 
action  by  a  servant  for  injuries. 

Jftc^— Preston  Nat.  Bank  v.  Pier- 
son,  112  Mich.  436,  70  N.  W.  1013. 

M%98, — ^Thompson  v.  Hester,  66 
Miss.  656. 

Veb. — Omaha  Brewing  Assoc,  v. 
Zeller,  4  Nebr.  (Unoff.)  198,  93  N.  W. 
762. 

V,  ff.— Parsons  v.  McKnight,  8  N. 
H.  36. 

y.  J.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  White, 
60  N.  J.  £q.  487,  46  Atl.  1092. 


V.  W.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  McClel- 
land, 9  N.  M.  636,  68  Pac.  347. 

Vt. — Farmers'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Thom- 
son, 74  Vt.  442,  52  Atl.  961;  Sanborn 
V.  Kittredge,  20  Vt.  632,  60  Am.  Dec. 
58. 

Wm.— Crocker  v.  Huntdcker,  113 
Wis.  181,  88  N.  W.  232. 

Can, — Feiguson  v.  Kenny,  16  Ont. 
App.  276. 

Bng, — Whittington  v.  Jennings,  3 
L.  J.  Ch.  167,  6  Sim.  403,  9  £ng.  Ch. 
493. 

Contra, — Bank  v.  Marchand,  T.  U. 
P.  Charlt.  (Oa.)  247;  Boone  County 
Nat.  Bank  v.  Newkirk,  144  Mo.  472, 
46  S.  W.  606. 

14.  /U.— Th<Mnas  v.  Lye,  37  111. 
App.  482. 

Ky, — ^Little  v.  Ragan,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
391,  when  the  creditor  has  an  ac- 
count due  from  his  debtor  at  the  date 
of  the  latter's  voluntary  or  fraudu- 
lent deed,  although  the  amount  was 
afterwards  increased  by  subeequent 
purchases,  the  whole  is  to  be  taken 
as  a  liability  existing  at  the  date  of 
the  deed. 

Ifd.— Diggs  V.  McCollough,  69  Md. 
692,  16  Atl.  453,  but  one  who  is  a 
creditor  at  the  time  of  a  fraudulent 
conveyance,  but  who  receives  payment 
and  continues  to  supply  goods  to  the 
debtor,  taking  notes  on  short  time 
therefor,  is  a  subsequent  creditor. 


184 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


creditors  wliose  liens  attached  before  an  alleged  fraudulent  con- 
veyance  cannot  complain  of  a  subsequent  fraudulent  conveyance 
or  encumbrance  of  the  property  and  are  not  entitled 'to  equitable 
interference^  since  their  liens  are  in  no  way  affected  by  the 
fraudulent  conveyance  and  it  cannot  affect  their  rights,  and  a 
sale  under  their  judgments  will  entirely  devest  the  title  of  the 
grantee  or  subsequent  encumbrancer.^^  A  general  creditor  or 
creditor-at-Iarge,  or  a  creditor  by  simple  contract  whose  debt  has 


Mi9», — Chapman  ▼.  Hughes,  61 
Miss.  330,  a  judgment  creditor  whose 
debt,  for  which  the  judgment  was  ren- 
dered, was  partly  contracted  'before 
and  partly  after  a  voluntary  convey- 
ance of  lands  sought  to  be  subjected 
by  him  to  the  payment  of  such  debt, 
will  not  be  treated  as  a  subsequent 
creditor  as  to  the  entire  indebtedness. 

y.  C. — Johnson  v.  Murchison,  (W  N. 
C.  286,  1  Winst.  292. 

Tenn. — ^Trezevant  v.  Terrill,  96 
Tenn.  528,  33  S.  W.  109. 

Wliere  a  ereditor  blends  de« 
nuuidsy  which  accrued  prior  to  a 
conveyance  by  the  debtor  which  he 
would  impeach  on  the  grounds  of 
fraud,  in  the  same  suit  with  demands 
or  interest  accruing  after  said  con- 
veyance, and  having  recovered  judg- 
ment, extends  his  execution  on  the 
land,  he  can  come  in  only  in  the  char- 
acter of  a  subsequent  creditor. 
Quimby  v.  Dill,  40  Me.  528;  Miller 
V.  Miller,  23  Me.  22,  39  Am.  Dec. 
597;  Husher  v.  Hazelton,  5  Me.  471, 
17  Am.  Dec.  253;  Reed  v.  Woodman, 
4  Me.  400. 

15.  La.— Payne  v.  Kemp,  33  La. 
Ann.  818;  Levi  v.  Morgan,  33  La. 
Ann.  532. 

ife. — Crocker  v.  Holmes,  65  Me. 
195,  20  Am.  Rep.  687. 

j|f(2.— Baltimore  High  Grade  Brick 
Co.  V.  Amis,  96  Md.  571,  52  Atl.  682, 
53  Atl.  148. 


Masa. — ^Powers  v.  Russell,  13  Piek. 
69. 

ifo. — BrinkerhdT-Faris  Trust,  etc., 
Co.  V.  Horn,  83  Mo.  App.  114. 

N.  H.— Blake  v.  Williams,  36  N.  H. 
39. 

N,  J, — ^Meeker  v.  Warren,  66  N.  J. 
Eq.  146,  67  Atl.  421,  a  judgment 
creditor  cannot  maintain  a  bill  to  set 
aside  as  fraudulent  a  quitclaim  deed 
not  conveying  the  fee. 

Ohio, — Stephenson  v.  Donahue,  40 
Ohio  St.  184,  aff'g  6  Ohio  Dec.  828,  S 
Am.  L.  Rec.  358. 

Okla. — First  Nat  Bank  v.  Yeoman^ 
14  Okla.  626,  78  Pac.  388. 

Pa, — ^Armington  v.  Rau,  100  Pa. 
St.  105;  Haak's  Appeal,  100  Pa.  St. 
59;  Appeal  of  Byrod,  31  Pa.  St.  241 : 
Barren  v.  Adams,  26  Pa.  Super.  Ct. 
635;  Boyle  v.  Thomas,  1  Chest.  Co. 
Rep.  117. 

Tex. — Pearson  v.  Hudson,  52  Tex. 
352. 

W.  Va, — Carr  v.  Summerfield,  47 
W.  Va.  155,  34  S.  E.  804. 

Can. — Crombie  v.  Toung^  26  Ont. 
194. 

But  see  Shiveley  v.  Jones,  45  Ky. 
274,  a  first  mortgagee  may  take  ad- 
vantage of  a  fraud  against  creditors 
in  a  subsequent  mortgage  on  the  same 
land,  so  far  as  it  may  impede  him, 
since  a  conveyance  fraudulent  as  to 
some  creditors  is  fraudulent  as  to  all. 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyance.         185 


not  been  l^Uy  ascertained  by  judgment,  as  a  general  rule,  is 
not  in  a  position  to  assert  his  rights  by  action  as  a  creditor  and 
cannot  attack  a  conveyance  or  other  transfer  of  property  by  his 
debtor  as  fraudulent  as  against  creditors,  but  he  must  first  es- 
tablish his  debt  by  the  judgment  of  a  court  of  competent  juris- 
diction, and  either  acquire  a  lien  by  valid  legal  process  upon 
the  specific  property,  or  to  be  in  a  situation  to  perfect  a  lien 
thereon,  and  subject  it  to  the  payment  of  his  judgment  upon 
the  removal  of  the  obstacle  presented  by  the  fraudu- 
lent   conveyance    or    other    transfer.**     This    rule    is,    how- 


16.  y.  y.— Prentiss  v.  Bowden,  146 
N.  Y.  342,  40  N.  E.  13,  an  execution 
issued  after  the  death  of  the  judg- 
ment debtor  is  wholly  void  and  insuffi- 
cient to  sustcdn  a  creditor's  bill; 
Southard  ▼.  Benner,  72  N.  Y.  424, 
a  creditor  by  simple  contract  is  within 
the  protection  of  the  statute  as  much 
as  a  creditor  by  judgment,  but  until 
he  has  a  judgment  and  a  lien,  or  a 
right  to  lien  upon  the  specific  prop- 
erty, he  is  not  in  a  condition  to  as- 
sert his  rights  by  action  as  a  creditor; 
Estes  V.  Wilcox,  67  N.  Y.  2S4; 
Geery  ▼.  Geery,  63  N.  Y.  266; 
Rinchey  v.  Stryker,  28  N.  Y.  46,  84 
Am.  Dec.  324,  but  a  party  procuring 
an  attachment  is  not  to  be  deemed  a 
mere  creditor  at  large  of  the  defend- 
ant therein,  after  the  writ  is  served, 
but  a  creditor  having  a  specific  lien 
upon  the  goods  attached;  Cramer  v. 
Blood,  67  Barb.  165,  671;  Davis  v. 
Graves,  29  Barb.  480;  Wintringham 
V.  Wintringham,  20  Johns.  296; 
Brinkerhoff  v.  Brown,  4  Johns.  Ch. 
671,  6  Johns.  Ch.  139;  Frisbey  v. 
Thayer,  26  Wend.  396. 

U.  H.— Jones  V.  Green,  1  Wall.  330, 
17  L.  Ed.  663;  Day  v.  Washburn,  24 
How.  362,  16  L.  Ed.  712;  Viquesney 
V.  Allen,  131  Fed.  21,  66  C.  C.  A.  269; 
United  States  v.  Ingate,  48  Fed«  261. 


Ark, — ^Meux  v.  Anthony,  11  Ark. 
411,  62  Am.  Dec.  274. 

Col, — Algeltinger  v.  Einstein,  143 
Cal.  609,  77  Pac.  669,  101  Am.  St. 
Rep.  131. 

Colo, — ^Hugus  V.  Hardenburg,  19 
Colo.  App.  464,  76  Pac.  643. 

Ill — Rogers  v.  Dimon,  106  Dl.  App. 
201;  Koster  v.  Hiller,  4  111..  App.  21. 

Ind, — State  Bank  v.  Backus  (App.), 
66  N.  E.  476,  aff'd  160  Ind.  682,  67 
N.  E.  612. 

/ottw. — ^Klay  v.  McKellar,  122 
Iowa,  163,  97  N.  W.  1091.  But  see 
Mallow  V.  Walker,  116  Iowa,  238,  88 
N.  W.  462,  91  Am.  St.  Rep.  168. 

Kan. — Chicago  Bldg.,  etc.,  Co.  v.  I. 
A.  Taylor  Banking  Co.,  78  Pac.  808; 
Daugherty  v.  Powell,  67  Kan.  867, 
72  Pac.  274,  74  Pac.  242. 

ITy.— McKinley  v.  Combs,  1  T.  B. 
Mon.  106. 

Md, — ^Wanamaker  v.  Bowes,  36 
Md.  42;  Griffith  v.  Frederick  County 
Bank,  6  Gill  &  J.  424. 

Iftc/t.— Eslow  v.  Mitchell,  26  Mich. 
600;  Fox  V.  Clark,  1  Walk.  Ch.  636. 
See  Hatch  v.  Daugherty,  146  Mich. 
669,  13  Det.  L.  N.  667,  108  N.  W. 
986. 

Mo. — ^Davidson  v.  Dockery,  179  Mo. 
687,  78  S.  W.  624,  the  creditor  must 
either  have  redueed  hia  claim  to'  judg- 


186 


F&AUDULEKT   CoNVEYAlTCBS. 


ever,    subject  to   certain   exceptions   which   will   be   hereafter 
discussed.^^ 


§  3.  Subsequent  creditors. — It  is  the  general  mle  that  a 
voluntary  conveyance  by  a  debtor  cannot  be  set  aside  at  the 
instance  of  subsequent  creditors,  and  the  property  of  the  debtor, 
alleged  to  have  been  transferred  in  fraud  of  his  creditors,  sub- 
jected to  their  debts  against  him,  unless  it  is  shown  that  the 
transfer  was  made  with  the  intent  to  defraud  subsequent  credi- 
tors."   But  subsequent  as  well  as  existing  creditors,  may  attack 


ment,  bay«  a  legal,  equitable,  or  at- 
tachment lien  on  the  land,  or  show 
that»  although  but  a  general  creditor, 
•he  has  no  adequate  remedy  at  law; 
RoBencranz  v.  8wofford  Bros.  Dry 
Goods  Co.,  175  Mo.  518,  75  S.  W.  445, 
97  Am.  St  Rep.  609;  Peters  Shoe  Co. 
y.  Arnold,  82  Mo.  App.  1. 

y.  .f.— Guy  B.  Waite  Co.  ▼.  Otto 
(Ch.),  54  Atl.  425,  a  creditor  of  a 
living  debtor  must  have  a  lien  which 
is  not  created  by  a  foreign  judgment; 
Hunt  V.  Field,  9  N.  J.  Eq.  36,  67  Am. 
Dec.  365. 

N.  C— Cowan  v.  Phillips,  122  N. 
C.  70,  28  S.  £.  961. 

Tetin. — ^Hopkins  t.  Webb,  9 
Humphr.  519,  claim  must  be  estab- 
lished by  a  judgment  at  law  or  a  de- 
cree in  equity. 

Tc». — ^Herring-Hall-Manrin  Co.  t. 
Kroeger,  23  Tex.  Civ.  App.  672,  67  S. 
W.  980. 

Va.— Tate  v.  Liggat,  2  Leigh,  84. 

ir(MJ^— Rothchild  v.  Trewella,  36 
Wash.  679,  79  Pac.  480,  104  Am.  St. 
Bep.  973,  68  L.  R.  A.  281. 

W,  Va, — ^Kennewig  Co.  v.  Moore,  49 
W.  Va.  323,  38  S.  E.  558. 

Wia.— Miller  v.  Drane,  122  Wis. 
315,  99  N.  W.  1017. 

Eng, — Collins  v.  Burton,  4  DeG.  & 
J.  612,  61  Eng.  485,  45  Eng.  Reprint, 


238;  Smith  ▼.  Hurst,  10  Hai«,  30,  17 
Jur.  30,  22  L.  J.  Ch.  289,  15  Eng.  L. 
&  Eq.  520,  44  Eng.  Ch.  30;  Angell  v. 
Draper,  1  Vem.  Ch.  399,  23  Eng.  Re- 
print, 543;  Colman  v.  Croker,  1  Ves. 
Jr.  160,  30  Eng.  Reprint,  280. 

17.  See  Conditions  precedent  to 
suit  in  equity  to  set  aside  conveyance, 
chap.  XV,  I  31,  infra. 

18.  N.  y.— Phoenix  Bank  v.  Staf- 
ford, 89  N.  Y.  406 ;  Phillips  v.  Woos- 
ter,  36  N.  Y.  412;  Wadsworth  v.  Hav- 
ens, 3  Wend.  411. 

U,  8. — Graham  v.  La  Crosse,  etc, 
Co.,  102  U.  S.  148,  26  L.  Ed.  106; 
Mattingly  v.  Nye,  8  Wall.  370,  17  L. 
Ed.  380;  Sexton  v.  Wheaton,  8  Wheat. 
229,  5  L.  Ed.  603;  Central  Trust  Co. 
V.  Worcester  Cycle  Mfg.  Co.,  110  Fed. 
491 ;  Continental  Trust  Co.  v.  Toledo, 
etc.,  R.  Co.,  82  Fed.  642;  Metropoli- 
tan Nat.  Bank  v.  Rogers,  47  Fed.  148; 
Burdick  v.  Gill,  7  Fed.  668,  2  Mc- 
Crary,  486. 

Ala, — ^Wilson  t.  Stevens,  129  Ala. 
630,  29  So.  678,  87  Am.  St  Rep.  86; 
Flyton  Land  Co.  v.  Iron  City  Steam 
Bottling  Works,  109  Ala.  602,  20  So. 
51;  CNeil  v.  Birming^iam  Brewing 
Co.,  101  Ala.  383,  13  So.  576;  Lock- 
ard  V.  Nash,  64  Ala.  386;  Oole  v. 
Vamer,  31  Ala.  244. 

Ark, — Crampton  v.  8^uMp»  56  Ark. 


Who  Mat  Attaok  Validity  of  Convetahcb. 


187 


tiieir  debtor's  oonvejance  aa  fraudulent  if  made  with  intent  to 


253,  19  S.  W.  660;  Stix  v.  Chaytor, 
56  Ark.  116,  17  S.  W.  707. 

Colo. — ^Amett  v.  Coffey,  1  Colo. 
App.  34,  27  Pac.  614. 

Conn. — ^Whiting  v.  Ralph,  75  Conn. 
41,  62  Atl.  406;  Barbour  ▼.  Connecti- 
cut Mut.  L.  Ins.  Co.,  61  Conn.  240,  23 
AU.  164;  Smith  v.  Gaylord,  47  Conn. 
380. 

Qa. — Clayton  ▼.  Brown,  30  Qa.  400. 

/IZ.— Chicago  Daily  News  Co.  ▼. 
Siege],  212  111.  617,  72  N.  £.  810; 
Springer  v.  Bigford,  160  HI.  405,  43 
N.  E.  571;  Faloon  v.  Mclntyre,  118 
111.  292,  8  N.  E.  315,  affg  17  111.  App. 
479;  Durand  y.  Weightman,  108  111. 
489 ;  Tunison  y.  Chamblin,  88  HI.  378 ; 
Lincoln  y.  McLaughlin,  74  111.  11; 
Bridgford  y.  Riddell,  55  111.  261; 
Mixell  y.  Luts,  34  111.  382;  Carter  y. 
Lewis,  29  111.  500;  Hunt  y.  Connor, 
74  111.  App.  298;  Racine  Wagon,  etc., 
Co.  y.  Roberts,  54  111.  App.  515; 
Sweet  y.  Dean,  43  111.  App.  650;  Ed- 
gerly  y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  30  Ul.  App. 
425. 

/ml.— Bishop  y.  Redmond,  83  Ind. 

157. 

Iowa. — ^Eeehn  y.  Keehn,  115  Iowa, 
467,  88  N.  W.  957;  Heaton  y.  Ainley, 
108  Iowa,  112,  78  N.  W.  798;  Everist 
V.  Pierce,  107  Iowa,  44,  77  N.  W. 
608. 

Zoffi.— Chase  State  Bank  y.  Chat- 
ten,  60  Kan.  435,  77  Pac.  96;  Voorhii 
y.  Ifichaelis,  45  Kan.  255,  25  Pac 
692. 

JT^.— Gregory  y.  Lamb,  101  Ky. 
727,  42  S.  W.  339,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
«43;  Ceilings  v.  CoUings,  29  Ky.  L, 
Rep.  51;  Hunt  v.  Nance,  28  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1188,  92  S.  W.  6;  Mundy  v.  Ma- 
son, 67  Ky.  339;  Haskell  y.  Bakewell, 
49  Ky.  206 ;  Lillard  y.  McQee,  4  Bibb, 


166;  Howell  y.  Smith,  1  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
415.  See  also  Boldrick  y.  Mills,  20 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  852,  96  S.  W.  624. 

La. — Mossop  y.  His  Creditors,  41 
La.  Ann.  296,  6  So.  134;  Dayis  y. 
Stem,  15  La.  Ann.  177;  Simpson  y. 
Mills,  12  La.  Ann.  173;  Brunet  y.  Du- 
yergis,  5  La.  124;  Brown  y.  Ferguson, 
4  La.  257;  Morgan  y.  Dayis,  4  La. 
141;  Mercer  y.  Andrews,  2  La.  538; 
Henry  y.  Hyde,  5  Mart.  N.  S.  633; 
Hesser  y.  Black,  5  Mart  N.  S.  96. 

Me. — ^Fletcher  y.  Clarke,  29  Me. 
486;  Whitmore  y.  Woodward,  28  Me. 
392. 

Jfd.— Diggs  y.  McCullough,  69  Md. 
592,  16  Atl.  453;  Matthai  y.  Heather, 
57  Md.  483;  Ward  y.  Hollins,  14  Md. 
158;  WiUiams  y.  Banks,  11  Md.  198; 
Faringer  y.  Ramsay,  4  Md.  Ch.  33. 

M<U8. — Plimpton  y.  Qoodell,  14S 
Mass.  365,  9  N.  E.  791;  Day  y. 
Cooley,  118  Mass.  524. 

Mioh. — ^Barkworth  y.  Palmer,  118 
Mich.  50,  76  N.  W.  151;  Cole  y. 
Brown,  114  Mich.  396,  72  N.  W.  247, 
68  Am.  St.  Rep.  491;  Hopson  y. 
Payne,  7  Mich.  334. 

Mis8. — ^Pennington  y.  Seal,  49  Miss. 
518;  Summers  y.  Roos,  42  Miss.  749, 
2  Am.  Rep.  653;  Henry  y.  Fullerton, 
13  Sm.  &  M.  631. 

Mo. — Welch  y.  Mann,  193  Mo.  304, 
92  S.  W.  98;  Krueger  y.  Vorhauer, 
164  Mo.  156,  63  S.  W.  1098;  Cald- 
well y.  Smith,  88  Mo.  44;  Scudder  y. 
Morris,  107  Mo.  App.  634,  82  S.  W. 
217. 

ye6.— Weckerly  y.  Taylor  (1905), 
103  N.  W.  1065;  Pender  SUte  Bank 
y.  Frey,  3  Neb.  (UndT.)  83,  91  K. 
W.  239. 

N.  /.— Kinsey  y.  Feller,  64  N.  J. 
£q.  367,  61  Atl.  485,  rev'g  60  Ati. 


188 


F&AUDULENT    CoNVETANOES. 


defraud  them.^  A  conveyajice  may  also  be  set  aside  as  fraudu- 
lent as  to  subaequQut  creditors  where  the  conveyance  was  made 
secretly  while  the  grantor  remained  in  possession  and  in  seem- 


680;  Carter  v.  Carter,  63  N.  J.  Eq. 
726,  63  Atl.  160,  aff'g  65  N.  J.  Bq. 
766,  55  Atl.  1132;  Burne  ▼.  Kunzman 
(Ch.  1890),  19  Atl.  667;  CampbeU  y. 
Tompkins,  32  N.  J.  Eq.  170;  Allaire 
V.  Bay,  30  N.  J.  Eq.  231;  Carpenter 
V.  Carpenter,  27  N.  J.  Eq.  502; 
Metropolis  Nat.  Bank  v.  Sprague,  20 
N.  J.  Eq.  13;  Beeckman  v.  Mont- 
gomery,  14  K.  J.  Eq.   106,  80  Am. 

N.  C— Smith  v.  Reavis,  29  N.  C. 
341. 

O^kio.— Evans  y.  Lewis,  30  Ohio  St 
11;  Robinson  ▼.  Von  Bolcke,  3  Ohio 
S.  &  C.  PI.  Dec.  107,  1  Ohio  N.  P. 
429. 

Or, — Seed  y.  Jennings  (1905),  83 
Pac.  872. 

Pa.  —  Westmoreland  Guarantee 
Bldg.,  etc.,  Assoc,  v.  Thomas,  207  Pa. 
St.  513,  56  Atl.  1072;  Kuder  v.  Chad- 
wick,  207  Pa.  St.  182,  56  Atl.  407; 
Best  y.  Smith,  193  Pa.  St.  89,  44  Atl. 
329,  74  Am.  St.  Rep.  676;  Reese  y. 
Reese,  167  Pa.  St.  200,  27  Atl.  703; 
Qarlan  y.  Maglaughlin,  90  Pa.  St. 
293;  Monroe  y.  Smith, '79  Pa.  St.  459; 
Larkin  y.  McMullin,  49  Pa.  St.  29; 
Murphy  y.  Solms,  6  Pa.  Co.  Ct.  264; 
Brown  y.  Atkinson,  9  Kulp,  164; 
Clark  y.  Krieg,  7  Phila.  126. 

S.  C— King  V.  Clarke,  2  Hill  Eq. 
611;  Henderson  y.  Dodd,  Bailey  Eq. 
138. 

Tenn.— Churchill  y.  Wells,  47  Tenn. 
364;  Hickman  y.  Perrin,  46  Tenn. 
135;  Nicholas  y.  Ward,  38  Tenn. 
323,  73  Am.  Dec.  177;  Dillard  y.  Dil- 
lard,  22  Tenn.  41. 

Tex. — Martin  Brown  Co.  y.  Perrill, 
77  Tex.  199,  13  S.  W.  976 ;  Heath  ▼. 


First  Nat.  Bank,  19  Tex.  Ciy.  App. 
63,  46  S.  W.  123. 

F^.— McLane  y.  Johnson,  43  Vt.  48; 
Church  y.  Chapin,  35  Vt  223. 

Fa.— Yates  y.  Law,  86  Va.  117,  ^ 
S.  E.  508;  Pratt  y.  Cox,  22  Gratt. 
330;  Johnston  y.  Zane,  11  Gratt  652. 

W.  Fa.— Piirmers'  Bank  y,  Gould, 
48  W.  Va.  99,  35  S.  E.  878,  86  Am. 
St  Rep.  24;  Rogers  y.  Verlander,  30 
W.  Va.  619,  5  S.  E.  847;  Silyerman 
y.  Greaser,  27  W.  Va.  550. 

Can. — Ferguson  y.  Ferguson,  9 
Ont  218;  Darling  y.  Price,  27  Grant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  331. 

Eng.-^In  re  Lane-Fox  (1900),  2  Q, 
B.  508,  69  L.  J.  Q.  B.  508,  83  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  176,  7  Manson,  295,  48 
Wkly.  Rep.  650;  Stileman  y.  Ash- 
down,  Ambl.  13,  27  Eng.  Reprint,  7, 
2  Atk.  477,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  688; 
Gugen  y.  Sampson,  4  F.  &  F.  974; 
Holmes  y.  Penny,  3  Jur.  N.  S.  80,  3 
Kay  &  J.  90,  26  L.  J.  Ch.  179,  5 
Wkly.  Rep.  132;  Kidney  y.  Couss- 
maker,  12  Ves.  Jr.  136,  2  Rey.  Rep. 
118,  33  Eng.  Reprint,  53.  See  also 
Effect  of  want  of  consideration  as  to 
subsequent  creditors,  chap.  VIII,  |  36, 
infra, 

19.  N.  r.— Ehbitt  y.  Dunham,  25 
Misc.  Rep.  232,  55  N.  Y.  Supp.  78. 

Colo. — Emery  y.  Yount,  7  Colo.  107, 
1  Pac.  686. 

Jnd. — Barrow  y.  Barrow,  108  Ind. 
i{45,  9  N.  E.  371;  Bishop  y.  Redmond, 
83  Ind.  157. 

Ky. — Johnson  y.  Skaggs,  2  S.  W. 
493. 

Md. — Spuck  y.  Logan,  97  Md.  162, 
64  Atl.  989,  99  Am.  St  Rep.  427. 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Oonveyahge. 


189 


ing  ownership  of  the  property  and  kept  up  his  credit  thereby, 
and  knowledge  of  the  transfer  was  withheld  from  such  credi- 
torsy  who  dealt  with  the  grantor  and  extended  him  credit  upon 
the  faith  of  his  owning  the  property  transferred  ;^  or  the  grantor 
has  obtained  credit  thereby,  while  embarking  in  some  new  and 
hazardous  business  requiring  such  credit  and  incurred  debts 
which  possible  losses  might  render  him  unable  to  pay,  or  the 
debts  which  he  has  incurred  wei^  incurred  soon  after  the  con- 
veyance, thus  making  the  intent  to  defraud  creditors  whose 
rights  may  and  do  shortly  supervene  a  natural  and  almost  neces- 
sary inference,  and  in  this  way  he  has  been  enabled  to  obtain 
the  property  of  others  who  were  relying  upon  an  appearance 
which  was  wholly  delusive,  or  the  grantor  in  anticipation  of 
entering  on  a  new  business  conveys  property  to  prevent  its  ap- 
plication to  the  grantor's  possible  debts  in  case  of  financial  mis- 
fortune, whereby  the  hazard  or  risk  of  the  business  should  be 
cast  upon  the  parties  who  become  his  creditors  in  the  new  busi- 
ness.'^   But  fraud  in  fact  must  be  proved  in  order  to  set  aside 


JfoM. — Day  y.  Cooley,  118  Mass. 
524. 

2^.  J. — K[atioiial  Bank  of  Metropo- 
lis V.  Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13. 

Tenn. — ChurchiU  v.  WeUs,  47  Tenn. 
364. 

Tesff, — ^Tucker  ▼.  Pennington  (Civ. 
App.),  46  S.  W.  313. 

IV.  Va, — Silvennan  v.  Oreaser,  27 
W.  Va.  650. 

Wia. — Zimmerman  y.  Bannon,  101 
Wis.  407,  77  N.  W.  735;  Hoffman  t. 
Junk,  61  Wis.  613,  8  V.  W.  493. 

20.  y.  r.— Shand  v.  Hanley,  71  N. 
Y.  319;  Savage  v.  Murphy,  34  N.  Y. 
608,  90  Am.  Dec.  733. 

Iowa. — First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Reid,  122 
Iowa,  280,  98  N.  W.  107;  Hitt  v. 
Sterling-Goold  Mfg.  Ck>.,  Ill  Iowa, 
458,  82  N.  W.  919;  Hook  v.  Mowre,  17 
Iowa,  195. 

M%$8. — ^Robertson  &  Go.  ▼.  Oolum- 


bu8  Ins.,  etc.,  Co.,  85  Miss.  234,  38  So. 
100;  Winn  v.  Bamett,  31  Miss.  663. 

Ohio, — Bowlus  V.  Shanabarger,  19 
Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  137,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec. 
167. 

8,  C— Kidd  ▼.  Mitchell,  1  Nott  ft 
M.  334,  9  Am.  Dec.  702. 

ai.  2^.  r.— Todd  V.  Nelson,  109  N. 
Y.  316,  16  N.  E.  360;  Young  v.  Heer- 
mans,  66  N.  Y.  374;  Case  v.  Phelps, 
39  N.  Y.  164;  Dygert  v.  Remer- 
schnider,  32  N.  Y.  629;  Carpenter  ▼. 
Roe,  10  N.  Y.  227;  O'Brien  v. 
Whigam,  0  App.  Div.  113,  41  N.  Y. 
Supp.  40. 

U,  flf.— Schreyer  v.  Scott,  134  U.  8. 
406,  10  Sup.  Ct.  579,  33  L.  Ed.  955; 
Horbach  v.  Hill,  112  U.  S.  144,  5 
Sup  Ct.  81,  28  L.  Ed.  670;  Graham  ▼. 
LaCross,  etc.,  R.  Co.,  102  U.  S.  148, 
26  L.  Ed.  106;  Smith  v.  Vodges,  92 
U.  S.  183,  23  L.  Ed.  481 ;  MatUngly 


1»0 


FsAUDUIiSKT   OOKVXTAHOXB. 


A  voluntary  convejanoe  at  the  instance  of  subsequent  creditors, 
and  it  will  not  be  imputed  when  the  facts  upon  which  it  is 
predicated  may  consist  with  honesty  and  purity  of  intention; 
and  a  mere  expectation  of  future  indebtedness,  or  even  an  in- 
tent to  contract  debts  if  it  is  not  coupled  with  a  purpose  to  con- 
vey the  property  in  order  to  withdraw  it  from  the  reach  of  sub- 
sequent creditors,  and  there  is  no  immediate  intention  of  engaging 
in  a  new  or  a  hazardous  business  or  incurring  indebtedness  with 
a  preconceived  purpose  not  to  pay  it,  will  not  make  the  convey- 
ance invalid,  as  against  subsequent  creditors,  whom  subsequent 
unexpected  depreciation  in  the  value  of  the  debtor's  property  or 
unexpected  reverses  or  embarrassments  in  business  render  the 
debtor  unable  to  pay." 


▼.  Nye,  8  Wall.  370,  19  L.  Ed.  380; 
Sexton  V.  Wheaton,  8  Wheat.  229,  5 
L.  Ed.  603;  Burdick  ▼.  GUI,  7  Fed. 
668,  2  McCary  486;  Ridgeway  v. 
Underwood,  20  Fed.  Gas.  No.  11,815, 
4  Wash.  129;  Parish  v.  Murphee,  13 
How.  99. 

Ala.— Echols  v.  Orr,  106  Ala.  237, 
17  So.  677;  Seals  ▼.  Robinson,  75 
Ala.  363;  Kirksey  y.  Snedeoor,  60  Ala. 
192. 

ifd.— Diggs  V.  McGuUough,  69  Md. 
592,  16  Ail.  453;  Matthai  ▼.  Heather, 
57  Md.  483. 

JficA.— Herschfeldt  t.  George,  6 
Mich.  456. 

Jfeh.—Ayen  ▼.  Wolcott,  66  Neb. 
712,  92  N.  W.  1036. 

N.  J.— Hildebrand  v.  Willig,  64  N. 
J.  Ed.  240,  53  All.  1035;  Minzeshei- 
mer  t.  Doolittle,  56  N.  J.  Eq.  206,  39 
Atl.  386;  Providence  City  Nat.  Bank 
▼.  Hamilton,  34  N.  J.  Eq.  158. 

OJiio.— Hedrick  ▼.  Gregg,  10  Ohio 
S.  &  C.  PI.  Dec.  462,  8  Ohio  N.  P. 
24. 

Pa.— Mullen  y.  Wilson,  44  Pa.  St. 
413,  84  Am.  Dec.  461;  Black  v.  Nease, 
37  Pa.  St.  433;   Sanders  ▼.  Wagon- 


seller,  19  Pa.  St  248;  Thomson  y. 
Dougherty,  12  Serg.  &  K.  448;  Ma- 
teer  v.  Hissim,  3  Penr.  ft  W.  160. 

7e(9.— Lewis  v.  Simon,  72  Tex,  470, 
10  S.  W.  554;  Cole  v.  Terrell,  71  Tex. 
549,  9  S.  W.  668. 

Can.— Bucklin  v.  Rose,  7  Grant  Ch. 
(U.  C.)  440;  Bank  of  British  North 
America  v.  Rattenbury,  7  Grant  Ch. 
(U.  C.)  383. 

Eng.^Ex  parte  Russell,  19  Ch.  D. 
688,  61  L.  G.  Ch.  521,  46  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  113,  30  Wkly.  Rep.  684; 
Mackay  y.  Douglass,  L.  R.  14  Eq.  106, 
41  L.  J.  Ch.  639,  26  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S. 
721;  20  Wkly.  Rep.  652;  Taylor  v. 
Jones,  2  Atk.  601;  Stileman  y.  Adh- 
down,  Ambl.  13,  27  Eng.  Reprint,  7, 
2  Atk.  477,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  688;  2 
Story  Eq.  Jur.,  §  356  and  note;  Bar- 
ling y.  Bishopp,  29  Beav.  417,  6  Jur. 
N.  S.  812,  8  Wkly.  Rep.  631,  54  Eng. 
Reprint,  689;  Richardson  y.  Smell- 
wood,  Jac.  552,  4  Eng.  Ch.  552,  27 
Eng.  Reprint,  958. 

21^.  y,  r. — ^Neuberger  v.  Keim,  134 
N.  Y.  35,  31  N.  E.  268. 

U.  flf,— Schreyer  y.  Scott,  134  U.  S. 
405,  10  Sup.  Ct.  579,  33  L.  Ed.  955; 


Who  Mat  Attack  Validity  of  CoNVBYAifOB. 


191 


§  4.  Effect  of  fraud  as  to  pre-esdstiiig  creditors. — The  au* 
thorities  are  conflicting  upon  the  question  as  to  whether  subse- 
quent creditors  can  attack  and  set  aside  a  prior  conyejance  of  his 
property  by  a  debtor  on  the  ground  that  it  was  fraudulent  as  to 
existing  creditors.  The  rule  is  maintained  in  many  jurisdictions 
that  a  conveyance  fraudulent  as  to  existing  creditors  is  fraudur 
lent  as  to  subsequent  creditors  as  well  and  subsequent  creditors 
can  attack  and  set  it  aside  upon  showing  actual  fraud  as  to  ex- 
isting creditors^  upon  the  theory  that  proof  of  such  fraud  is 
sufScient  evidence  of  fraud  upon  subsequent  creditora^  "  In 


AdAHiB  y.  Riley,  122  U.  S.  3S2,  7  Sup. 
Ct.  120S,  30  L.  Bd.  1207;  Wallaoe  t. 
Penfield,  106  U.  8.  260»  1  Sup.  Ct 
216,  27  L.  Bd.  147. 

/oioa. — ^Lymaii  t.  Cenford,  15  Iowa, 
229. 

JTii.— Totten  ▼.  Brady,  64  Md.  170. 

Jfo.^Pftyne  t.  Stanton,  60  Mo.  168; 
Pepper  ▼.  Carter,  11  Mo.  640. 

^05.— Weckerly  y.  Taylor  (1906), 
103  N.  W.  1066. 

v.  J.— <3ray  v.  Folwell,  67  N.  J.  Eq. 
446,  41  Ati.  869. 

Or. — Marquam  t.  Sengfelder,  24  Or. 
2,  32  Pac.  676. 

Pto.— Harlan  y.  Maglauglin,  90  Pa. 
St  293;  Wmiams  y.  Dayis,  69  Pa. 
St.  21;  Snyder  y.  Christ,  39  Pa.  St 
499. 

Tev.— Ckmzales  y.  Adoue,  94  Tex. 
120,  68  S.  W.  961. 

Fa.— Engleby  y.  Haryey,  93  Va. 
440,  26  S.  E.  226. 

Can, — ^Fleming  y.  Edwards,  23  Ont 
App.  718;  Mnlliolland  y.  Williamson, 
14  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  291. 

23.  V.  y.— Carr  y.  Breese,  81  N.  Y. 
684;  Mead  y.  Oregg,  12  Barb.  663, 
antecedent  debte  must  be  shown  suiB- 
eient  in  amount  to  afford  reasonable 
snridenoe  of  fraudulent  intent;  Weld 
y.  Reilly,  48  N.  Y.  Super  Ct  531; 
JiocM^gk  y.  Addison,   19  Abb.   Pr. 


169;    Spicer  y.  Ayers,   63  How.  Pr. 
406;  Anderson  y.  Boberte,  18  Johns 
616,  9  Am.  Dec  236;  King  y.  Wil 
ooz,    11    Paige,   689;    Reade   y.  Liy 
ingston,  3  Johns.  Ch.  481,  8  Am.  Dee 
620.    But  see  Holmes  y.  dark,  a  yol 
untary  eonyeyance  is  not  fraudulent 
as  to  subsequent  creditors,  unless  the 
grantor  was  then   insolyent,  or  the 
deed  was   made   with   intent  to  de- 
fraud subsequent  creditors. 

IJ.  iSf.— lalienthal  y.  Drucklieb,  92 
Fed.  763,  34  C.  C.  A.  657 ;  Voorhees  y. 
Blanton,  83  Fed.  234. 

Ala. — ^Prestwood  y.  Troy  Fertilizer 
Co.,  116  Ala.  668,  22  So.  77;  Hoins 
y.  White,  105  Ala.  670,  17  So.  185; 
Yeend  y.  Weeks,  104  Ala.  331,  16  So. 
165,  53  Am.  St.  Bep.  50;  Dickson  y. 
MeLamey,  97  Ala.  383,  12  So.  398; 
PinlcBton  y.  McLemore,  31  Ala.  308; 
Johnson  y.  Thweatt,  18  Ala.  741. 

Arh. — Semmes  y.  Underwood,  64 
Ark.  415,  42  8.  W.  1069;  May  y. 
State  Nat  Bank,  69  Ark.  614,  28  S. 
W.  431;  Toney  y.  McGehee,  38  Ark. 
419. 

Colo.—- Mulock  y.  Wilson,  19  C6lo. 
296,  35  Pac.  532;  Wllcoxen  y.  Mor- 
gan, 2  Colo.  473. 

C<mn, — ^Barbour  y.  Connecticut 
Mut  L.  Ins.  Co.,  61  Conn.  240,  23 


192 


Fbauduusnt  ComrEYANCSS. 


many  other  jurisdictions  the  contrary  rale  is  held  that  a  con- 
veyance which  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  existing  creditors  is 
not  necessarily  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  subsequent  creditors, 
but  that  it  is  only  bad  as  to  those  it  was  intended  to  defraud, 
and  that  subsequent  creditors  can  only  avail  themselves  of  the 
fraud  which  is  practiced  on  them  and  can  only  attack  sudi  con- 
veyance on  the  ground  of  actual  fraud  as  against  them.**    Subse- 


Atl.  154;  BsBMtt  ▼.  McKenna,  52 
Gonn.  437. 

D.  C. — Edwards  ▼.  Entwide,  2 
Mackey,  43;  Killian  v.  Clark,  3  Mae- 
Arthur,  379. 

Ky. — Dishman  v.  Daridson,  19  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  139,  39  S.  W.  515. 

Me, — ^Whitmore  v.  Woodward,  28 
Me.  392;  Clark  v.  French,  23  Me.  221, 
39  Am.  Dec.  618. 

Mass.  —  Woodbury  t.  Sparrell 
Print,  187  Mass.  426,  73  N.  E.  547; 
Livermore  v.  Boutelle,  11  Gray,  217, 
71  Am.  Dec.  70S;  Parkman  v.  Welch, 
36  Mass.  231;  Clapp  v.  Leatherbee, 
35  Mass.  131;  Damon  v.  Btyant,  19 
Mass.  411; 

Mich. — ^Hopson  v.  Payne,  7  Mich. 
334;  Herschfeldt  ▼.  George,  6  Mich. 
456. 

N,  JBr.-^took  v.  Lee,  72  N.  H.  569, 
58  Atl.  511;  Coolidge  ▼.  Melvin,  42 
N.  H.  510;  Smyth  t.  CarlUle,  16  N. 
H.  464,  17  N.  H.  417. 

N.  C— Toole  V.  Darden,  41  N.  C. 

394. 

Ohio, — ETans  t.  Lewis,  30  Ohio  St. 
11;  Vanzant  ▼.  Davies,  6  Ohio  St  62; 
Hedrick  v.  Gregg,  10  Ohio  S.  &  C.  PI. 
Dec.  462,  8  Ohio  N.  P.  24. 

Tenn, — Nelson  v.  Venden,  99  Tenn. 
224,  42  S.  W.  5;  Trezevant  v.  Terrell, 
96  Tenn.  528,  33  S.  W.  109;  Nichol 
V.  Nichol,  63  Tenn.  145;  White  ▼. 
Bettis,  56  Tenn.  645;  Nicholas  ▼. 
Ward,  38  Tenn.  323,  73  Am.  Dec. 
177;  Hester  t.  Wilkinson,  25  Tenn. 


215,  44  Am.  Dee.  303;  Young  t.  Pate» 
4  Yerg.  164;  Carpenter  t.  Scales  (Ck. 
App.  1897),  48  S.  W.  249. 

Vt, — ^McLane  t.  Johnson,  43  Vt. 
48;  Dewey  ▼.  Long,  25  Vt.  264. 

Fa.— Yates  v.  Law,  86  Va.  117,  9 
S.  E.  508;  Hutchinson  ▼.  Kelly,  1 
Bob.  123,  39  Am.  Dee.  250. 

W.  Fa.— Bogers  t.  Verlaader,  80 
W.  Va.  619,  5  S.  E.  847. 

Can.— Struthers  t.  Glennle,  14  Ont. 
726. 

24.  U.  H.— Wallace  t.  Penfield,  106 
U.  S.  260,  1  Sup.  Ct  216,  27  L.  Ed. 
147;  Sexton  t.  Wheaton,  8  Wheat. 
229,  5  L.  Ed.  603. 

Ca<.— Banning  t.  Marleau,  133  Gal. 
485,  65  Pac.  964;  Hussey  ▼.  Oastle, 
41  Cal.  239;  Horn  ▼.  Volcano  Water 
Co.,  13  Cal.  62,  73  Am.  Dee.  569; 
Wells  V.  Stout,  9  Cal.  479.  See  also 
Youd  V.  German  Savings,  etc.,  Soc. 
(Cal.  App.  1906),  86  Pac.  901. 

Oa, — ^Brown  t.  Spivey,  63  Ga.  155; 
Cunningham  ▼.  Schley,  41  Ga.  426. 

/II.— Higgins  V.  White,  118  HI.  619, 
8  N.  E.  808;  Crawford  t.  Logan,  97 
HI.  396;  Phillips  v.  North,  77  HI. 
243;  Blakely  Printing  Co.  t.  Pease, 
95  HI.  App.  341. 

/ltd. — Stumph  ▼.  Bruner,  89  Ind. 
556;  Lynch  v.  Baleigfa,  3  Ind.  273; 
Doe  y.  Hurd,  7  Blackf.  510;  Paine  y. 
Doe,  7  Blackf.  485.  Compare  Dart  t. 
Stewart,  17  Ind.  221 ;  Rufling  y.  Til> 
ton,  12  Ind.  259. 

Iowa. — ^Bnmdage    y.    Cheneworth. 


Who  Mat  Attack  Validity  of  Cohveyanob. 


193 


quent  creditors  are  in  a  less  favorable  position  to  attack  a 
voluntary  conveyance  as  fraudulent  because  tiieir  debts,  being 
contracted  after  the  conveyance  they  seek  to  impeach,  cannot  be 
said  to  have  been  incurred  on  the  faith  of  the  property  con- 
veyed.^ It  has  been  held  that  a  gift  by  an  insolvent  debtor  is 
not  void  as  to  subsequent  creditors  in  the  absence  of  fraud,  al- 
though money  vr^is  obtained  of  a  subsequent  creditor  for  the 
express  purpose  of  paying  debts  existing  when  the  gift  was  made, 
as  to  which  the  gift  was  fraudulent,  and  was  actually  used  for 
that  purpose.^     And  where  a  debtor,  solvent  at  the  time,  and 


101  Iowa,  256;  70  N.  W.  211,  S3  Am. 
8t.  Rep.  382;  Carbioner  v.  Montgom- 
ery, 97  Iowa,  660,  66  N.  W.  900; 
Rock  Island  Stove  Go.  v.  Walrod,  76 
Iowa,  479,  39  N.  W.  811;  SUte  t. 
Wallace,  67  Iowa,  77,  24  N.  W.  609; 
Lyman  ▼.  Cesaford,  16  Iowa,  229. 

Minn, — WilliamB  v.  Kemper,  99 
Minn.  301,  109  N.  W.  242;  Pul 
lington  v.  Northwestern  Importers', 
etc.,  Assoc.,  48  Minn.  490,  61 
N.  W.  476,  31  Am.  St.  Rep.  663; 
Bloom  V.  Moy,  43  Minn.  397,  45  N. 
W.  715,  19  Am.  St.  Rep.  243;  Hart- 
.man  t.  Weiland,  36  Minn.  223,  30  N. 
W.  815;  Sanders  v.  Chandler,  26 
Minn.  273,  3  N.  W.  351;  Stone  ▼. 
Myers,  9  Minn.  303,  86  Am.  Dec.  104; 
Bniggerman  v.  Hoerr,  7  Minn.  337. 
82  Am.  Dec.  97. 

Mi88. — Simmons  ▼.  Ingram,  60 
Miss.  886;  Winn  v.  Bamett,  31  Miss. 
653;  Henry  y.  Fullerton,  13  Sm.  ft 
M.  631. 

Mo. — Johnson  ▼.  Murphy,  180  Mo. 
697,  79  S.  W.  909;  Burgess  v.  Mc- 
Lean, 85  Mo.  678;  Pepper  v.  Carter, 
11  Mo.  540;  Mutual  L.  Ins.  Co.  v. 
Sandfelder,  9  Mo.  285.  But  see 
Bracken  v.  Milner,  99  Mo.  App.  187, 
73  S.  W.  225. 

I^«fr«— -Ayers   v.   Woloott,   66   Neb. 

13 


712,  92  N.  W.  1036;  Raoek  v.  First 
Nat.  Bank,  62  Neb.  669,  87  N.  W. 
542;  Graham  v.  Townsend,  62  Neb. 
364,  87  N.  W.  169, 

V,  J.— Gray  v.  Folwell,  67  N.  J. 
Eq.  446,  41  Atl.  869;  Zinn  v.  Brinker- 
hoff,  48  N.  J.  Eq.  513,  22  Atl.  353. 

Pa.— Buckley  ▼.  Duff,  114  Pa.  St. 
596,  8  Atl.  188;  Kimble  v.  Smith,  95 
Pa.  St.  69;  Harlan  v.  Maglaughlin, 
90  Pa.  St.  293;  Monroe  v.  Smith,  79 
Pa.  St.  459 ;  Staller  v.  Kiricpatrick,  1 
Mona.  486.  But  see  Ammon's  Ap- 
peal, 63  Pa.  St.  284. 

8,  C — ^Richardson  y.  Rhodus,  14 
Rich.  95;  Ingrem  ▼.  Phillips,  3 
Strobh.  565 ;  Iley  v.  Niswanger,  1  Mc- 
Cord  Eq.  518. 

8.  D. — ^Aldous  ▼.  Olverson,  17  S.  D. 
190,  95  N.  W.  917. 

Te». — Bavouset  t.  York,  18  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  428. 

Wtuh. — ^Mayer  v.  Frasch,  7  Wash. 
504,  35  Pac.  409. 

W.  Fa.— Greer  v.  O'Brien,  36  W. 
Va.  277,  15  S.  E.  74;  Rose  v.  Brown, 
11  W.  Va.  122;  Lockhard  t.  Beck- 
ley,  10  W.  Va.  87. 

26.  Pike  v.  Miles,  23  Wis.  164,  99 
Am.  Dec.  148. 

26.  First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Bayless,  96 
Ga.  684,  23  S.  E.  861. 


194 


Fbaudulent  Cokvbtancbs. 


having  no  actual  intent  to  defraud  creditors,  dispoees  of  prop* 
erty  for  on  inadequate  consideration  or  by  a  voluntary  con- 
veyance, subsequent  creditors  cannot  question  the  transaction.^ 

§  5.  E£Fect  of  prior  and  continuing  indebtedness. — ^Where  a 
conveyance  is  made  with  intent  to  defraud  creditors,  by  one  at 
the  time  in  debt,  and  who  subsequently  continues  to  be  indebted, 
the  indebtedness  being  continuous  and  unbroken,  it  is  fraudulent 
and  void  as  to  existing  creditors.^  Where  a  conveyance  is  fraudu- 
lent and  void  as  to  existing  creditors,  the  subsequent  payment 
and  discharge  of  such  existing  indebtedness  with  money  or  prop- 
erty received  by  contracting  new  debts  with  subsequent  credi- 
tors, will  not  render  the  conveyance  valid  aa  to  subsequent  credi- 
tors, but  such  conveyance  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  such  subse- 
quent creditors  also.^ 


27.  N.  y.— Phoenix  Bank  v.  Staf- 
ford, 89  N.  Y.  405. 

U.  8. — Qraham  v.  Lacrosse  ft  M.  R. 
Co.,  102  U.  S.  148,  26  L.  Ed.  106. 

Conn. — Smith  v.  Gaylord,  47  Conn. 
380. 

/U.— Durand  v.  Weightman,  108 
lU.  489;  Jackson  v.  Miner,  101  111. 
560;  Lincoln  ▼.  McLaughlin,  74  HI. 
IL 

ifo.— Caldwell  v.  Smith,  88  Mo.  44. 

Po.— Reese  v.  Reese,  167  Pa.  St. 
200,  27  Atl.  703. 

8,  C— Brock  ▼.  Bowman,  1  Rich. 
Eq.  Cas.  186. 

STenn.— Dillard  v.  Dillard,  22  Tenn. 
41. 

28.  v.  7.— ^vage  v.  Murphy,  34 
N.  Y.  608,  90  Am.  Deo.  733. 

ArA;.— Toney  v.  McQehee,  38  Ark. 
419. 

Oronn.— Paulk  t.  Cooke^  89  Conn. 
666. 

ifd.— 4Spuek  V.  Logan,  97  Md.  162, 
64  Atl.  989,  99  Am.  St  Rep.  427. 


N. ./.— Claflin  t.  Mess,  30  K.  J.  S9. 
21L 

8.  C— McElwee  y.  Sutton,  2  Bai- 
ley, 128. 

Con.— Ferguson  v.  Kenny,  16  Out. 
App.  276. 

Bng. — Freeman  v.  Pope,  L.  R.  9  Eq. 
206,  39  L.  J.  Ch.  148,  689,  21  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  816,  18  Wkly.  Rep.  399,. 
906,  L.  R.  6  Ch.  638;  Jenkyn  ▼. 
Vaughan,  3  Drew.  419,  2  Jur.  N.  S. 
109,  26  L.  J.  Ch.  338,  4  Wkly.  Rep. 
214. 

Conira.— Mayer  ▼.  Frasch,  7  Wash. 
604,  36  Pac.  409. 

£0.  N,  r.— Savage  ▼.  Murphy,  34 
K.  Y.  608,  90*  Am.  Dec.  733,  where 
the  debt9  owing  at  the  time  of  the 
fraudulent  conveyance  were  paid  with 
the  proceeds  of  credit  subsequently  ac- 
quired, the  indebtedness  then  existing 
was  merely  transferred,  not  paid,  and 
the  fraud  is  as  palpable  as  it  would 
be  if  the  subsequent  debts  unpaid 
were  owing  to  the  same  creditors 
who  held  them  at  the  time  of  the 


J 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  op  Convbyancb. 


195 


§  6.  Knowledge  or  notice  of  fraudulent  transaction. — ^As  a 

general  rule  a  conveyance  made  by  a  debtor  cannot  be  attacked 
for  fraud  by  a  subsequent  creditor  who  has  acquired  his  daim 
with  notice,  either  actual  or  oonstructive,  of  such  conveyanca*^ 
But  subsequent  creditors  are  not  debarred  from  attacking  a  deed 
made  in  pursuance  of  a  scheme  to  defraud  them  merely  because  it 
is  regist^red/^  and  such  a  conveyance  is  void  as  against  a  subs^ 


oonyeyance;  MiUs  ▼.  Morris,  1  Hoffm. 
Ch.  419. 
/II.— Thomas  y.  Lye,  37  111.  App. 

482. 
/oiMi.— Barhydt  ▼.  Perry,  67  Iowa, 

416,  10  K.  W.  820. 

8.  C— MoElwee  y.  Sutton,  2  Bai- 
ley, 128. 

Ya, — ^Wilson  y.  Buchanan,  7  Gratt. 

334. 

Contra.— First  Nat  Bank  y.  Bay- 
less,  96  Ga.  684,  23  S.  £.  861,  such 
a  0Qnve3rance  is  not  yoid  as  to  suhse- 
quent  creditors  in  the  absence  of  ac- 
tual fraud. 

30.  N.  y.— Baker  y.  Gilman,  52 
Barb.  26;  PeU  y.  Tredwell,  6  Wend. 
661.  But  see  Martin  ▼.  Walker,  12 
Hun,  46. 

U.  fif.— In  re  May,  2  Fed.  846. 

Cofwi.— Smith  v.  Gaylord,  47  Conn. 

380. 

(7a.— Sims  y.  Albea,  72  Ga.  761; 
Brown  v.  Spiyey,  63  Ga.  166. 

/ZZ.— Henebery  y.  Johnson,  96  IlL 

App.  637. 

/nd.— Parke  County  Coal  CO.  y. 
Terre  Haute  Paper  Co.,  129  Ind.  73, 
26  N.  £.  884. 

lotoa. — Saunders  y.  King,  119  Iowa, 
291,  93  N.  W.  272. 

JTan.— State  Bank  of  Chase  y. 
Chatten,  69  Kan.  436,  77  Pac.  96; 
Sheppard  y.  Thomas,  24  Kan.  780. 

Afd.— Kane  v.  Roberts,  40  Md.  690; 
Williams  v.  Banks,  11  Md.  198;  Rob- 


erts y.  Gibson,  6  Harr.  ft  J.  116.  But 
see  Scott  y.  Keane,  87  Md.  709,  40  Atl. 
1070,  42  L.  R.  A.  369,  a  creditor  who 
contracts  with  notice  of  a  trust  deed 
placing  property  of  his  debtor  beyond 
the  reach  of  creditors,  and  under 
which  the  debtor  exercises  all  the 
rights  of  ownership,  is  not  estopped 
to  have  such  deeds  declared  fraudu- 
lent and  against  the  policy  of  the 
law. 

Mi88. — ^Donoghue  y.  Shull,  86  Miss. 
404,  37  So.  817. 

Pa.— Monroe  v.  Smith,  79  Pa.  St 
469;  Snyder  y.  Christ,  39  Pa.  St.  499; 
Thomas  v.  Butler,  16  Pa.  Super  Ct. 
268. 

8.  C— Bank  of  South  Carolina  y. 
BaUard,  12  Rich.  269;  Eigleberger  y. 
Kibler,  1  Hill  £q.  113,  26  Am.  Dec. 
192. 

Tenn. — ^Nelson  v.  Vanden,  99  Tenn. 
224,  42  S.  W.  6;  Churchill  v.  Wells,  7 
Coldw.  364,  actual  notice  necessary. 

Tew, — ^Lehmberg  y.  Biberstein,  61 
Tex.  467. 

Fa. — ^Bank  of  Alexandria  y.  Pat- 
ton,  1  Rob.  499. 

W.  Fa. — ^Horner-Gaylord  Co.  v. 
Fawcett,  50  W.  Va.  487,  40  S.  E.  664, 
67  L.  R.  A.  869. 

ai.  Diggs  y.  McCullough,  69  Md. 
692,  16  Atl.  463;  Matthai  y.  Heather, 
57  Md.  483;  Moore- y.  Blondheim,  19 
Md.  172;  Williams  y.  Banks,  11  Md. 
198. 


196 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


quent  creditor  who  had  no  knowledge  thereof,  though  the  oan-* 
vejance  was  of  reo^rd.  The  reoord  is  not  constructive  notice  to 
subsequent  creditora^  In  some  jurisdictions  it  is  held  that 
notice  to  a  creditor,  at  the  time  of  the  creation  of  his  debt,  of  a 
prior  conveyance  made  in  fraud  of  creditors,  will  not  affect  such 
creditor's  subsequent  right  to  have  the  conveyance  set  aside.** 

§  7.  Creditors   whose   claims    are   barred   or    satisfied* — A 

creditor  whose  claim  or  judgment  is  barred  by  the  statute  of 
limitations  cannot  maintain  a  suit  or  bill  in  equity  to  set  aside 
the  debtor's  conveyance  as  fraudulent  and  to  subject  to  the  pay- 
ment of  such  claim  or  judgment  property  assigned  or  conveyed 
by  the  debtor  in  fraud  of  his  creditors."  To  enable  a  creditor 
to  contest  the  validity  of  a  conveyance  by  his  debtor,  he  must 
have  a  judgment  or  a  claim  in  full  force;  one  which  has  been 
paid  or  satisfied  is  not  sufficient.  Where  the  claim  of  a  creditor 
is  satisfied  and  extinguished,  or  where  property  sold  on  execution 
is  purchased  by  the  judgment  creditor  for  a  sum  sufficient  to 
satisfy  the  same,  he  ceases  to  be  a  creditor  of  the  judgment  debtor, 


32.  Marshall  ▼.  RoH,  139  Pa.  St. 
399,  20  Atl.  999,  23  Am.  St.  Rep. 
19S;  Mahle  y.  Kurtz,  9  Pa.  Co.  Gt. 
280,  6  Eulp,  157. 

33.  Ala. — ^Echols  y.  Peurring,  107 
Ala.  660,  18  So.  250. 

Ky. — O'Kane  y.  Vixmedge,  108  Ky. 
34,  55  S.  W.  711,  21  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
1551;  Buffington  y.  Mosby,  17  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  1307,  34  S.  W.  704,  where  the 
creditor  was  induced  to  extend  credit 
by  the  debtor's  representations  that 
he  made  the  conyeyance  only  to  de- 
feat persons  seeking  an  unjust  judg- 
ment against  him  in  another  State, 
and  that  the  creditor's  debt  would 
be  paid.  But  see  Shipp  y.  Hibler,  4 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  47 ;  Hanson  y.  Power,  38 
Ky.  91. 

Mont. — Pincus  y.  Reynolds,  19 
Mont.  564,  49  Pac.  145. 


y.  J. — Spielman  y.  Knowles,  60  N. 
J.  Eq.  796,  27  Atl.  1033;  Receiyer  of 
Graham  Button  Co.  y.  Spielman,  60 
N.  J.  Eq.  120,  24  Atl.  671. 

34.  Ala, — ^Herstein  y.  Walker,  85 
Ala.  37,  4  So.  262;  Merchants'  Kat. 
Bank  y.  McGee,  108  Ala.  304,  19  So. 
356,  claim  against  estate  of  deceased 
debtor  not  barred  where  there  has 
been  no  administration  on  the  es- 
tate; Larkin  y.  Mead,  77  Ala.  486. 

La. — ^Hopkins  y.  Buck,  6  La.  Ann. 
487. 

Mi88. — Fox  y.  WaUaoe,  31  Miss. 
660;  Edwards  y.  McGtoe,  31  Miss. 
143. 

Or.— Dayis  y.  Dayis,  20  Or.  78,  25 
Pac.  140. 

Tea. — ^McClenney  y.  McClenney,  3 
Tex.  192,  49  Am.  Dec.  738. 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyance. 


197 


and  cannot  attack  prior  or  subsequent  conveyances  by  such 
debtor,  and  sedc  to  have  them  set  aside  as  fraudulent^  One 
who  has  ceased  to  be  a  creditor  with  an  enforceable  lien  cannot 
attack  his  debtor's  conveyance."  A  person  designing  to  file  a 
bill  in  aid  of  an  execution,  for  the  purpose  of  vacating  an  al- 
leged fraudulent  transfer  of  land,  must  do  so  before  the  sale; 
if  he  waits  until  after  the  sale,  and  the  purchase  of  the  land 
thereat  by  himself,  the  suit  cannot  be  maintained."  The  grantee 
of  a  judgment  debtor  who  purchased  at  the  execution  sale  can- 
not sue  to  set  aside  as  fraudulent  a  deed  made  by  the  judgment 
debtor  prior  to  the  sale."    Where  property  sold  on  execution  and 


36.  N.  r.— Weaver  v.  Toogood,  1 
Barb.  238;  Van  Wyek  v.  Seward,  18 
Wend.  375;  Jackson  ▼.  Cadwell,  1 
€k>w.  622. 

17.  fir.— Gottlieb  v.  Thatcher,  34  Fed. 
435,  where  the  creditor  was  held  to 
have  been  in  equity  more  than  fully 
paid;  Walker  v.  Powers,  104  U.  S. 
245,  26  L.  Ed.  729. 

On, — ^Feagan  v.  Cureton,  19  Oa. 
404. 

Ind. — ^Voorhees  v.  Carpenter,  127 
Ind.  300,  26  N.  E.  838,  where 
the  debtor  after  the  fraudulent  con- 
veyance made  a  general  assignment 
and  the  trust  had  been  executed  and 
the  assignee  discharged. 

JTan.— Bobbins  v.  Sackett,  23  Kan. 
301. 

Mass. — ^Plimpton  v.  Goodell,  143 
Mass.  365,  9  N.  E.  791. 

Neb.—^ATle  V.  Burch,  21  Neb.  702, 
33  N.  W.  254. 

5Penn.— Tyler  v.  Hamblin,  68  Tenn. 
152.  A  conveyance  cannot  be  set 
aside  by  creditors  who  compromised 
their  claims  after  the  conveyance  was 
recorded.  Landreth  Co.  v.  Schevenel, 
102  Tenn.  486,  52  S.  W.  148. 

rear.— Willis    v.    Hudson,    72    Tex. 


598,  10  S.  W.  713;  Hodges  v.  Taylor, 
57  Tex.  196. 

y*.— Bichards  v.  Hunt,  6  Vt.  251, 
27  Am.  Dec.  545,  but  a  composition 
and  discharge  of  the  creditor's  claim 
by  false  and  fraudulent  representa- 
tions will  not  deprive  the  creditor  of 
his  rights. 

Neslicenoe  in  purralns  rem* 
edy. — ^The  rule  that  giving  time  to 
the  principal  debtor  discharges  the 
surety  does  not  apply  in  the  case  of 
a  judgment  creditor  seeking  to  sub- 
ject property  voluntarily  conveyed  by 
the  debtor,  in  the  hands  of  the 
grantee,  so  as  to  make  a  stay  of  exe- 
cution on  the  judgment  by  the  plain- 
tiff, under  an  arrangement  for  its 
payment  by  installments,  a  bar  to  the 
suit  to  subject  the  property  in  his 
hands,  although  the  debt  might  cer- 
tainly have  been  satisfied  had  the 
creditor  proceeded  in  the  usual  man- 
ner. Hopkirk  v.  Randolph,  12  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  6,698,  2  Brock.  132. 

36.  Daugherty  v.  Powell,  67  Kan. 
857,  72  Pac.  274,  74  Pac.  242. 

37.  Cranson  v.  Smith,  47  Mich.  189, 
10  N.  W.  194. 

38.  Helden  v.  Hellen,  80  Md.  616, 
31  Atl.  506,  45  Am.  8t.  Rep.  371. 


198 


Fbaubulent  Convetajtces. 


purchaaeu  lor  the  benefit  of  the  creditor^  is  incumbered  with  a> 
fraudulent  mortgage,  the  creditor  maj,  where  the  execution  is 
satisfied,  file  a  bill  to  set  aside  the  mortgage.* 

§  8.  Nature  of  claims  of  creditonL — The  statute  of  13  Eliza- 
beth relating  to  fraudulent  conveyances,  and  the  statutes  based 
thereon  enacted  in  various  states  in  this  country,  embrace  as 
creditors  within  the  meaning  of  such  statutes,  as  a  general  rule, 
all  persons  who  have  a  valid  cause  of  action.^  A  creditor's  bill 
to  set  aside  a  conveyance  by  the  debtor,  as  intended  to  defeat 
and  delay  the  complainant,  cannot  be  maintained  by  one  who  is 
not  a  bona  fide  creditor,^^  or  by  one  who  is  made  a  nominal 
creditor  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  debtor  through  him  to 
himself  indirectly  defeat  a  prior  conveyance  to  a  bona  fide  credi- 
tor.^ A  conveyance  cannot  be  avoided  by  a  creditor  whose  claim 
is  founded  on  an  illegal  consideration.^    A  suit  or  bill  in  equity 


39.  Bailey  y.  Burton,  8  Wend.  (N. 
Y.)  339. 

40.  y.  r.— Stinwon  v.  Wrigley,  86 
N.  Y.  332,  a  municipal  corporation 
under  a  valid  tax  warrant;  Bowls  ▼. 
Tompkins,  18  Hun,  219,  as  overseer 
of  the  poor  of  a  town  had  no  cause  of 
action;  Vi^ilcox  v.  Pitch,  20  Johns. 
472,  plaintiff  in  ejectment  a  creditor 
within  the  meaning  of  the  statute  of 
frauds. 

Ala. — See  Schwartz  v.  Barley,  142 
Ala.  439,  38  So.  119,  as  the  claim  of 
a  firm  creditor  against  individual 
partners. 

/«.— Walradt  v.  Brown,  6  111.  397, 
41  Am.  Dec.  190. 

3f  (2.— Welde  v.  Scotten,  59  Md.  72 ; 
Gebhart  v.  Merfeld,  61  Md.  321. 

Mass, — ^Woodbury  v.  Sparrell  Print, 
187  Mass.  426,  73  N.  E.  547. 

jgf.  />.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Calkins, 
16  S.  D.  446,  93  N.  W.  646. 

Ft. — ^Fairbanks  v.  Benjamin,  60  Vt. 

99. 


of  eovrt  koldlac 
elatms  for  eosta  are  such  creditors 
as  may  set  aside  their  debtor's  oon- 
veyanoe  as  fraudulent.  Chapman  ▼. 
Chapman,  13  Ind.  396. 

A  elala  of  a  witmoM  for  at« 
toiUUjMOy  eton  la  such  a  debt  or  de- 
mand upon  the  party  by  whom  he  was 
summoned  as  is  protected  by  the 
statute  against  fraudulent  convcy- 
anoes.  Worland  v.  Outtm,  33  Ky. 
477. 

41.  Townsend  v.  Tuttle,  28  N.  J. 
Eq.  449. 

42.  Esty  ▼.  Long,  41  N.  H.  103. 

4^  Ato.— Mohr  ▼.  Senior,  85  Ala. 
114,  4  So.  736,  contract  by  married 
woman. 

M€is8, — Alexander  v.  Qould,  1  Mass. 
166. 

Minn. — ^Bruggerman  v.  Hoerr,  7 
Minn.  337,  82  Am.  Dec.  97,  contract 
for  purchase  of  land  to  be  acquired 
under  a  presumption  right. 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyance. 


199 


attacking  a  conveyance  as  in  fraud  of  creditors  cannot  be  main- 
tained by  creditors;  whose  claims  are  not  due  or  before  the 
maturity  of  the  debt  or  daim.^  A  creditor  who  has  taken  a 
mortgage  as  security  for  his  debt  or  daim  can  attack  a  prior 
fraudulent  transfer  or  mortgage  made  by  his  mortgagor.* 


Miss, — ^Edwards  ▼.  Mister,  58  Miss. 
765,  contract  with  minor. 

Pa,— Hart  v.  Hart,  5  Watts,  106. 

Fa.— Burton  v.  Mill,  78  Va.  468,  a 
claim  for  breach  of  promise  of  mar- 
riage, though  not  reduced  to  judg- 
ment, is  within  the  protection  of  the 
statute. 

A  note  for  Uqnors  sold  in  the 
State  without  a  license,  though  made 
in  another  State,  being  void  through 
illegality  of  consideration,  will  not 
create  the  relation  of  debtor  and 
creditor  between  the  parties,  so  as  to 
entitle  the  payee  to  question  the  va- 
lidity of  a  sale  made  by  the  maker 
to  a  third  person  as  fraudulent.  Ful- 
ler V.  Bean,  30  N.  H.  181. 

OUdBUi  parti*Uy  lUesaL— 
Where  a  creditor  seeks  to  set  aside 
his  debtor's  conveyance  and  subject 
the  property  to  certain  claims,  part 
of  which  are  so  tainted  with  illegal- 
ity that  equity  will  not  enforce  them, 
and  part  of  which  are  valid  and  en- 
forceable, but  the  creditor  refuses  to 
produce  his  accounts,  so  aa  to  enable 
the  valid  items  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  illegal  ones,  the  former  must 
share  the  fate  of  the  latter,  and 
equity  will  refuse  to  aid  him  alto- 
gether.   Hanson  v.  Power,  38  Ky.  91. 

44.  U.  ifif.— Adler  v.  Fenton,  65  U. 
S.  407,  16  L.  Ed.  696.  But  suit  may 
be  maintained  where  a  note  has  been 
discounted  and  renewed  from  time  to 
time,  although  the  note  is  not  yet 
due.  McLaughlin  v.  Bank  of  Potomac, 
48  U.  S.  220,  12  L.  Ed.  675. 


•» 


Ala, — McGhee  v.  Importers',  etc 
Nat.  Bank,  93  Ala.  192,  9  So.  734; 
Fieider  v.  lienkauff,  92  Ala.  469,  8 
So.  758;  Jones  v.  Massqr*  79  Ala.  370. 

Ind, — Collins  v.  Nelson,  81  Ind.  75; 
Evans  v.  Thomburg,  77  Ind.  106.  But 
a  mortgagee  of  chattels  may  sue  for 
equitable  relief  against  a  subsequent 
fraudulent  mortgage  of  the  chattels, 
and  a  judgment  foreclosing  the  same, 
although  the  debt  secured  is  not  yet 
due  him,  since  he  had  a  subsisting 
lien  upon  the  property  at  the  time  of 
the  fraudulent  conveyance.  McCor- 
mick  V.  Hartley,  107  Ind.  248,  6  N. 
E.  357. 

JTy.— United  States  Bank  v.  Huth, 
43  Ky.  423. 

Mass, — ^England  t  Adams,  157 
Mass.  449,  32  N.  E.  665. 

Fa.— Simon  v.  Ellison,  22  S.  E.  860. 

Compare  Stein  v.  Gibbons,  16  La. 
103,  a  debt  on  a  note  which  has  not 
yet  matured  has  ''accrued"  so  as  to 
constitute  the  holder  a  creditor  who 
can  institute  action ;  Mowry  v.  Schro- 
der, 4  Strobh.  ( S.  C. )  69,  where  the 
complainant  alleges  that  the  whole 
debt  is  lost,  it  is  immaterial  whether 
it  was  due  before  or  after  action  was 
brought;  Reg  v.  Henry,  21  Ont.  113. 

46.  N.  r.— Anderson  v.  Hunn,  5 
Hun,  79,  the  holder  of  a  second  chat- 
tel mortgage  may  maintain  an  action 
to  set  aside  a  prior  chattel  mortgage 
on  the  ground  of  fraud,  since  his 
mortgage  gives  him  a  specific  lien. 

U.  fif.— People's  Sav.  Bank  v.  Bates, 


200 


FbAUDULENT   CoNVETAirCBS. 


§  9.  Claims  for  torts.— It  is  the  established  rule  in  most 
jurisdictions  that  the  statute  relating  to  fraudulent  conveyances 
extends  its  protection  to  all  persons  having  a  valid  cause  of 
action  or  suit  for  damages  arising  from  torts,  as  well  as  in  con- 
tract/*   Persons  having  a  cause  of  action  for  damages  for  as- 


120  U.  a  666,  7  Sup.  a.  679,  30  L. 
Ed.  764,  under  Michigan  €tatute. 

Ga, — ^Lee  v.  Brown,  7  Ga.  276. 

Me, — Spraguo  v.  Graham,  20  Me. 
160. 

ificA.— Fox  V.  Clark,  Walk.  676. 

Can, — ^Warren  v.  Taylor,  8  Can.  L. 
J.  O.  S.  243,  9  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  69. 

Eng. — ^Bartow  v.  Van  heythuysen, 
11  Hare,  126,  18  Jur.  344,  1  Wkly. 
Rep.  429,  46  Eng.  Ch.  127;  Bill  v. 
Cureton,  4  L.  J.  Ch.  98,  2  Myl.  &  K. 
603,  7  Eng.  Ch.  603,  39  Eng.  Reprint» 
1036. 

In  Ne^MT  Jersey  a  creditor  who  ac- 
cepts a  chattel  mortgage  as  security 
for  his  debt  is  held  to  be  a  purchaser, 
and  cannot  therefore,  while  relying 
on  his  mortgage,  have  a  prior  volun- 
tary conveyance  or  mortgage  by  the 
mortgagee  declared  fraudulent  as  to 
him,  since  the  statute  of  27  Eliz.  and 
the  New  Jersey  statute  based  thereon 
apply  only  to  realty.  Boice  v.  Cono- 
ver,  64  N.  J.  Eq.  531,  35  Atl.  402. 

46.  y.  r.— Kain  v.  Larkin,  4  App. 
Div.  209,  88  N.  Y.  Supp.  546 ;  Fuller 
V.  Brown,  76  Hun,  657,  28  N,  Y.  Supp. 
189;  Hepworth  v.  Union  Ferry  Co.,  62 
Hun,  267,  16  N.  Y.  Supp.  692 ;  Ford 
V.  Johnston,  7  Hun,  563;  Pendleton 
V.  Hughes,  66  Barb.  136;  Jackson  v. 

Myers,  18  Johns.  425. 

Ata.—^wan  v.  Hardy,  130  Ala.  642, 

31  So.  443. 

Oonn.— Fox  v.  Hills,  1  Conn.  296. 

l».--Bongard  ▼.  Block,  81  111.  186, 
26  Am.  Rep.  276;  Walradt  v.  Brown, 
6  ni.  397,  41  Am.  Dec.  190. 


Ind. — ^Petree  v.  Brotherton,  13S 
Ind.  692,  32  N.  £.  300;  Shean  v.  Shay, 
42  Ind.  375,  13  Am.  Bep.  366;  Pen- 
nington V.  Clifton,  11  Ind.  162. 

Iowa. — ^Wier  v.  Day,  67  Iowa,  84, 
10  N.  W.  304;  Corder  v.  Williams,  40 
Iowa,  582. 

Me, — ^Tobie,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Wal- 
dron,  76  Me.  472. 

Ifd.—Welde  y.  Scotten,  69  Md.  72. 

If  i«9.—McInni8  v.  Wiscassett  Mills, 
78  Miss.  62,  28  So.  726. 

Mo. — ^McCbllum  v.  Crane,  101  Mo. 
App.  522,  74  S.  W.  660. 

N.  J.— Thorpe  v.  Leibrecht,  66  N. 
J.  Eq.  499,  39  Atl.  361 ;  Boid  v.  Dean, 
48  N.  J.  Eq.  193,  21  Atl.  618;  Post  v. 
Stiger,  29  N.  J.  Eq.  664;  Scott  v. 
Hartman,  26  N.  J.  Eq.  89. 

2^.  D.— Soly  V.  Aasen,  10  N.  D.  108, 
86  N.  W.  108. 

Or.— Seed  v.  Jennings  (1905),  SS 
Pac.  872. 

8.  C— McAfee  v.  McAfee,  28  S.  C. 
188,  6  S.  E.  480; 

yenn.— Patrick  v.  Ford,  37  Tenn. 
532. 

Tea?.— Holden  v.  McLaury,  60  Tex. 

228. 

Ft— Corey  v.  Morrill,  71  Vt  61,  42 
Atl.  976.  But  see  Green  v.  Adams, 
59  Vt.  602,  10  Atl.  742,  69  Am.  Rep. 
761. 

Va. — ^Harris  v.  Harris,  23  Gratt. 
737. 

Wa8h.—Btite»  ▼.  Drake,  28  Wash. 
447,  68  Pac.  961. 

Eng. — Crossley  v.  Elworthy,  I/.  R- 
12  Eq.  158,  40  L.  J.  Ch.  480,  24  L.  T. 


Who  May  Attaok  Validity  of  Conveyaucb. 


201 


sault  and  battery,*^  bastardy,^  breach  of  promise  to  marry/* 
seduction,"  libel  or  slander,"  deceit,^  trespass,"  or  usury  penal- 
ties,^ are  regarded  as  creditors  within  the  meaning  of  such 
statutes  and  may  attack  their  debtor's  fraudulent  conveyance 
made  to  defeat  a  recovery  upon  such  claims.  A  person  upon 
whom  robbery  has  been  committed  has  been  held  to  be  entitled 
to  be  considered  as  a  creditor  of  the  party  committing  the  rob- 
bery." A  voluntary  conveyance  to  defeat  a  claim  of  a  third  per- 
son to  damages  for  a  tort  is  void  at  common  law  as  against 
such  third  person."  In  some  cases  it  has  been  held  that  a  claim- 
ant for  damages  arising  out  of  a  tort  is  not  a  creditor  within  the 


Rep.  N.  S.  607,  19  Wkly.  Rep.  842; 
Barling  ▼.  Bishopp,  29  Beav.  417,  6 
Jur.  N.  S.  812,  8  Wkly.  Rep.  631,  54 
Eng.  Reprint^  689;  Strong  ▼.  Strong, 
18  Beay.  408,  52  Eng.  Reprint,  161. 
But  see  Leukener  y.  Freeman,  2 
Freem.  236,  22  Eng.  Reprint,  1182, 
Free.  Ch.  105,  24  Eng.  Reprint,  51. 

47.  Martin  y.  Walker,  12  Hun  (N. 
Y.)  46;  Anglin  y.  Conle^,  114  Ky. 
741,  71  S.  W.  926,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
1561;  Slater  y.  Sherman,  6  Bush. 
{Ky.)   206;   Floyd  y.  Martin,  4  Ky. 

L.  Rep.  891. 

48.  Bishop  y.  Redmond,  83  Ind. 
157;  Schuster  &  Co.  y.  Stout,  30  Kan. 
529,  2  Pae.  642;  Leonard  y.  Bolton, 
153  Mass.  428,  26  N.  E.  1118;  Pier- 
stoff  y.  Jorges,  86  Wis.  128,  56  N. 
W.  735,  39  Am.  St.  Rep.  881. 

48.  Thompson  y.  Robinson,  89  Me. 
46,  35  Atl.  1002;  McVeigh  v.  Rite- 
nour,  40  Ohio  St.  107 ;  Smith  v.  Cul- 
bertson^  9  Rich.  (S.  C.)  106;  Lowry 
y.  Pinson,  2  Bailey  (S.  C),  324,  23 
Am.  Dec.  140;  Hoffman  y.  Junk,  51 
Wis-  613,  8  N.  W.  493. 

SO.  Hunsinger  y.  Hofer,  110  Ind. 
390,  11  N.  E.  463;  Bishop  y.  Red- 
mond, 83  Ind.  157;  Carbiener  y.  Mont- 


gomery, 97  Iowa,  659,  66  N.  W.  900; 
McKenna  y.  Crowley,  16  R.  I.  364, 
17  Atl.  354. 

61.  Cai. — Chalmers  y.  Sheehy,  132 
Cal.  459,  64  Pac.  709. 

/«.— Walradt  y.  Brown,  6  111.  397, 
41  Am.  Dec.  190. 

Xy.— Lillard  y.  McGee,  7  Ky.  166. 

Me, — ^Hall  y.  Sands,  52  Me.  355. 

ifd— Gebhart  y.  Merfeld,  51  Md. 
322;  Cooke  y.  Cooke,  43  Md.  522. 

Tenn, — Farnsworth  y.  Bell,  5  Sneed, 
531. 

Contra. — Fowler  y.  Frisbie,  3  Conn. 
320. 

62.  Miner  y.  Warner,  2  Grant 
(Pa.),  448. 

63.  Westmoreland  y.  Powell,  59 
Oa.  256;  Gebhart  y.  Merfeld,  51  Md. 
322;  Schaible  y.  Ardner,  98  Mich.  70, 
56  N.  W.  1105;  Paul  v.  Crocker,  8  N. 
H.  288. 

64.  Heath  y.  Page,  63  Pa.  St.  108, 
3  Am.  Rep.  533. 

66.  Reld  y.  Kennedy,  21  Grant  Ch. 
(U.  C.)  86. 

66.  Fowler  y.  Frisbie,  3  Conn.  320; 
Fox  y.  Hills,  1  Conn.  295;  lillard  y. 
McGee,  7  Ky.  165. 


156 


Fbauduubnt  Conveyances. 


crops/^  and  exempt  improvements  on  Indian  agricultural  lands 


ground  tliat  it  has  been  fraudulently 
asdigned  by  the  pensioner.  CSark  ▼. 
Ingraham,  15  Fhila.  646,  36  Leg. 
Iht.  393.  The  proceeds  of  a  pension 
check  deposited  with  a  bank  for  col- 
lection are  not  liable  to  attachment. 
Reiff  ▼.  Mack,  160  Pa.  St.  265,  28 
Atl.  600,  40  Am.  St.  Rep.  720.  Real 
estate  bought  by  a  pensioner  in  the 
name  of  his  wife,  with  his  pension 
mon^,  is  liable  to  seizure  and  sale 
for  his  debts.  Burtch  v.  Bnrtoh^  14 
Pa.  Co.  Ot  482,  11  Lane.  L.  Rev. 
237. 

Vt — A  pension  draft,  being  ex- 
empt from  execution,  may  be  made 
the  subject  of  a  gift  by  the  pensioner 
without  fraud  upon  his  creditors. 
Hayward  v.  aark,  60  Vt.  612. 

Can, — ^Money  received  by  a  debtor 
from  the  crown  for  contract  work 
cannot  be  garnisheed  before  being 
paid  by  the  crown,  but  a  gift  of  them 
after  payment  is  fraudulent  under 
the  statute  of  Elisabeth.  Nicholson 
V.  Shannon,  28  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.) 
378. 

40.  /da.— EUiot  v.  Hall,  3  Ida. 
421,  31  Pac.  706,  35  Am.  St.  Rep. 
285,  18  L.  R.  A.  586. 

I<nt}a. — Ehlers  v.  Blumer  (1005), 
105  N.  W.  406;  Nash  v.  Stevens,  06 
Iowa,  616,  65  N.  W.  825;  Robb  v. 
Brewer,  60  Iowa,  530,  15  N.  W.  420; 
Patterson  v.  Johnson,  50  Iowa,  307, 
13  N.  W.  416. 

JSTy.— Wallace  v,  Mascm,  100  Ky. 
560,  38  S.  W.  887,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
035. 

Mo. — Jarboe  v.  Jarboe,  106  Mo, 
App.  450,  70  S.  W.  1162;  Furth  v. 
March,  101  Mo.  App.  320,  74  S.  W. 
147. 

Mont, — Gushing  v.  Quigley,  11 
Mont.  577,  20  Pac.  337. 


2^e6. — ^Union  Pac.  R.  CJo.  v.  Smersh, 
22  Neb.  751,  36  N.  W.  130,  3  Am.  St. 
Rep.  200. 

N.  H. — ^Provencher  v.  Brooks,  64 
N.  H.  470,  13  Atl.  641. 

Ohio, — Stump  v.  Frary,  13  Ohio 
Cir.  Ct.  610,  6  Ohio  dr.  Dec.  357,  it 
is  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  for 
a  husband  to  give  his  exempt  wages 
to  his  wife,  who  applies  then»  in  part 
to  paying  for  a  home,  taking  the  title 
in  her  name. 

Wis. — Bloodgood  v.  Meissner,  84 
Wis.  452,  54  N.  W.  772,  moneys  of  a 
debtor  in  his  wife's  hands  are  not 
exempt  under  the  Wisconsin  statute 
exempting  the  earnings  of  a  married 
person  with  dependent  family  for 
three  months  next  preceding  the  is- 
suing of  garnishment  process,  to  the 
amount  of  $60  for  each  month,  where 
they  have  been  accumulated  for  three 
years  in  payments  of  less  than  $60 
per  month,  although  they  were  ex- 
exempt  at  the  time  they  were  paid 
over  to  her. 

41.  Layman  v.  Denton  (Tenn.  Ch. 
App.),  42  S.  W.  153,  creditors  can- 
not complain  of  a  mortgage  given  by 
a  debtor  to  secure  another  creditor 
on  a  growing  crop  before  November 
15,  but  which  creditors  under  the 
Tennessee  statute  are  not  allowed  to 
levy  upon,  as  fraudulent  as  a  matter 
of  law. 

Crops  s^o^vn  on  Uuads  piUF* 
okased  with  peasion  money  are, 
however,  not  exempt  fromj  execution, 
under  the  Iowa  statute,  providing 
that  the  homestead  of  a  pensioner 
purchased  and  paid  for  with  pension 
money,  or  the  proceeds  and  accumu- 
lations of  such  pension  money,  shall 
be  exempt  from  execution  or  attach- 
ment.    Haefer  v.   Mullison    (Iowa), 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyance. 


203 


ertj  by  a  husband  made  with,  inteait  to  defraud  his  wiife  of 
alimony  or  maintenance  is  fraudulent  as  to  his  wife,  althou^ 
the  conveyance  may  have  been  made  prior  to  the  institution  of 
the  proceedings  for  divorce.^ 


§  11.  Persons  representing  creditors;  Assignees. — An  as- 
signee for  creditors  may  maintain  a  suit  to  set  aside  a  fraudu- 
lent conveyance  made  by  the  assignor.^  An  assignee  in  bank- 
ruptcy may  maintain  an  action  to  annul  a  fraudulent  transfer  by 
the  bankrupt,  and  recover  the  property  or  its  avails  for  the  benefit 
of  simple  contract  creditors.^^  The  right  to  attack  a  conveyance  as 
being  in  fraud  of  creditors  is  not  personal  to  the  original  creditor, 
but  may  be  exercised  by  his  successors  or  assigns  whenever  he 
might  have  done  so.^    The  rule  that  a  cause  of  action  for  fraud 


60.  Gregory  ▼.  Filbeek,  12  Colo. 
379,  21  Pac.  489;  Platner  v.  Plainer, 
66  Iowa,  378,  23  K.  W.  764;  Weber 
V.  Rothschild,  15  Dreg.  385,  15  Pac. 
650,  3  Am.  St  Rep.  162;  Blenkinsopp 
V.  Blenkinsopp,  1  DeG.  M.  &  G.  495, 
16  Jut.  787.  21  L.  J.  Ch.  401.  60 
Eng.  Ch.  379,  42  £ng.  Reprint,  644. 

60.  MeMahon  ▼.  Allen,  35  N.  Y. 
403. 

61.  Southard  ▼.  Benner,  72  K.  T. 

424. 

6«.  N.  T.— In  re  CorneU,  110  N.  Y. 
351,  18  N.  E.  142;  Bostwick  ▼.  Scott, 
40  Hun,  212. 

Ala. — Jones  v.  Smith,  92  Ala.  455, 
9  So.  179;  Ruse  v.  Bromberg,  88  Ala. 
619,  7  So.  884;  Bragg  ▼.  Paterson,  85 
Ala.  233,  4  So.  716;  Feam  ▼.  Ward, 
80  Ala.  555,  2  So.  114. 

Col.— WindhauB  ▼.  Bootz  ( 1890) ,  25 
Pac.  404;  Hohart  v.  Tyrrell,  68  Cal. 
12,  8  Pac.  525. 

Colo.— Rose  V.  Donklee,  12  Colo. 
App.  403,  56  Pac.  342.  But  see  Kauf- 
man ▼.  Burchinell,  16  Colo.  App.  520, 
63  Pac.  786. 


Conn. — Shipman  ▼.  Aetna  Ins.  Co., 
29  Conn.  245. 

/oti>a.--Searing  v.  Berry,  58  lows, 
20,  11  N.  W.  708. 

Me. — Simpson  v.  Warren,  55  Me. 
18;  Warren  v.  Williams,  52  Me.  343. 

Md. — Schaferman  y.  O'Brien,  28 
Md.  565,  92  Am.  Dec.  708;  Waters  ▼. 
Dashiell,  1  Md.  455. 

Mass. — ^Freeland  t.  Freeland,  102 
Mass.  475;  Lynde  v.  McGregor,  95 
Mass.  172;  Blake  v.  Sawin,  92  Mass. 
340;  Gibbs  y.  Thayer,  60  Mass.  30. 

If  toft.— Noble  y.  McKeith,  127  Mich. 
163,  86  N.  W.  526;  Sweet  y.  Conyerse, 
88  Mich.  1,  49  N.  W.  899. 

IfiM.— Cook  y.  Liggin,  54  Miss.  368. 

N.  J. — ^Wimpfheimer  v.  Perrine 
(1901),  50  Atl.  356.  See  Winans  y. 
Gi&yes,  43  N.  J.  Eq.  263,  11  Atl.  25. 

O^io.— Kilboume  y.  Fay,  29  Ohio 
St.  264,  23  Am.  Rep.  741;  HaUowell 
y.  Baylies,  10  Ohio  St.  536. 

Pa,— Tams  y.  BulUtt,  35  Pa.  St. 
308;  Moncure  y.  Hanson,  15  Pa.  St. 
385. 

B.  /.—Doyle  y.  Peckham,  9  R.  1. 21. 


204 


Fbattdulent  Conveyances. 


is  not  assignable  does  not  apply  to  a  contractual  debt  as  the  basis 
of  a  suit  to  set  aside  fraudulent  conveyances.*'  The  assignment 
!by  a  trustee  in  bankruptcy^  however,  of  the  mere  right  to  set 
aside  a  fraudulent  conveyance  by  the  bankrupt  is  invalid.^ 

§  12.  Receivers  in  supplementary  proceedings. — It  is  the 

general  rule,  imder  statutes  providing  for  the  appointm^it  of  a 
receiver  in  proceedings  supplementary  to  execution,  that  the  re- 
ceiver appointed  represents  the  interests  of  the  creditors  as  well 
as  those  of  the  debtor  and  is  a  trustee  for  all  parties,  and  has 
power  to  assail  and  set  aside  such  acts  of  the  debtor  as  are  illegal 
and  forbidden  by  law,  and  may,  therefore,  institute  actions  in 
his  own  name  to  avoid  and  set  aside  conveyances  made  by  the 
debtor  with  intent  to  defraud  his  creditors.**     The  receiver  is 


Va, — Staton  y.  Pittman,  11  Gratt. 
99;  Clough  y.  Thompson,  7  Gratt.  26; 
Shirley  y.  Long,  6  Rand.  735. 

Wa«^.— Bates  y.  Drake,  2S  Wash. 
447,  68  Pae.  961. 

W.  Fa.— Highland  y.  Highland,  5 
W.  Va.  63. 

Wi«.—- Sutton  y.  Hasej,  58  Wis. 
666,  17  N.  V«r.  416. 

Compare  Carrigan  y.  Byrd,  23  S. 
C.  89;  Pierce  y.  Bowers,  67  Tenn.  353; 
Kearby  y.  Hopkins,  14  Tex.  Ciy.  App. 
166,  36  S.  W.  606;  Lumsden  y.  (Scott, 
4  Ont.  323. 

63.  Howd  y.  Breckenridge,  97  Micb. 
65,  66  N.  W.  221. 

64.  Annis  y.  Butterfield,  99  Me. 
181,  58  Atl.  898. 

66.  N.  y. — ^Kennedy  y.  Thorpe,  51 
N.  Y.  174,  where  one  frcMn  whom 
goods  haye  been  fraudulently  pur- 
chased sues  for  the  price  and  gets 
judgment,  a  reoeiyer  in  supplementary 
proceedings  upon  such  judgment  may 
not  set  up  the  fraud  in  the  sale  to 
defeat  an  assignment  of  the  property 
made  by  the  purchaser  for  the  benefit 


of  creditors,  although  the  assign- 
ment was  made  in  furtheraaoe  of  the 
fraud,  with  full  notice  thereof  to  the 
assignee;  Bostwick  y.  Menck,  40  N. 
Y.  383 ;  Porter  y.  Williams,  9  N.  Y. 
142,  69  Am.  Dec.  619;  Manley  y.  Ras- 
siga,  13  Hun,  288;  Bennett  y.  Mc- 
Guire,  68  Barb.  626;  Gere  y.  Dibble, 
17  How.  Pr.  31.  The  earlier  easee  of 
Hayner  y.  Fowler,  16  Barb.  300,  and 
Seymour  y.  Wilson,  16  Barb.  294, 
holding  to  the  contrary,  were  oyer- 
ruled  by  Porter  y.  Williams,  supra, 

U.  ifif.-^lney  y.  Tanner,  18  Fed. 
636,  21  Blatchf.  640,  but  such  a  re- 
ceiyer  cannot  maintain  a  suit  to 
reach  property  which  was  transferred 
by  a  bankrupt  in  fraud  of  creditors 
before  he  was  appointed  reoeiyer,  and 
when  there  is  an  assignee  in  bank- 
ruptcy; in  such  cases  the  assignee  in 
bankruptcy  is  the  only  person  who 
can  assail  such  transfer. 

Mfcfc.— Prescott  y.  PfeiflFer,  67' 
Mich.  21,  23  N.  W.  477. 

Minn, — Dunham  y.  Byrnes,  36 
Minn.  106,  30  N.  W.  402. 


Who  May  Attack  Vaudity  of  Conveyance. 


205 


a  trustee  for  all^  clothed  with  power  to  set  aside  transfers, 
fraudulent  as  against  demands  represented  bj  him,  only  to  an 
extent  sufficient  to  satisfy  such  demands  and  costs*^ 


§  13«  Sureties  and  endorsers. — ^It  is  held  in  some  cases  that 
the  relation  of  debtor  and  creditor  between  principal  and  surety, 
so  as  to  entitle  the  latter  to  avoid  a  voluntary  conveyance  made 
by  the  former,  commences  at  the  date  of  the  obligation  or  the 
date  of  signing  the  surety  bond,  and  not  from  the  time  the  surety 
makes  payment,  and  in  other  oases  that  the  payment  by  the 
surety  of  the  debt  of  his  principal  relates  back  to  the  date  of 
the  bond,  and  constitutes  the  surety  a  creditor,  who  may  avoid 
a  fraudulent  conveyance  made  by  the  principal  during  the  period 
the  claim  was  contingent,  while  other  cases  hold  that  where  a 
voluntary  conveyance,  void  as  to  a  subsisting  creditor,  is  made 
by  a  principal  debtor,  and  afterwards  the  surety  pays  the  debt, 
the  latter  becomes  himself  the  creditor  and  will  be  substituted 
or  subrogated  to  the  rights  of  the  creditor,  and  may  subject  the 
property  so  conveyed  to  the  payment  of  his  debt*^     So  an  ae- 


N,  J. — ^Miller  v.  Mackenzie,  29  K.  J. 
Eq.  291.  But  compare  HigginB  ▼.  Gil- 
lesheimer,  26  N.  J.  Eq.  308,  a  re- 
ceirer  appointed  under  the  act  to  pre- 
vent fraudulent  trusts  and  assign- 
ments (Nix  Dig.,  p.  297)  has  no 
power  to  impeach  a  grant  made  by 
the  debtor  in  fraud  of  creditors. 

W«9.— Hamlin  v.  Wright,  23  Wis. 
491. 

66.  Bostwiek  v.  Menck,  40  N.  T. 
383. 

67.  2^.  r.— Martin  ▼.  Walker,  12 
Hun,  46. 

U,  B, — ^Thompson  ▼.  Crane,  73  Fed. 
327. 

Ala. — Washington  v,  Norwood,  128 
Ala.  383,  30  So.  405;  Jenkins  v.  Lock- 
ard,  66  Ala.  377;  Cato  ▼.  Easley,  2 
Stew.  214. 


Arfc.— WiUiams  v.  Bimell,  11  Ark. 
716. 

Oa. — ^Banks  ▼.  McOandless,  119  Ga. 
793,  47  S.  E.  332. 

/».— Ohoteau  ▼.  Jones,  11  111.  300, 
50  Am.  Dec.  460;  Dunphy  ▼.  Gorman, 
29  111.  App.  132. 

Ind. — ^Barnes  ▼.  Sammons,  128  Ind. 
596,  27  N.  E.  747. 

JTy.— Partlow  v.  Lane,  42  Ky.  424, 
39  Am.  Dec.  473;  Poynter  ▼.  Mallory, 
20  Ky.  L.  Rep.  284,  45  S.  W.  1042; 
Johnson  y.  Harrison,  6  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
591. 

Me. — ^Whitehouse  v.  Bolster,  95  Me. 
458,  50  Atl.  240;  Danforth  ▼.  Robin-, 
son,  80  Me.  466,  15  Atl.  27,  6  Am. 
St.  Rep.  224;  Sargent  v.  Salmond,  27 
Me.  539;  Howe  v.  Ward,  4  Me.  195. 

Miss, — ^Ames  y.   Dorroh,   76   Miss. 


206 


Fbaudulent  Convetavcsb. 


conunodation  endorser  of  a  note  who  has  been  compelled  to  pay 
it  is  a  creditor  of  the  maker  within  the  statute  prohibiting 
fraudulent  conveyances,  and  is  therefore  entitled  to  maintain 
an  action  to  vacato  and  set  aside  such  a  conveyance,  and  subject 
the  property  to  his  claim  for  reimbursement"  A  surety  is  a 
creditor  of  his  co^bligor  in  the  same  way  and  the  same  rules 
apply  as  between  co-sureties.** 

§  14.  Purchasers  at  judicial  sales. — A  purchaser  at  a  judicial 
sale  has  the  same  right  as  the  judgment  creditor  to  attack  a 
prior  conveyance  made  by  the  judgment  debtor  as  being  fraudu- 
lent as  against  creditors.^    He  may  impeach  the  conveyance  in 


187,  23  So.  768,  71  Am.  St.  Kep.  622; 
Loughridge  ▼.  Bowland,  52  Miss.  546. 

N.  0.— Tatum  v.  Tatum,  36  N.  C. 
113. 

Tenn, — ^Williams  ▼.  Tipton,  6 
Humphr.  66,  42  Am.  Dec.  420;  Sha- 
pira  V.  PaletB  (Ch.  App.),  59  S.  W. 
774;  Oneal  ▼.  Smith,  10  Lea,  340. 

ya.— Curd  ▼.  Miller,  7  Gratt.  185. 

W.  Fa.— Hawker  ▼.  Moore,  40  W. 
Va.  49,  20  S.  E.  848. 

Wm.— ElUa  ▼.  Southwestern  Land 
Co.,  108  WiB.  313,  84  N.  W.  417,  81 
Am.  St.  Hep.  909. 

68.  Lyon  ▼.  Boiling,  9  Ala.  463,  44 
Am.  Dec.  444;  SererB  ▼.  Dodson,  53 
N.  J.  Eq.  633,  34  Atl.  7,  51  Am.  St. 
Rep.  641;  Phelps  y.  Morrison,  24  N. 
J.  Eq.  196.  Compare,  however,  Mason 
V.  Somers  (N.  J.  Ch.),  46  Atl.  602, 
an  accommodation  endorser  does  not 
thereby  become  a  creditor  of  the 
maker  so  as  to  raise  a  presamptioa 
that  the  maker's  subsequent  yolun- 
tary  conveyance  is  fraudulent. 

60.  Washington  v.  Norwood,  128 
Ala.  383,  30  So.  405 ;  Jenkins  v.  Lock- 
ard,  66  Ala.  377;  Gibson  v.  Love,  4 
Fla.  217;  Whitehouse  v.  Bolster,  95 
Me.  458,  50  Atl.  240;  Pashby  v.  Man- 


digo,  42  Mich.  172,  3  N.  W.  927; 
Smith  V.  Rumsey,  33  Mich.  183. 

70.  y,  7.— Smith  v.  Reid,  134  N. 
Y.  568,  31  N.  E.  1082,  alfg  11  N.  Y. 
Supp.  1139,  19  Civ.  Proc.  R.  363;  Ber- 
ger  V.  Carman,  79  N.  Y.  146,  rwfg 
Snedeker  v.  Snedeker,  18  Hun,  355; 
Sands  v.  Hildreth,  14  Johns.  493; 
Hildreth  v.  Sands,  2  Johns.  Ch.  35. 

U.  8. — Farrar  ▼.  Bemheim,  74  Fed. 
435,  20  C.  C.  A.  496;  Mlddleton  v. 
Sinclair,  17  Fed.  Cas.  No.  9,634,  5 
Cranch  C.  C.  409. 

Oa, — ^Murray  v.  Jones,  50  Ga.  109. 

/U.— Murphy  ▼.  Orr,  32  Dl.  489. 

Ind. — Frakes  v.  Brown,  2  Bladcf. 
295. 

JTy.-— Fuller  v.  Pinson,  98  Ey.  441, 
33  S.  W.  399,  17  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1002; 
Shiveley  v.  Jones,  45  Ky.  274. 

Mom. — Gerrish  ▼.  Mace,  9  Gray, 
235. 

ifio^.— Watson  v.  Mead,  98  Mich. 
330,  57  N.  W.  181. 

Minn, — ^Millis  ▼.  Lombard,  32  Minn. 
269,  20  N.  W.  187. 

Miu, — ^Mays  v.  Rose,  1  FreenL  Gh. 
703. 

Ifo.— Lindell  Real  Estate  Co.  ▼. 
Lindell,  113  Mo.  386,  33  S.  W.  466» 


Who  May  Attaok  Validity  of  Convbyakcb. 


207 


a  suit  at  law  to  recover  posseesion,  or  if  he  can  gaia  possession 
defend  the  title  thus  acquired  against  the  fraudulent  grantee  or 
those  claiming  under  him.^  But  a  purchaser  at  an  execution 
or  other  judicial  sale^  with  notice^  actual  or  constructive,  of  a 
prior  conveyance  by  the  judgment  debtor,  cannot  assail  such 
conveyance  as  fraudulent.^  Upon  a  question  respecting  a 
fraudulent  conveyance,  a  purchaser  under  a  judgment  against  the 
grantor  will  be  considered  as  a  creditor,  and  not  as  a  pur- 
chaser,^ and  he  stands  in  no  better  situation  than  the  judgment 
creditor  who  files  a  bill  to  avoid  the  conveyance.^^  Where  a 
creditor  is  estopped,  by  participation  in  a  fraudulent  convey- 
ance, from  afterwards  questioning  it^  a  purchaser  at  execution 
sale  under  such  creditor's  judgment  is  likewise  precluded  from 
doing  so.^ 


%  15.  Officers  levying  attachment  or  execution^— ^A  sheriff 
property  under  an  attachment  process  duly  issued  may 


Wt9.— Eastman  ▼.  Sehettler,  18 
Wis.  324. 

Oonfftj.— Thigpen  ▼.  Pitt,  64  N.  0. 
49,  the  creditor's  claim  being  satis- 
fied he  no  longer  has  any  rights  to 
which  the  purchaser  may  be  subro- 
gated. 

71.  Smith  T.  Reid,  9upra,  and  other 
K.  T.  cases. 

72.  Abbott  V.  Hurd,  7  Blackf. 
(Ind.)  510;  Davis  v.  Briscoe,  81  Mo. 
27.  But  see  Lawrence  v.  Lippencott» 
5  N.  J.  Eq.  473,  a  purchaser  will  be 
protected  in  his  purchase  though  he 
knew  of  such  previous  conveyance; 
McGee  v.  Jones,  34  S.  C.  146;  Ford 
V.  Aiken,  4  Rich.  L.  (S.  C.)  121,  no- 
tice had  by  the  purchaser  is  immate- 
rial if  the  judgment  creditor  had  no 
notice  of  the  conveyance. 

78.  Pepper  v.  Carter,  11  Mo.  640. 
74.  Smith  v.  Espy,  9  N.  J.  Eq.  160. 
76.  Sharpe  v.  Davis,  76  Ind.  17. 


and  a  decree  setting  the  conveyance 
aside  is  not  vitiated  by  the  facts  that 
the  sale  was  void  and  that  the  pur- 
chaser hence  acquired  no  title  there- 
under; Rinehart  v.  Long,  95  Mo.  396, 
8  S.  W.  569;  Wood  v.  Augustine,  61 
Mo.  46,  but  he  cannot  do  so  without 
showing  an  equitable  or  legal  title  in 
himself;  Gentry  v.  Robinson,  55  Mo. 
260;  Ryland  v.  Callison,  64  Mo.  513; 
Dunnica  v.  Coy,  28  Mo.  525,  75  Am. 
Dec.  133. 
Ofcto.— Barr  v.  Hatch,  3  Ohio,  527. 

Or.— Wood  V.  Fisk,  46  Or.  276,  77 
Pac.  128,  738. 

Pa.— Ferris  v.  Irons,  83  Pa.  St.  179. 

R.  /.—Belcher  v.  Arnold,  14  R.  I. 
613. 

8.  C— McQee  v.  Jones,  84  S.  C. 
146,  13  8.  E.  326;  Ford  v.  Aiken,  4 
Rich.  L.  121;  Caston  v.  Cunningham, 
3  Strobh.  59. 


208 


Fbaudtilent  Convetanoes. 


defend,  in*  an  action  for  possession  brought  by  the  vendee  or 
assignee  of  the  attachment  debtor,  by  showing  that  the  sale  was 
fraudulent  as  against  creditors.^*  None  but  creditors  or  pur- 
chasers can  take  advantage  of  a  fraudulent  deed,  but  a  sheriff 
in  attaching  the  property  in  the  hands  of  one  to  whom  it  has  been 
fraudulently  conveyed,  is  the  lawfully  authorized  agent  of  the 
creditors.^  In  replevin  for  property  attached  as  belonging  to  a 
third  person,  the  sheriff  cannot  justify  by  proof  that  it  was  trans- 
ferred by  such  third  person  to  the  plaintiff  in  the  replevin  under 
a  fraudulent  contract  of  salCi" 


§  16.  Personal  representatives. — The  personal  representative 
of  a  deceased  debtor  stands  as  trustee  for  his  creditors  and  for 
their  benefit  may  disaffirm  and  treat  as  void  any  transfer  or 
agreement  made  in  fraud  of  the  rights  of  any  creditor  interested 
in  any  property  or  right  belonging  to  the  estate  he  represents, 
and  it  is  his  right  and  duty  to  institute  proceedings  to  set  aside 
a  conveyance  made  by  his  decedent  which  was  fraudulent  as  to 
his  creditors.''*  In  many  jurisdictioois,  either  by  special  statutes 
conferring  this  power  or  by  judicial  construction  of  statutes,  a 
personal  representative  is  authorized  and  empowered  to  bring  an 
action  or  take  proceedings  to  set  aside  a  fraudulent  conveyance 


76.  y.  r.— Rinchey  ▼.  Stryker,  28 
K.  Y.  46,  84  Am.  Dec.  324;  Hall  ▼. 
Stryker,  27  K.  Y.  696;  Thayer  v.  Wil- 
let,  18  N.  Y.  Super.  Ct.  344,  9  Abb. 
Prac.  325. 

CaL — ^Bolander  v.  Gentry,  36  Cal. 
106,  96  Am.  Dec.  162. 

Mass. — See  Bond  y.  Endicott,  149 
Mass.  282,  21  N.  E.  361. 

Mich.—Vierce  v.  Hill,  35  Mich. 
194,  24  Am.  Rep.  641 ;  Haynes  v.  Led- 
yard,  33  Mich.  319. 

N,  H.— Walker  v.  Lovell,  28  N.  H, 
138,  61  Am.  Dec.  605. 

fif.  C— Paris  v.  Du  Pre,  17  S.  C. 
282. 


fif.  D.— See  Griswold  v.  Sundback, 
6  S.  D.  269,  60  N.  W.  1068,  where  de- 
fendant had  relinquished  his  lien  he 
was  precluded  from  questioning  the 
bona  fides  of  a  prior  sale  of  the 
property  by  the  debtor  to  plain- 
tiff. 

77.  Swanzey  v.  Hunt,  2  Nott  k  M. 
(S.  C.)  211. 

78.  Deutsch  ▼.  Reilly,  57  How.  Pr. 
(N.  Y.)  75. 

70.  y.  7.— National  Bank  of  West 
Troy  V.  Levy,  127  N.  Y.  649,  28  N.  E. 
692,  rev'g  2  N.  Y.  Supp.  162;  Hanrey 
V.  McDonnell,  113  K.  Y.  626,  21  N.  E. 
696. 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyance. 


209 


made  by  his  decedent^  In  other  jurisdictions^  the  right  of  an 
executor  or  administrator  to  maintain  a  suit  or  action  to  impeach 
and  set  aside  a  conveyance  of  property  made  by  his  decedent,  as 
fraudulent  as  against  his  creditors,  is  denied.^^  The  p^sonal 
representative's  right  to  sue  is  not  exclusive  and  the  creditor's 
ri^t  to  prosecute  such  an  action  remains."  Where  the  adminis- 
trator or  executor,  upon  application  of  a  creditor,  refuses  to 
pursue  his  remedy  and  set  aside  a  fraudulent  conveyance  and 
reclaim  the  property,  the  creditor  may  bring  an  action  for  him- 
self and  the  other  creditors,  making  the  personal  representatives 
parties" 

%  17.  Estoppel  and  waiver. — In  general. — Where  the  com- 
plainant in  a  suit  to  set  aside  a  voluntary  or  fraudulent  con- 
veyance has  not  sought  or  received  any  benefit  from  the  con- 
veyance, or  caused  the  defendant  to  forego  any  rightful  advant* 


80.  Oal, — ^Emrnons  v.  Barton,  109 
Oal.  682,  42  Pae.  303. 

/fitf.— -JamU  ▼.  Bnibaker,  115  Ind. 
260,  49  N.  E.  1050. 

Ma99. — ^Putney  ▼.  Fletcher,  148 
Mass.  247,  19  K  £.  370. 

MieK^B^ih  ▼.  Porter,  119  Mich. 
365,  78  K.  W.  336,  75  Am.  St.  Rep. 
402. 

y.  H.— Matthews  v.  Hntchins,  68 
N.  H.  412,  40  Atl.  1063. 

1^.  c.— Webb  ▼.  Atkinson,  122  N.  C. 
683,  29  S.  E.  949. 

O^to.— Hoffman  ▼.  Kiefer,  19  Ohio 
€ir.  Ct.  401,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  304. 

Pa. — Stewart  ▼.  Kearney,  6  Watts, 
453,  31  Am.  Dee.  482. 

Vt. — ^McLane  ▼.  Johnson,  43  Vi.  48. 

Wis.— Eckler  ▼.  Wolcott,  115  Wis. 
19,  90  N.  W.  1081. 

81.  Ala, — ^Davis  ▼.  Swanson,  54 
Ala.  277,  25  Am.  Bep.  678. 

Arik.— Matlodc  v.  Bledsoe  (Ark. 
1005),  90  S.  W.  848,  assignment  of 

14 


life  policy;  Anderson  v.  Dunn,  19  Ark. 
650. 

D.  C— Tiemey  y.  Coibett,  2 
Mack^,  264. 

Oa, — ^Anderson  v.  Brown,  72  Qa.  713. 

III. — ^Majorowicz  v.  Payson,  153  DI. 
484,  39  N.  E.  127. 

ITan.— <^awford  v.  Lehr,  20  Kaa. 
500. 

IfiStf.— Blake  v.  Blake,  53  Miss.  182. 

Mo. — Hall  ▼.  Cbllahan,  66  Mo.  316. 

R.  I. — Gardner  v.  Gardner,  17  R. 
I.  751,  24  Atl.  785. 

Tew. — ^Wilson  ▼.  Denander,  71  Tez. 
603,  9  S.  W.  678. 

Fa.--Spooner  v.  Hilbish,  92  Va. 
333,  23  S.  E.  751. 

W.  Fa.— Jone  v.  Patton,  10  W.  Va. 
653. 

82.  Hoffman  ▼.  Kiefer,  19  Ohio  Cir. 
Ct.  401,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  304. 

83.  National  Bank  of  West  Troy  ▼• 
Levy,  127  N.  Y.  549;  Harvey  v.  Mc- 
Donnell, 113  K.  Y.  526. 


210 


Fraudulent  Convstakobs. 


age  in  respect  to  the  subject  matter  or  defense  of  the  snit^  he 
is  not  estopped  to  invoke  relief.  It  is  an  essential  element  of 
estoppel  by  oonduet  that  the  party  claiming  the  estoppel  shall 
have  relied  upon  the  words  or  conduct  of  the  other,  and  have 
been  induced  by  tbem  to  do  something  which  he  otherwise  would 
not  have  done.^  There  must  have  been  such  a  benefit  conferred 
apon  the  creditor  or  disadvantage  suffered  by  the  vendee  as 
ought  to  bind  the  conscience  of  the  creditor  or  clothe  his  act 
with  the  character  of  a  contract,  in  order  to  estop  him  from 
attacking  the  conveyance  on  the  ground  of  f raud.^  A  creditor 
joining  in  a  deed  of  partition  after  his  debtor  has  made  a  fraudu- 
lent conveyance  of  his  interest  in  the  land  partitioned  does  not 
thereby  waive  his  right  to  maintain  a  bill  to  subject  his  debtor's 
interest  in  the  land  to  the  payment  of  his  debt,  where  tiie  partition 
deed  recited  that  it  should  in  no  wise  prejudice  the  creditor  from 
maintaining  such  bill.^ 

§  18.  Knowledge  or  assent. — ^A  pre-existing  creditor's  right 
to  avoid  a  conveyance  which  is  fraudulent  as  to  him  is  not 
affected  by  his  mere  knowledge  of  tlie  fraud  at  the  time  the 
conveyance  was  executed,*^  in  the  absence  of  evidence  that  he 
knew  the  debtor  was  thereby  depriving  himself  of  the  means  to 
pay  his  debt,"  or  that  the  creditor  knowing  the  purpose  of  the 
conveyance,  assented  to  it  and  that  such  assent,  induced  the 
bolder  of  the  property  to  accept  it.®  But  a  conveyance  in 
fraud  of  creditors  is  valid  as  to  a  creditor  who  has  full  knowl- 


84.  Geiler  ▼.  Littlefield,  148  K.  T. 
603,  43  K.  E.  66,  one  who  has  a  con- 
tract to  do  work  on  certain  premises 
does  not,  by  performing  the  work 
under  a  new  contract  with  a  trans- 
feree of  such  premises,  estop  himself 
to  claim  as  a  judgment  creditor  of 
the  transferrer  that  the  transfer  was 
fraudulent,  at  least  as  to  other  {Trem- 
ises  included  in  the  transfer;  Wood 
T.  Potts  ft  PotU,  140  Ala.  426,  37  So. 
253;  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Maxwell,  123 


Cal.  360,  55  Pac.  980,  60  Am.  St. 
Rep.  64;  Woodson  v.  Carson,  135  Mo. 
521,  35  S.  W.  1005,  37  S.  W.  197. 

86.  Corbitt  v.  Cutcheon,  79  Mich. 
41,  44  N.  W.  163. 

86.  Stout  V.  Stout,  77  Ind.  637. 

87.  Fitch  V.  Oorbett,  64  Cal.  150, 
28  Pac.  231 ;  Armstrong  Co.  v.  Elbert, 
14  Tex.  Civ.  App.  141,  36  S.  W.  139. 

88.  Cole  V.  Tyler,  65  N.  Y.  78. 

89.  Graves  v.  Blondell,  70  Me.  190; 
Bingley  v.  Robinson,  5  Me.  127. 


Who  May  Attack  Valibitt  of  Conveyance.        211 


edge  of  and  asseiats  or  agrees  to  the  convejance,  and  cannot  be 

avoided  by  snch  creditor  on  that  ground,*^  either  as  to  a  previous 

debt,  or  a  debt  subeequentiy  assigned  to  him  by  a  third  per- 
il 


son. 


§  19.  Affirmance  or  ratificatioa. — Where  a  creditor  has  sub- 
sequently ratified  or  affirmed  his  debtor's  fraudulent  transfer 
of  propefrty,  he  is  estopped  from  assailing  it  as  fraudulent.*^ 
Mere  notice  of  a  fraudulent  conveyance  without  any  action  on 
the  part  of  a  creditor  will  not  amount  to  a  confirmation ;  but  if , 
with  notice  of  the  fraud,  either  actual  or  constructive,  the  credi- 
tor agrees  upon  consideration  to  confirm  it,  or  makes  any  state- 
ment or  agreement  to  that  effect  upon  the  faith  of  which  the 
grantee  acts  as  he  would  not  otherwise,  or  if  the  creditor  acts  in 
such  manner  that  the  subsequent  assertion  of  his  rights,  if  per- 
mitted, would  be  a  fraud,  he  will  be  held  to  have  assented  to  or 


00.  y.  T. — Schol^  V.  Worceeter,  4 
Hun,  302,  6  Thomp.  k  G.  574;  PeU  v. 
TredweU,  6  Wend.  661. 

AZa.— -Wooten  v.  Robins,  128  Ala. 
373,  30  Sp.  681. 

/fuf.— Smith  ▼.  WeUs  Mfg.  Co.,  148 
Ind.  333,  46  K.  E.  1000. 

La. — ^Wright  ▼.  Hogan,  11  La.  Ann. 
563. 

Mo, — ^Torreyson  v.  Turnbangh,  105 
Mo.  App.  439,  79  S.  W.  1002. 

Pa.—- MitcheU  ▼.  MitcheU,  212  Pa. 
St.  62,  61  Atl.  570;  Zuver  ▼.  Clark, 
104  Pa.  St  222. 

01.  PeU  V.  Trodw«U,  5  Wend.  (N. 
Y.)  661. 

02.  Ala.— Wooten  v.  Robins,  128 
Ala.  373,  30  So.  681,  and  he  cannot 
suecessfuUy  assail  the  same  upon  be- 
coming a  creditor  of  the  fraudulent 
grantor  subsequent  to  such  assent  or 
ratification. 

Colo.— Sickman  ▼.  Abemathy,  14 
Colo.  174,  23  Pac.  447. 


Fla.— Simon  v.  Levy,  36  Fla.  438, 
18  So.  777. 

lfa«9.— Oriental  Bank  v.  Haskins, 
44  Mass.  332,  37  Am.  Bee.  140. 

Minn. — ^Hathaway  v.  Brown,  22 
Minn.  214. 

Mo. — ^Torreyson  v.  Tumbaugh,  106 
Mo.  App.  439,  79  S.  W.  1002. 

2Ve6.— Rockford  Watch  Co.  ▼.  Mani- 
fold, 36  Neb.  801,  55  N.  W.  236. 

Oteo.— Rennick  v.  Bank  of  Chilli- 
cothe,  8  Ohio,  530. 

Pa.— Appeal  of  Byrod,  31  Pa.  St. 
241. 

8.  a— Kid  V.  Mitchell,  1  Kott  k 
M.  334,  9  Am.  Bee.  702. 

Can. — ^Blackley  v.  Kenny,  16  Ont. 
App.  522. 

^n^.--01iver  v.  King,  8  BeG.  M.  & 
G.  110,  2  Jur.  N.  S.  312,  26  L.  J. 
Ch.  427,  4  Wkly.  Rep.  382,  57  Eng. 
Ch.  86,  44  Eng.  Reprint,  331.  See 
also  Assent  or  confirmation  by  credi- 
tors, chap.  Ill,  8  6,  supra. 


212 


Fraudulent  Convsyances. 


ratified  the  transaction*^  Where  plaintiff,  by  a  formal  authenti- 
cated act,  recognized  defendant's  title  to  property,  he  is  estopped 
to  allege  that  the  convey anoe  as  to  him  was  fraudulent.*^  'A 
creditor  is  not  estopped  from  assailing  as  fraudulent  a  convey- 
ance of  real  estate  by  his  debtor  by  the  fact  that  he  afterwards, 
in  ignorance  of  the  fraud,  accepted  from  the  grantee  the  benefit 
of  a  deed  of  trust  of  a  portion  thereof,^  or  because  he  treated  a 
subsequent  partition  of  the  premises  as  legal  and  sought  to  sub- 
ject to  the  payment  of  his  claim  the  portion  of  the  premises 
set  apart  to  his  debtor's  grantee,*^  or  by  garnishing  the  grantee 
who  had  possession  of  the  property.*' 

§  20.  Participation. — ^Where  the  evidence  shows  that  the  com- 
plainant in  a  bill  to  set  aside  a  fraudulent  conveyance  had  par- 
ticipated in,  advised,  or  instigated  sudi  conveyance^  the  court, 
as  a  general  rule,  will  leave  him  in  the  position  he  has  made 
for  himself,  and  will  hold  him  estopped  by  his  conduct  from 
attacking  the  o(mveyanca  Where  he  not  only  consents  to  the 
act  but  himself  performs  or  assists  in  performing  it,  the  maxim, 
volenti  nan  fit  injuria,  is  certainly  applicable.**     But  it  has 


99.  Wooten  ▼.  Boblns,  128  Ala.  373, 
30  So.  681.  See  also  oases  cited  in 
note  92. 

94.  Theriot  v.  Michel,  28  La.  Ann. 

107. 

95.  Baldwin   v.   Tattle,   23   Iowa, 

66. 

96.  Staples  v.  Bradley,  23  Conn. 
167,  60  Am.  Dec.  630. 

97.  Armstrong  Co.  v.  Elbert,  14 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  141,  36  S.  W.  139. 

98.  y,  Y.— PhiUips  v.  Wooster,  36 
N.  Y.  412,  3  Abb.  Pr.  N.  S.  476. 

17.  isr.— Bacon  v.  Harris,  62  Fed. 
99,  where  the  creditor  united  with  bis 
debtor  in  concealing  the  indebtedness 
and  the  existence  of  a  bill  of  sale  to 
secure  it,  to  enable  the  debtor  to  ob- 
tain credit. 

/K.— Perisho    ▼.    Perisho,    95    111. 


App.  644;  Dobbins  T.  Cruger,  108  HI. 
188. 

/fu7.— Beagan  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
157  Ind.  623,  61  N.  E.  575,  62  N.  E. 
701;  Smith  v.  Wells  Mfg.  Co.,  148 
Ind.  333,  46  N.  E.  1000;  Sharpe  t. 
DaTis,  76  Ind.  17. 

ITy.— Bull  V.  Harris,  57  Ky.  196. 

lf«o^.-*Bunoe  v.  Baile^f,  89  Mich. 
192. 

Mo, — ^Thompson  v.  Cohen,  127  Mo. 
215,  28  S.  W.  984,  29  S.  W.  885;  Bobb 
V.  Bobb,  99  Mo.  578,  12  S.  W.  893. 

y.  J. — Schenck  ▼.  Hart,  32  N.  J. 
Eq.  774;  Brinkerhoff  ▼.  Brinkerbi^, 
23  N.  J.  Eq.  477;  Smith  ▼.  Espy,  9 
K  J.  Eq.  160. 

Pa.— McDonald  v.  CNefll,  161  P*. 
St.  245,  28  Atl.  1081 ;  French  ▼.  M^- 
ban,  56  Pa.  St.  286. 


Who  Mat  Attack  Vai.idity  of  Conveyance. 


213 


been  held  tihat  a  fraudulent  conveyance,  made  by  the  advice  and 
at  the  request  of  a  creditor  of  the  grantor,  is  not  valid  as  against 
that  creditor  ;^  that  the  grantee  of  land  conveyed  by  an  intestate 
in  his  lifetime  with  intent  to  defraud  creditors,  who  has  acted 
on  such  conveyance  and  is  himself  a  creditor,  is  not  estopped 
thereby,  as  one  of  the  creditors  of  the  estate,  from  availing  him* 
self  of  the  fraudulent  character  of  the  conveyance;^  and  that  a 
niece  who  participated  in  a  fraudulent  transfer  by  her  undo,  in 
viefw  of  the  unequal  condition  of  the  parties,  was  not  thereby 
estopped  from  afterwards  subjecting  the  property  so  conveyed 
to  her  claim.*  Where  a  creditor  is  estopped  by  participation  in 
a  fraudulent  conveyance  from  afterwards  questioning  it,  a  pur^ 
chaser  at  an  execution  sale  under  the  creditor's  judgment  is  like- 
wise precluded  from  doing  so.'  A  creditor  who  did  not  in  any 
way  participate  in  the  fraud  attempted  to  be  practiced  may 
assail  a  fraudulent  conveyance.^ 


§  21.  Receipt  of  benefit  under  convejrance* — ^It  is  the  gen- 
eral  rule  that  a  creditor  who,  with  a  full  knowledge  of  the  vitiat- 
ing circumstances  of  the  transaction,  seeks  or  accepts  a  benefit 
under  a  conveyance  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  thereby  elects  to 
afSrm  it,  and  is  thereby  estopped  from  afterwards  questioning 
its  validity  and  vacating  the  conveyance  as  fraudulent.^    A  pur- 


Tetp.—- Jaoobfl  ▼.  Jefferson  Lumber 
Co.  (Tex.)  15  S.  W.  236. 

99.  Waterhouse  ▼.  Benton,  5  Day 
(Conn.),  136. 

1.  Norton  ▼.  Norton,  59  Mass.  524. 

2.  Schmelz  v.  Michelson,  8  Ohio 
Dec.  538,  8  Wkly.  L.  Bui.  304. 

3.  Sharpe  ▼.  Davis,  76  Ind.  17. 

4.  Woodson  v.  Carson,  135  Mo.  521, 
37  S.  W.  197. 

5.  Ato.— Mobile  Say.  Bank  v.  Mc- 
Donnell, 87  Ala.  736,  6  So.  703;  But- 
ler ▼.  O'Brien,  6  Ala.  316.  See,  how- 
ever, Proskauer  ▼.  People^s  Sav.  Bank, 
77  Ala.  267. 


Ark, — Bryan-Brown  Shoe  Co.  v. 
Block,  52  Ark.  458,  12  S.  W.  1073; 
Mlllington  v.  Hill,  47  Ark,  301,  1  S. 
W.  547. 

/nd.— Reagan  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
157  Ind.  623,  61  N.  E.  575,  62  N.  E. 
701. 

Minn. — ^Lemay  ▼.  Bibeau,  2  Minn. 
291. 

Mo, — ^Torreyson  v.  Tumbaugh,  105 
Mo.  App.  439,  79  S.  W.  1002;  Gutz- 
willer  ▼.  Lackman,  23  Mo.  168,  but 
in  an  action  by  attachment,  in  which 
an  interpleader  claims  the  attached 
property  under   a   previous   transfer 


214 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


chaser  at  an  execution  sale  who  pays  a  less  price  for  the  land  hy 
reason  of  there  being  an  apparently  valid  lien  on  the  property 
or  by  reason  of  its  b&ing  douded  by  the  judgment  debtor's  prior 
fraudulent  conveyance,  having  thus  received  a  benefit  from  the 
existence  of  such  lien  or  conveyance,  is  estopped  from  after- 
wards attacking  such  conveyance  or  bringing  suit  to  set  aside 
such  incumbrance  as  in  fraud  of  his  rights/  Where  one  pur- 
chases at  a  foreclosure  sale  had  under  the  express  condition  that 
it  is  made  subject  to  certain  judgments,  he  cannot  afterwards 
assail  such  judgments  as  fraudulent,  since  to  permit  him  to  do 
so  would  be  to  give  him  an  inequitable  advantage  over  other 
bidders  at  the  sale  who,  but  for  the  condition  announced,  mig^t 
have  bid  more  for  the  property*^ 


§  22.  Subsequent  purchasers. — In  general. — 'A  subsecpient 
bona  fide  purchaser  of  real  property,  under  the  statute  of  27 
Elizabeth,  may  avoid  a  prior  voluntary  conveyance  or  transfer 
of  the  same  property  by  his  grantor,  upon  proof  that  the  prior 


thereof  to  himself  from  defendant  in 
exchange  for  promissory  notes,  the 
fact  that  the  notes  have  been  received 
by  plaintiffs  from  defendant  in  the 
due  course  of  business  does  not  estop 
them  from  challenging  the  transfer 
of  the  property  to  the  interpleader  as 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors.  Martin  v. 
Johnson,  23  Mo.  App.  96. 

0*to.— Crumbaugh  v.  Kugler,  3 
Ohio  St.  544. 

Pa, — Fumess  v.  Ewing,  2  Pa.  St. 

479. 

Tenn, — Cunningham  v.  Campbell,  3 
Tenn.  Ch.  708.  But  see  Nichol  v. 
Nichol,  63  Tenn.  145,  where  the  ac- 
ceptance of  a  note  was  held  not  such 
a  receipt  of  a  benefit  under  the  fraud- 
ulent conveyance  as  precluded  the 
creditor  from  afterward  attacking  it. 

F*.— Ingals  V.  Brooks,  29  Vt.  398. 

Can.— Rielle  v.  Beid,  26  Ont.  App. 


64;  Wood  v.  Reesor,  22  Ont  App.  67; 
Young  V.  Ward,  24  Ont.  App.  147. 

Compare  Wadsworth  v.  Marsh,  9 
Conn.  481;  Goldnamer  v.  Robinson,  11 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  630. 

6.  ITy.— White  v.  Gates,  37  Ky.  367. 
IficA.— Marshall  v.  Blass,  82  Mich. 

618,  46  N.  W.  947,  47  N.  W.  616. 

N.  J, — ^DeGraw  v.  Mechan,  48  N.  J. 
Eq.  219,  21  Atl.  193. 

N.  C— Thigpen  v.  Pitt,  64  N.  C.  49. 

Contra. — ^Wagner  v.  Law,  3  Wash. 
600,  28  Pac.  1109,  29  Pac.  927,  28 
Am.  St.  Rep.  66,  15  L.  R.  A.  784,  the 
right  of  an  execution  creditor,  pur- 
chasing at  his  own  sale,  to  set  aside 
his  debtor's  prior  conveyance,  is  not 
affected  by  the  fact  that  he  purchased 
the  lands  for  a  trifle  on  account  of 
the  existence  of  such  conveyance. 

7.  Friedrich  v.  Brewster,  26  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  236. 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyakce.         215 


conveyance  was  made  with  fraudulent  intent.'  The  same  rule 
preivails  in  most  of  the  United  States  where  the  statute  of  27 
Elizabeth  has  been  adopted  or  substantially  re-enacted,  and  a 
subsequent  purchaser  for  a  good  consideration  may  set  aside  a 
prior  fraudulent  conveyance  made  by  his  grantor.*    The  statute 


8.  Enff, — ^De  Mestre  v.  West^  A.  0. 
264,  56  J.  P.  613,  60  L.  J.  P.  C.  66, 
64  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  376;  In  re  Cam- 
eron, 37  Gh.  Div.  32,  67  L.  J.  Ch.  69, 
57  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  645,  36  Wkly. 
Rep.  5 ;  Shurmur  ▼.  Sedgwick,  24  Ch. 
Div.  597,  53  L.  J.  Ch.  87,  49  L.  T. 
Rep.  K.  8.  156,  31  Wkly.  Rep.  884; 
Cracknall  v.  Jansen,  11  Ch.  Div.  1, 
48  L.  J.  Ch.  168,  40  L.  T.  Rep.  N. 
S.  640,  27  Wkly.  Rep.  851;  Doe  v. 
Rolfe,  8  A.  &  E.  650,  7  L.  J.  Q.  B. 
251,  3  N.  &  P.  648,  35  E.  C.  L.  775; 
Doe  ▼.  Roe,  5  B.  &  Ad.  1  Am.  279,  4 
Bing.  N.  Cas.  737,  6  Scott,  525,  33 
E.  C.  L.  950;  and  other  earlier  cases. 

Can. — ^Harper  ▼.  Culbert,  5  Ont. 
152;  Buchanan  ▼.  Campbell,  14  Grant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  163;  Osborne  ▼.  Osborne, 
5  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  619;  Demorest 
T.  Miller,  42  U.  C.  Q.  B.  56;  Miller 
T.  MoGill,  24  U.  C.  Q.  B.  697;  Wilson 
▼.  Wilson,  8  U.  C.  C.  P.  525. 

A  -wohBOktmrj  gift  for  ehartt- 
able  piurpoaes  is  not  to  be  treated 
as  covinous  within  the  meaning  of  27 
Eliz.,  chap.  4,  and  is  not  avoided  by  a 
subsequent  conv^ance  for  value. 
Ramsay  v.  Gilchrist,  A.  C.  412,  56  J. 
P.  711,  61  L.  J.  P.  C.  72,  66  L.  T. 
Rep.  K.  S.  806. 

A  pwol&aaer  from  aa  heir  is 
not  entitled  under  27  Eliz.,  chap.  4, 
to  set  aside  a  voluntary  conveyance 
by  the  ancestor.  Lewis  v.  Rees,  3  Jur. 
N.  S.  12,  3  Kay  &  J.  132,  26  L.  J. 
Ch.  101,  6  Wkly.  Rep.  96. 

9.  N.  Y.— Wadsworth  v.  Havens^  8 
Wend.  411. 


U.  8. — Cathcart  v.  Robinson,  6  Pet. 
264,  8  L.  Ed.  120.  And  see  Greenbank 
V.  Ferguson,  58  Fed.  18. 

Ala, — Stokes  v.  Jones,  18  Ala.  734; 
McGuire  v.  Miller,  15  Ala.  294;  El- 
liott V.  Horn,  10  Ala.  348,  44  Am. 
Dec.  488.  And  see  Walton  v.  Bon- 
ham,  24  Ala.  513. 

CoZ.— Kohner  v.  Ashenaur,  17  Cal. 
578. 

Ga.— Brown  v.  Burke,  22  Ga.  674; 
Fowler  v.  Waldrip,  10  Ga.  360;  Lee  v. 
Brown,  7  Qa,  275. 

/oira.— Wolf  V.  Van  Metre,  23  Iowa, 
397 ;  Gardner  v.  Cole,  21  Iowa,  205. 

JTy.^Edwards  v.  Ballard,  14  B. 
Mon.  289;  Dalton  v.  Mitchell,  4  J.  J. 
March,  372. 

La. — ^Ray  v.  Harris,  7  La.  Ann.  138. 

Mass. — ^Hill  V.  Ahem,  135  Mass. 
158;  Blanchard  v.  McK^,  125  Mass. 
124;  Freeland  v.  Freeland,  102  Mass. 
475;  Cox  v.  Jackson,  88  Mass.  108. 

Mo. — Chapman  v.  Callahan,  66  Mo. 
299;  Henderson  v.  Dickey,  50  Mo.  161. 

N.  H. — Marston  v.  Brackett,  9  N. 
H.  336. 

N.  O.— Lata  v.  Morrison,  23  K.  C. 
149. 

B.  /.— Tiemay  v.  daflin,  15  R.  I. 
220,  2  Atl.  762. 

8.  C— Sutton  V.  Pettus,  4  Rich.  163. 

Tenn.— Laird  v.  Scott,  6  Heisk,  314. 

Ft— Hoy  V.  Wright,  Brayt.  208. 

Ww.— Reynolds  v.  Vilas,  8  Wis. 
471,  76  Am.  Dec.  238. 

Fravdiftlent  tptmatnr  estopped. 
— One  who  has  made  a  voluntary  con- 
veyance of  his  property   to   defraud 


216 


Fbaubulert  Convstanobs. 


of  27  Elizabeth  has  in  many  of  the  states  been  extended  bj 
statute  so  Bfi  to  include  the  convejanoe  of  personal  -prop&tj,  aa 
well  as  real  praperty.^^  The  statute^  in  some  jurisdicticms,  pro- 
vides that  a  fraudulent  conveyance  can  only  be  attacked  as  fraud- 
ulent by  subsequent  purchasers  when  made  with  intent  to  de- 
fraud such  purchasers,  and  haice  subsequent  purchasers  cannot 
defeat  a  prior  conveyance  on  the  ground  that  it  was  made  with 
intent  to  defraud  creditors.^ 

§  23.  Who  are  subsequent  purchasers. — ^No  one  can  be  oon* 

sidered  as  a  eubsequent  purchaser  under  the  statute  respecting 
fraudulent  conveyances  unless  he  has  acquired  the  l^gal  title  by 
a  valid  deed  of  conveyanca  A  covenant  to  con<vey  does  not  con- 
stitute him  a  purchaser,  authorized  to  contest  the  validity  of  a 
deed  on  the  ground  of  fraud."    A  judgment  creditor  is  not  a 


his  creditors,  and  subsequently  con- 
veys the  same  to  a  purchaser  in  good 
faith  and  for  a  valuable  oonsiderationy 
is  estopped  from  denying  the  latter 
conveyance.  Hurley  v.  Ostler,  44 
Iowa,  642. 

10.  N.  7.— Clute  V.  Fitch,  26  Barb. 
428,  fraud  in  the  sale  of  a  chattel 
valid  as  between  the  parties  may  be 
alleged  by  subsequent  purchasers 
from  the  seller. 

Ala. — Corprew  v.  Arthur,  16  Ala. 
626 ;  Eddins  v.  Wilson,  1  Ala.  237. 

Colo. — ^McKee  v.  Bassick  Min.  Co.^ 
8  Colo.  392,  8  Pac.  661. 

Iowa. — Osbom  v.  Ratliff,  63  Iowa, 
748,  6  N.  W.  746. 

Mont, — Stevens  v.  Curran,  28 
Mont.  366,  72  Pac.  763. 

N.  C— Potts  V.  Blackwdl,  66  N. 
C.  449;  Freeman  v.  Lewis,  27  N.  C. 
91,  a  trustee  or  mortgagee  for  a  val- 
uable consideration  is  to  be  consid- 
ered a  purchaser  within  provisions  of 
27  Elizabeth. 

B.  C— Hudnal  v.  Wilder,  4  McCord, 


294,  17  Am.  Dee.  744. 

T€9. — Fowler  v.  Stonenm,  11  Tez. 
478,  62  Am.  Dec.  490. 

11.  y.  7. — ^Zimmemuui  v.  Schoen- 
feldt,  3  Hun,  692,  6  Thomps.  ft  C.  142. 

MiB9, — ^Prestidge  v.  Cooper,  64  Miss;. 
74. 

Mo, — ^Davidson  v.  Dockery,  179  Mo. 
687,  78  8.  W.  624;  Reynolds  v.  Faust» 
179  Mo.  21,  77  S.  W.  866;  Evans  v. 
David,  98  Mo.  406,  11  S.  W.  976,  and 
the  purchaser  must  have  been  a  party 
or  privy  to  the  fraud;  Bonney  v.  Tay- 
lor, 90  Mo.  63,  1  S.  W.  740. 

2^.  £r.->Quimby  v.  Williams,  67  N. 
H.  489,  41  Atl.  862,  68  Am.  St.  Bep. 
686. 

Tenn. — Harton  v.  Lyons,  07  Temiu 
180,  36  S.  W.  861. 

12.  Hopkins  v.  Webb,  9  Humphr. 
(Tenn.)  619. 

Xieaaee  m  pvrohaoer  for  taIwa. — 
Where  a  mining  lease  for  99  years 
contained  provisions  enabling  the 
lessor  to  demand  at  his  option  a  roy- 
alty upon  the  proceeds  of  the  minesy 


Who  Mat  Attack  Validity  of  Cohvbyancb.        217 


purdiaser  for  value  within  the  statute  of  27  Elizabeth.^*  A 
mortgagee  for  a  valuable  oonsidera^iioii  is  to  be  considered  a 
subsequent  purchaser,  and  ia  entitled  to  the  same  protection  ac- 
corded to  any  bona  fide  purchaser,  under  the  statute  against 
fraudulent  conveyances.^^  A  purchaser  at  execution  sale  is  a 
subsequent  purchaser  who  may  attack  a  conveyance  for  fraud.^ 

§  24.  Bona  fide  purchaser  tor  value. — ^A  subsequent  por^ 
chaser,  seeking  to  attack  a  prior  conveyance  on  the  ground  of 
fraud  and  to  hold  property  as  against  a  prior  fraudulent  vendee 


or  $4,000  in  lieu  of  such  option,  the 
lewee  was  a  purchaser  for  Talue,  and 
a  prior  voluntary  conveyance  was  void 
as  against  him.  Gonlin  v.  Elmer,  16 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  541. 

IS.  Beavan  ▼.  Oxford,  6  DeO.  M.  k 
G.  607,  2  Jur.  N.  S.  121,  26  L.  J.  Ch. 
299,  41  Wkly.  Rep.  276,  66  Eng.  Ch. 
395,  43  Eng.  Reprint,  1331;  Gillespie 
▼.  Van  Egmondt,  0  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.) 

533. 

14.  /».— Snyder  ▼.  Partridge,  138 
HI.  173,  29  N.  E.  861,  32  Am.  St.  Rep. 

130. 

/fid.— Sanders  v.  Muegge,  91  Ind. 
214,  but  the  mortgagee  having  had 
constructive  notice  that  the  convey- 
ance to  the  mortgagor  was  made  to 
defraud  creditors,  he  was  barred  from 
attacking  the  same. 

Iowa. — Osbom  v.  Ratliff,  63  Iowa, 
748,  6  N.  W.  746.  The  fact  that  a 
transfer  of  certificate  of  stock  is 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  will  not  in- 
validate a  subsequent  contract  be- 
tween the  debtor  and  his  attorney, 
who  is  not  a  party  to  the  fraud,  pro- 
viding that  the  transferee  shall  hold 
the  stock  as  security  for  whatever 
sum  is  or  may  become  due  to  the  at- 
torney for  services  in  the  litigation 
with  creditors.  Cox  v.  CoUis,  109 
Iowa,  270,  80  N.  W.  343. 


K^, — Cook  V.  Landrum,  26  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  813,  82  S.  W.  686. 

If  A— Stewart  v.  Iglehart,  7  Gill  ft 
J.  132,  28  Am.  Deo.  202,  but  the  mort- 
gagee cannot  attack  where  he  had  no- 
tice of  the  previous  conveyance. 

MioK-^Fox  V.  Clark,  Walk.  Ch. 
636. 

N.  H.— Plaisted  v.  Holmes,  68  K. 
H.  619. 

N,  J. — ^Boice  V.  Conover,  64  N.  J. 
Eq.  631,  36  Atl.  402. 

N.  O.— -Potts  V.  Blackwell,  66  N.  C. 
449;  Freeman  v.  Lewis,  27  N.  C.  91. 

7a.— Tate  v.  laggat,  2  Leigh.  84. 

Can, — (Gordon  v.  Proctor,  20  Ont. 
53. 

Bng, — ^Dolphin  v.  Aylward,  L.  R.  4 
H.  L.  486,  23  L.  J.  Rq>.  N.  S.  636,  19 
Wkly.  Rep.  49;  Cracknall  v.  Janson, 
11  Ch.  D.  1,  48  L.  J.  Ch.  168,  40  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  640,  27  Wkly.  Rep.  861; 
Townshend  v.  Windham,  2  Ves.  1,  28 
Eng.  Reprint,  1.  See  Herrick  v.  Att- 
wood,  2  DeQ.  &  J.  21,  4  Jur.  N.  S. 
101,  27  L.  J.  Ch.  121,  6  Wkly.  Rep. 
204,  69  Eng.  Ch.  17,  44  Eng.  Reprint, 
895. 

15.  Carter  v.  Castleberry,  6  Ala. 
277 ;  Rinehardt  v.  Long,  96  Mo.  396,  8 
S.  W.  659;  Gray  v.  Tappan,  Wright 
(Ohio),  117.     See  Gentry  v.  Robin- 
son, 66  Mo.  260. 


172 


Fbaudulsnt  Convbtances. 


lent  judgments  are  within  this  mle.**  But  if  the  property  has 
been  destrojed  by  time  or  accident,  or  sold  and  delivered  to  an 
innocent  person,  for  a  valuable  oonsideration,**  or  has  been  ob- 
tained in  good  faith  by  the  creditors  of  the  transferee  on  execution 
sale,^  or  has  been  reoonveyed  or  paid  over  to  the  fraudulent 
grantor,**  or  to  his  other  creditors,*'  the  creditor's  remedy  is  gone. 
So,  where  the  judgment  creditor  has  a  plain  and  adequate  remedy 
at  law,**  or  his  rigjht  to  reach  and  subject  the  land  or  other 


Mioh, — ^Bresnahan  ▼.  Nugent,  92 
Mich.  76,  02  N.  W.  735;  Einter  ▼. 
Pickard,  67  Mich.  125,  34  K.  W.  535. 

MiM, — Bemheim  v.  Beer,  56  Miss. 
149;  Edmonson  v.  Meacham,  50  Miss. 
34;  Carlisle  ▼.  TindaU,  49  Miss.  229. 

7re&.--43elz  v.  HockneU,  62  Neb. 
101,  S6  N.  W.  905,  63  Neb.  503,  88 
N.  W.  767. 

N,  H.^^utterson  ▼.  Morse,  58  N. 
H.  529;  Coolidge  ▼.  Melvin,  42  N.  H. 
510. 

Pa.—Heath  t.  Page,  63  Pa.  St.  108, 
3  Am.  Rep.  533. 

Tefm.— Williamson  v.  WiUiams,  79 
Tenn.  355. 

Tecp, — Schultze  v.  Sehultse  (Civ. 
App.  1901),  66  S.  W.  56;  Heath  ▼. 
First  Nat.  Bank,  19  Tex.  Civ.  App. 
63,  46  S.  W.  123,  so  far  only  as  pro- 
ceeds of  a  fraudulent  conveyance  of 
property  go  to  the  purchase  of  other 
lands  by  the  fraudulent  grantee  can 
such  lands  be  subjected  to  the  debts 
of  the  grantor. 

Va. — ^Burbridge  v.  Higgins,  6  Qratt. 
119. 

Wia, — ^Bank  of  Commerce  v.  Fow- 
ler, 93  Wis.  241,  67  N.  W.  423. 

Can, — ^Masuret  v.  Stewart,  22  Ont. 
290.  See  also,  as  to  Rights  and  lia- 
biUties  of  the  grantee  and  those  claim- 
ing under  him,  chap.  XIV,  S  24,  infra. 

93.  Taggart  v.  PWllips,  6  Del.  Ch. 
237;     French    ▼.    Commercial    Nat. 


Bank,  199  III.  213,  65  N.  E.  252; 
Phelps  V.  Smith,  116  Ind.  387,  17  N. 
E.  602,  19  N.  E.  156;  Kohl  v.  Sulli- 
van, 140  Pa.  St.  35,  21  Atl.  247.  See 
also  Judgments,  chap.  II,  }  10,  8upra. 

94.  Mandeville  v.  Avery,  124  N.  Y. 
376,  26  N.  E.  951,  21  Am.  St.  Rep. 
678;  Heatii  v.  Page,  63  Pa.  St.  108, 
3  Am.  Rep.  533;  Richards  v.  Ewing, 
30  Tenn.  327;  Simpson  v.  Simpson,  26 
Tenn.  275;  and  other  cases  dted  in 
last  preceding  note.  See  also  Rights 
and  liabilities  of  bona  fide  purchas- 
ers from  grantee,  chap.  XIV,  8  54, 
infra. 

96.  Standard  Nat  Bank  v.  Gar- 
field Nat.  Bank,  70  App.  Dfv.  (N.  Y.) 
46,  75  N.  T.  Supp.  28.  See  also 
Rights  and  liabilities  of  grantees  as 
to  creditors,  chap.  XIV,  §  24,  infra, 

96.  Schneider  v.  Patton,  175  Mo. 
684,  75  S.  W.  155.  See  also  Rights 
and  liabilities  of  grantees  as  to  credi- 
tors and  subsequent  purchasers,  chap. 
XIV,  §}  24-48,  infra. 

97.  Steerov.Hoagland,50  III.  377; 
Kitts  V.  Willson,  140  Ind.  604,  39  N. 
E.  313.  See  also  Rights  and  liabili- 
ties of  grantees  as  to  creditors  and 
subsequent  purchasers,  chap.  XIV,  SS 
24-48,  infra. 

98.  Davis  v.  Tonge  (Ark.  1905), 
85  S.  W.  90.  See  also  Remedies  in 
equity,  chap.  XV,  8  23,  infra. 


/ 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Conveyanos. 


219 


The  Canadian  courts  follow  the  Engliflh  rule  in  the  constniotion 
of  the  statuta^  Some  of  the  earlier  cases  in  the  United  States 
followed  the  English  rula^  The  more  generally  prevailing  rule 
in  the  United  States,  however,  is  that  a  subsequent  purchaser  of 
property  with  notice  of  a  previous  voluntary  or  fraudulent  con- 
veyance thereof  by  his  grantor  cannot  impeach  such  prior  con- 
veyance  as  fraudulent  and  maintain  an  action  to  set  it  aside, 
although  he  has  paid  a  valuable  consideration.^    In  some  juris- 


139,  79  E.  C.  L.  723;  Talton  ▼.  Lid- 
dell,  17  Q.  B.  390,  16  Jut.  1170,  20 
L.  J.  Q.  B.  607,  7  Eng.  L.  &  £q.  860, 
79  E.  C.  L.  390;  Butterfield  v.  Heath, 
16  Beav.  408,  22  L.  J.  Ch.  270,  61 
Eng.  Reprint,  696;  and  other  earlier 


Volmtavy  99mwmjmMC9m  aflts. — 

The  voluntaiy  conveyances  act  of 
1893  (66  and  67  Vict.,  chap.  21),  pro- 
vides that  voluntary  conveyances,  if 
bona  fide,  are  not  to  be  avoided  under 
27  Eliz.,  chap.  4. 

The  voluntary  conveyances  act  of 
1868  (31  Vict.,  chap.  9)  gives  effect 
as  against  subsequent  purchasers  to 
voluntary  conveyances  executed  in 
good  faith,  and  to  them  only,  and  a 
voluntary  conveyance  to  a  wife  for 
the  purpose  of  protecting  proper^ 
from  the  creditors  is  not  good  as 
against  a  subsequent  mortgage  to  a 
creditor.  Richardson  v.  Armitage,  18 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  612. 

19.  Demorest  v.  Miller,  42  U.  C.  Q. 
B.  66. 

SO.  N.  7.— Roberts  v.  Anderson,  8 
Johns.  Ch.  371;  Sterry  ▼.  Arden,  1 
Johns.  Ch.  261. 

17.  £f.— Sexton  v.  Wheaton,  8 
Wheat.  229,  6  L.  Ed.  603. 

ITy.— Waller  v.  Cralle,  8  B.  Mon. 
11;  Anderson  v.  Green,  7  J.  J.  Marsh, 
448,  23  Am.  Dec.  417. 


IfoM.—- Ricker  v.  Ham,  14  Mass. 
137. 

Ifo.— Howe  V.  Waysman,  12  Mo. 
169,  49  Am.  Dec.  126. 

8,  C. — ^Barrineau  v.  McMurray,  3 
Brev.  204;  Rntledge  v.  Smith,  1  Mo- 
Cord  Eq.  119. 

21.  U,  8, — Cathcart  v.  Robinson,  6 
Pet.  264,  8  L.  Ed.  120,  the  universally 
received  doctrine  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  American  revolution  as  to 
the  construction  of  the  statute  of  27 
Elizabeth  unquestionably  went  as  far 
as  to  hold  that  a  subsequent  sale, 
without  notice,  by  a  person  who  had 
made  a  settlement  not  on  valuable 
consideration,  was  presumptive  evi- 
dence of  fraud,  which  threw  on  those 
claiming  under  such  settlement  the 
burden  of  proving  that  it  was  bond 
fide;  and  that  this  principle  there- 
fore according  to  the  uniform  course 
of  this  court  must  be  adopted  in  con- 
struing the  statute  of  27  Elizabeth  as 
it  applies  to  the  case. 

Cal, — Gregory  v.  Haworth,  26  Cal. 
663. 

Colo, — ^McKee  v.  Bassick  Min.  Co., 
8  Colo.  392,  8  Pac.  661. 

7U.— Chaffin  v.  Kimball,  23  HI.  36. 

/fuf.— Aiken  v.  Bruen,  21  Ind.  137; 
Paine  v.  Doe,  7  Blackf.  486;  McNeely 
V.  Rucker,  6  Blackf.  391. 

iTy.— Neighbors  v.  Holt,  14  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  237. 


220 


Fbaxtdulxnt  Convbyanoxs. 


dictions  it  is  held  that  a  vc^untary  conveyance  is  gooa,  as  well 
against  subsequefat  purchasers  from  the  grantor  with  notice  of 
the  previous  conveyance  as  against  subsequent  creditors,  unless 
it  be  shown  that  it  was  intended  to  defraud  creditors,  and  that 
the  execution  of  a  voluntary  conveyance  does  not  raise  a  pre- 
sumption of  fraud  as  against  a  subsequent  purchaser  from  the 
grantor  of  the  property  voluntarily  conveyed,  whan  the  purchaser 
had  notice  of  the  voluntary  caaveyance^  nor  does  sudi  a  pre- 
sumption arise  from  such  sale  against  the  voluntary  oonRrey- 
anoe."    Constructive  notice  is  held  in  some  jurisdictions  sufficient 


If toA.— Dennis  ▼.  Dennis,  119  Mich. 
380,  78  N.  W.  333;  Ckwper  v.  Bii^y, 
13  Mich.  463. 

Iftnn.— Olson  ▼.  Hanson,  74  Minn. 
337,  77  N.  W.  231;  Fitzpatriek  v. 
Hanson,  55  Minn.  195,  56  N.  W.  814. 

If tM.—Pre8tid^  ▼.  Cooper,  54  Miss. 
74;  Ck>ppage  v,  Barnett,  34  Miss.  621 ; 
Farmers'  Bank  ▼.  Douglass,  19  Miss. 
469. 

Jfo.— Davis  T.  Kline,  96  Mo.  401,  9 
S.  W.  724,  2  L.  R.  A.  78;  Bonney  v. 
Taylor,  90  Mo.  63,  1  S.  W.  740. 

?^e6.— Earle  v.  Burch,  21  Neb.  702, 
33  N.  W.  254,  if  a  creditor  receive 
his  pay  in  mortgaged  property  with 
knowledge  of  the  mortgage,  he  will 
take  the  property  subject  to  the  mort- 
gage, and  cannot  contest  its  validity; 
Bradt  v.  Hartson,  4  Neb.  (Unoff.) 
889,  96  N.  W.  1008. 

y.  £r.— Quimby  v.  Williams,  67  N. 
H.  489,  41  Atl.  862,  68  Am.  St.  Rep. 
685;  Stevens  v.  Morse,  47  N.  H.  632; 
Marston  v.  Brackett,  9  N.  H.  336. 

2V.  J. — ^Boice  V.  Conover,  54  N.  J. 
Eq.  531,  35  Atl.  402. 

N.  C— Pass  V.  Lynch,  117  N.  C. 
453,  23  S.  E.  357 ;  Triplett  v.  Wither- 
spoon,  70  N.  C.  589;  Long  v.  Wright, 
48  N.  C.  290;  Hiatt  v.  Wade,  30  N.  0. 
340;  Squires  v.  Riggs,  4  N.  C.  253,  6 
Am.  Dec.  564. 


Ohio. — Mathews  v.  Rents,  6  Ohio 
Dee.  72,  2  Am.  L.  Rec.  371. 

Pa. — ^Thomson  v.  Dougherty,  12 
Serg.  R.  448;  Poster  v.  Walton,  5 
Watts  378. 

8,  O. — ^Moultrie  v.  Jennings,  2  Me- 
Mull.  508;  Hudnal  v.  Wilder,  4  Mc- 
Cord,  294,  17  Am.  Dec.  744;  Kid  v. 
Mitchell,  1  Nott  k  M.  334,  0  Am.  Dec. 
702;  Footman  v.  Pendergrass,  3  Rich. 
Eq.  33. 

7enn.— Hubbs  v.  Brockwell,  35 
Tenn.  574.  Compare  Laird  v.  Soott,  5 
Heisk.  314. 

Tea, — ^Fowler  v.  Stoneum,  11  Tez. 
478,  62  Am.  Dec.  490;  Robinson  v. 
Martell,  11  Tex.  140;  McClenny  v. 
Floyd,  10  Tex.  159. 

Zit.  Ate.— GiUiland  v.  Fenn,  90  Ala. 
230,  8  So.  15,  9  L.  R.  A.  413;  Gard- 
ner V.  Boothe,  31  Ala.  186;  Corprew 
V.  Arthur,  15  Ala.  525;  GriiBn  v.  Doe, 
12  Ala.  783;  Elliott  v.  Horn,  10  Ala. 
348,  44  Am.  Dec.  488;  Frisbie  v.  Mc- 
Carty,  1  Stew.  &  P.  68. 

/otoa. — Saunders  v.  King,  119  Iowa, 
291,  93  N.  W.  272;  Wolf  v.  Van 
Metre,  23  Iowa,  397. 

Ky, — ^Earle  v.  Ck>uch,  3  Mete.  450; 
Enders  v.  Williams,  1  Mete.  346; 
Keghbors  v.  Holt,  14  Ky.  L.  Rep.  237; 
Winter  v.  Mannen,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep.  949. 

Me. — ^Wyman    v.    Brown,    50    Me. 


Who  May  Attack  Validity  of  Oonveyanoe. 


221 


%o  bar  a  subsequent  purchaser's  ri^t  of  action  to  set  aside  a 
fraudulent  conveyance.  For  example,  where  previous  sales  and 
conveyances  are  matters  of  record,  or  the  subsequent  purchaser 
has  knowledge  of  the  facts  and  dircumstancea  sufiBcient  to  put 
him  on  inquiry  and  he  n^lects  to  inquire,  he  will  be  chargeable 
with  notice*^  In  other  jurisdictions  constructive  notice  is  held 
insufficient  and  actual  notice  is  held  to  be  necessary  to  preclude 
the  right  of  action  of  a  subsequent  purchaser." 


139.  But  see  Spofford  v,  Weston,  29 
Me.  140. 

If d-~Cooke  y.  Kdl,  13  Md.  469; 
City  of  Baltimore  t.  WiUiams,  6  Md. 
235. 

23.  ind, — ^McNeely  v.  Rucker,  6 
Blackf.  391,  the  record  of  a  volun- 
tary conveyance  is  sufficient  notice  to 
a  subsequent  purchaser. 

jrd.~-Milholland  v.  Tiffany,  64  Md. 
455,  2  Atl.  831. 

Mass. — Beal  y.  Warren,  2  Gray, 
447. 

Mo, — Frank  y.  CSaruthers,  108  Mo. 
569,  18  S.  W.  927,  where  the  sale  and 
conyeyance  were  matters  of  record  of 
which  the  purchaser  had  full  notice; 
State  y.  Estel,  6  Mo.  App.  6,  where 
th6  purchaser  had  sufficient  knowl- 
edge to  excite  the  suspiciiw  of  an  or- 
dinarily prudent  man,  hut  failed  to 
make  inquiry. 

y.  J.— Dewitt  y.  Van  Sickle,  29  N. 
J.  Eq.  209,  purchaser  chargeable  with 
notice  when  he  had  such  knowledge  of 
facts  and  circnmstanoes  as  would 
naturally  prompt  a  prudent  mind  to 
further  inquiiy  and  emnlaatioiL 


N,  O. — ^Harris  y.  DeGraffenreid,  33 
N.  C.  89. 

Pa.— Tate  v.  Clement,  176  Pa.  St. 
550,  35  Atl.  214,  where  a  recital  in 
the  purehaser's  deed  referred  to  the 
prior  deed. 

£ft  C— 0.  Aultman  ft  Co.  y.  Utsey, 
84  S.  C.  559,  13  S.  E.  848,  where  pur- 
chasera  had  sufficient  notice  to  put 
them  on  inquiry. 

Tenf^ — ^Harton  y.  Lyons,  97  Tenn. 
180,  36  S.  W.  851,  where  the  yolun- 
tary  deed  was  registered  prior  to  the 
subsequent  purchase;  Laird  y.  Scott, 
5  Heisk.  314. 

04.  Iowa. — Gkimer  y.  Cole,  21  Iowa, 
205,  the  constructiye  notice  arising 
from  the  record  of  a  deed  is  insuffi- 
cient. 

Ky, — ^Enders  y.  Williams,  1  Mete. 
346;  Jones  y.  Jenkins,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
408;  Winter  y.  Mannen,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
949. 

Me, — Spofford  y.  Weston,  29  Me. 
140. 

Tew. — ^Lewis  y.  Castleman,  27  Tex. 
407,  record  of  deed  not  notice  to  sub- 
sequent purchaser. 


222 


FbAUBULENT   CoNVETAirCBS. 


CHAPTER  VL 

Badges  ov  Fsaub. 

Bection   1.  Badges  of  fraud  in  general. 

2.  Kecital  of  false  consideration. 

3.  Consideration  fictitious  in  whole  or  part. 

4.  Consideration  inadequate. 

5.  Excessive  security. 

6.  Excess  in  amount  secured. 

7.  Transfers  in  anticipation  of  or  pending  legal  proeeedingk 

8.  Transfers  of  all  the  debtor's  property. 

9.  Excessive  effort  to  give  appearance  of  fairness. 

10.  Suspicious  circumstances  unexplained. 

11.  Transfer  without  change  of  possession. 

12.  Reservation  of  trust  or  benefit  for  grantor. 

13.  Relationship  of  partis. 

14.  Indebtedness  or  insolvency  of  debtor. 

15.  Absolute  transfer  intended  as  security. 

16.  Concealment  of  or  failure  to  record  or  file  instrumeiit. 

17.  Secrecy  and  haste. 

18.  Sales  on  credit. 

19.  Transactions  not  in  usual  course  of  business. 

20.  Other  circumstances  indicating  fraud. 

21.  Repelling  badges  of  fraud. 

Section  1.  Badges  of  fraud  in  general — ^Various  facts  and  cir- 
cumstances are  of  tea  referred  to  as  and  denominated  badges  or 
indicia  of  fraud^  because  they  usually  or  frequently  attend  con- 
veyances or  tranafeirs  intended  to  hinder,  delay  and  defraud  cred- 
itorSy  and  are  frequently  or  usually  found  in  cases  where  fraud 
exists,  and  are  relied  upon  to  establish  the  existence  of  fraud.^ 
Badges  of  fraud  have  been  said  to  be  facts  calculated  to  throw 


1.  Thompson  v.  Williams,  100  Md. 
196,  199,  60  Atl.  26;  Hickman  v. 
Trout,  83  Va.  478,  3  6.  E.  131, 
wherein  quite  a  number  of  the  usual 
badges  of  fraud  were  found  grouped 
together  and  left  unexplained.  These 
were  gross  inadequacy  of  price;  no  se- 
curity taken  for  the  purchase  money; 
an  unusual  length  of  credit  for  the 


deferred  installments;  bonds  taken 
payable  at  long  periods,  when  the  pre- 
tence was  that  the  deferred  install- 
ments evidenced  by  them  had  already 
been  satisfied  in  the  main  by  antece- 
dent debts  due  by  the  obligee  to  the 
obligor;  the  conveyance  made  in  pay- 
ment of  alleged  indebtedness  of  fathei 
to  son,  residing  together  as  memben 


Badoes  of  Fbaud, 


223 


Buspidon  on  a  traiusacti<»iy  and  whidi  call  for  an  explanation.^ 
It  has  been  said  tliat  they  are  inferenceB  drawn  by  experience  from 
the  cnstomairy  conduct  of  mankind^*  and  that  they  afford  grounds 


of  one  family;  the  indebtedness  and 
insolTency  of  the  grantor,  and  well 
known  to  the  grantee;  the  threats  and 
pendens  of  suits;  the  secrecy  and 
concealment  of  the  transaction;  keep- 
ing the  deed  unacknowledged  and  un- 
recorded for  over  a  year;  grantor  re- 
maining in  possession  as  before  the 
conveyance,  and  cautioning  the  kins- 
maA  justice,  who  took  the  acknowl- 
edgment, to  keep  the  matter  private; 
and  the  relation  between  grantor  and 
grantee. 

Glenn  v.  Glenn,  17  Iowa,  498, 
wherein  some  of  the  badges  of  a 
fraudulent  sale  were  that  the  vendor 
was  in  embarrassed  circumstances; 
that  the  sale  was  made  on  the  day 
that  a  suit  was  commenced  against 
him ;  that  the  subject  of  the  sale  com- 
prised the  whole  of  his  property;  that 
the  vendees  were  his  sons  and  some 
other  relatives,  all  of  whom  were  pe- 
cuniarily irresponsible  and  one  was  a 
minor;  that  but  little,  if  any,  of  the 
property  had  been  assessed  for  taxes 
against  the  vendees;  that  the  sale 
was  almost  whoUy  on  credit,  and  that 
no  security  was  taken;  that  the  prop- 
erty was  afterward  controlled  by  and 
for  the  benefit  of  the  father;  and 
that  none  of  the  parties  were  offered 
as  witnesses  to  rebut  the  suspicious 
circumstances. 

Herrin  v.  Morford,  39  Ky.  (9 
Dana)  460,  wherein  a  conveyance 
made  by  a  debtor  was  set  aside  at  the 
suit  of  a  creditor,  where  it  appeared 
that  it  transferred  all  the  property 
of  the  debtor  of  value;  that  the  trans- 
action was  secret,  and  was  made 
pending  a  suit  of  the  creditor;  that 


the  pretended  sale  was  for  a  much 
less  price  that  was  paid  for  the  prop- 
erty when  bought  a  few  months  pre- 
vious, though  it  was  advancing  in 
value;  that  it  was  so  made  as  to  con- 
centrate the  property  in  the  debtor's 
two  sons-in-law,  who  had  no  use  for 
the  property  and  never  applied  it  to 
their  personal  use;  and  that  the 
debtor  remained  in  possession  of  and 
continued  to  enjoy  his  property.  See 
also  White  v.  Gibson,  113  Mo.  App. 
668,  88  S.  W.  120;  St.  Louis  Brew- 
ing Assoc.  V.  Steimke,  68  Mo.  App. 
62;  Weaver  v.  Owens,  16  Oreg.  304, 
18  Pac.  379,  where  the  circumstances 
of  the  sale  were  held  to  constitute  a 
badge  of  fraud,  rendering  the  transac- 
tion fraudulent  as  to  the  grantor's 
creditors^ 

In  the  famous  Twyne's  Oase,  3  Rep. 
80,  3  Coke,  80a,  1  Smith's  Lead.  Gas. 
1,  the  following  badges  or  marks  of 
fraud  were  pointed  out  by  the  court : 
( 1 )  The  gift  was  general,  without  ex- 
ception of  the  donor's  apparel,  or  of 
any  thing  of  necessity;  (2)  the  donor 
continued  in  possession,  and  used  the 
goods  as  his  own,  and  by  means 
thereof  traded  with  others  and  de- 
frauded then;  (3)  it  was  made  in 
secret;  (4)  it  was  made  pending  the 
writ;  (6)  there  was  a  trust  between 
the  parties;  (6)  the  deed  expressed 
that  the  gift  was  made  honestly, 
truly  and  bona  fide. 

It.  Helms  V.  Green,  106  N.  C.  261, 
11  S.  E.  470,  18  Am.  St.  Rep. 
893;  Peebles  v.  Horton,  64  N.  C. 
874. 

3.  TerreU  v.  Green,  11  Ala.  207, 
218. 


224 


Fbatjdtjlent  Convbtai^oes. 


of  inference  from  which  the  jury  are  authorized  to  conclude  that  a 
transaction  surrounded  by  them  is  fraudulent^  More  simply 
stated,  they,  are  the  sign&  or  marks  of  fraud.^  They  do  not  of 
themselves  or  per  se  constitute  fraud,  but  they  are  facts  having  a 
tendency  to  show  the  existence  of  fraud/  although  their  value  as 
evidence  is  relative  and  not  absolute.^  They  are  not  usually  con- 
clusive proof,  but  are  open  to  explanation.'  They  may  be  almost 
conclusive,  or  merely  furnish  a  reasonable  inference  of  fraud, 
according  to  the  weight  to  which'  they  may  be  entitled  from  their 
intrinsic  character  and  the  special  circumstances  attending  the 
case.*  Even  a  single  one  of  them  may  be  su£5cient  to  stamp  a 
transactioii  as  fraudulent,^^  but  when  several  are  found  in  the 
same  transaction,  strong  and  dear  evidence  will  be  required  to 
repel  the  conclusion  of  fraudulent  inteint^^  The  possible  indicia 
of  fraud  have  been  said  to  be  as  infinite  in  number  and  form  as 
are  the  resources  and  versatility  of  human  artifice,"  and  it  would 
be  an  almost  impossible  task  to  anticipate  and  catalogue  them. 
We,  theorefore,  have  cited  in  the  notes  below  many  cases  wherein 
the  circumstances  attending  the  transaction  in-  question,  were  held 
to  be  badges  of  fraud  and  others  wherein  the  circumstances  were 
held  nob  to  be  badges  of  fraud." 


4.  Sherman  ▼.  Hogland,  73  Ind. 
472. 

5.  Pilling  V.  Otis,  13  Wis.  406. 

6.  Shealy  v.  Edwards,  76  Ala.  411 ; 
Thames  v.  Rembert,  63  Ala.  661 ;  Wil- 
son V.  Lott,  6  Fla.  306. 

7.  Thompson  v.  Williams.  100  Md. 
196,  100,  60  Atl.  26,  ''these  indicia 
are  open  to  explanation,  and  they  are, 
therefore,  not  necessarily  conclusive, 
as  is  an  irrebuttable  legal  presump- 
tion. In  many  instances  they  furnish 
strong  and  satisfactoiry  evidence  of 
the  existence  of  fraud;  but  as  they 
are  relative  and  not  absolute  as  re- 
spects their  probative  value,  the 
special  circumstances  accompanying 
each  inquiry  must  be  known  and  con- 
sidered in  order  that  the  weight  prop- 


erly attributable  to  those  imdieia  may 
be  given  to  them. 

8.  Marshall  v.  Croon,  52  Ala.  S54; 
Hodges  V.  Colonan,  76  Ala.  103. 

9.  PiUing  V.  Otis,  13  Win.  406. 

10.  Stoddard  v.  Butler,  20  Wend. 
(K.  Y.)  607,  a  transfer  of  property 
to  a  creditor,  toward  the  satisfaction 
of  his  claim  merely  and  not  in  fall 
payment,  is  a  badge  of  fraud. 

11.  Hickman  v.  Trout,  83  Va.  401; 
Shealy  v.  Edwards,  16  Ala.  411;  Wil- 
liams V.  Bamett,  62  Tex.  130. 

12.  Shealy  v.  Edwards,  76  Ala.  411. 

13.  Oircniaatan—  lield  to  be 
badsea  of  fimvd. — N,  Y. — St.  John 
Wood-Working  Co.  v.  Smith,  178  N. 
Y.  629,  71  N.  E.  1130,  a/fV  82  App. 
Div.  348,  82  K.  Y.  Supp.  1026;  Third 


Badges  of  Fbaub. 


225 


§  2.  Recital  of  false  consideraticm. — The  recital  of  a  fake 
DBideration  in  a  deed  of  trust,  mortgage,  or  other  conveyance  of 


Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Keeffe,  30  Misc.  Rep. 
400,  63  K.  T.  Bupp.  1040;  Stoddard 
▼.  Butler,  20  Wend.  507,  transfer  of 
property  to  a  creditor  towards  the 
satisfaction  of  his  claim  merely,  and 
not  in  full  payment,  is  a  tMtdge  of 
fraud. 

Ga.— Trice  ▼.  Rose,  70  Qa.  76,  3  S. 
E.  701;  Howard  ▼.  Snelling,  82  Gki. 
105. 

III. — ^Merchants'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Lyon, 
185  111.  343,  56  N.  E.  1083;  Schroe- 
der  ▼.  Walsh,  120  111.  403,  11  N.  B. 
70;  Carter  v.  Qunnels,  67  111.  270; 
Blow  ▼.  Gage,  44  HI.  208;  Qray  ▼. 
St.  John,  35  HI.  222;  Boies  ▼.  Hen- 
n^,  32  HI.  130. 

Iowa. — ^Dunning  ▼.  Baily,  120  Iowa, 
720,  05  N.  W.  248;  Com  Ezch.  Bank 
T.  Applegate,  01  Iowa,  411,  60  K.  W. 
268. 

£y.— Lillard  ▼.  McQee,  4  Bibh,  166, 
selling  at  auction  without  previous 
notice  or  advertisement. 

Me. — ^Hartshorn  v.  Eames,  31  Me. 
93. 

M(U9, — ^Parker  v.  Barker,  43  Mass. 
423,  a  promise  by  the  mortgagee  to 
the  mortgagor's  creditors  that  he  will 
relinquish  his  claim  if  th^  will  ac- 
cept another  mortgage  and  give  the 
mortgagor  time  is  presumptive  evi- 
dence of  fraud. 

if  inn.— -Welch  v.  Bradley,  45  Minn. 
540,  48  N.  W.  440. 

N.  /.—Moore  V.  Roe,  85  N.  J.  Eq. 
00. 

N.  C.--Brown  v.  Mitchell,  102  N. 
C.  347,  0  S.  E.  702,  11  Am.  St.  Rep. 
748. 

Pa, — ^Waterhouse  v.  Waterhouse, 
206  Pa.  St.  433,  55  Atl.  1067;  Kaine 
T.  Weigtey,  22  Pa.  St.  170. 

15 


Tenn.— Carter  v.  Baker,  57  Tenn. 
640. 

Fa.-— American  Net,  etc.,.  Co.  v. 
Mayo,  07  Va.  182,  07  S.  B.  523;  aick 
V.  Qreen,  77  Va.  827;  Hickman  v. 
Trout,  83  Va.  401. 

W,  Va. — ^Richardson  v.  Ralphsny- 
der,  40  W.  Va.  15,  20  S.  E.  854; 
Goshorn  v.  Snodgrass,  17  W.  Va.  717; 
Hunter  v.  Hunter,  10  W.  Va.  321; 
Lockhard  v.  Beckley,  10  W.  Va.  87. 

Oironmstaiieea  lield  aot  to  be 
badges  of  f»and^ — N.  Y. — Craig  v. 
Tappin,  2  Sandf.  Ch.  78,  taking  a 
mortgage  after  the  creditor  knew  of 
the  intention  of  the  debtor  to  mort- 
gage the  same  land  to  another  credi- 
tor to  secure  a  pre-existing  debt. 

U.  flf.— Ctettlieb  v.  Thatcher,  151  U. 
S.  271,  14  Sup.  Ct.  310,  38  L.  Ed.  167, 
the  mere  fact  that  a  non-resident,  who 
purchases  lands  from  his  brother,  sub- 
sequently gives  the  latter  a  power  of 
attorney  to  dispose  of  all  his  lands 
in  the  State,  raises  no  presumption 
that  the  purchase  was  for  the  purpose 
of  defrauding  the  brother's  creditors, 
it  appearing  that  the  donor  had  other 
lands  in  the  State;  Ryttenberg  v. 
Shaefer,  131  Fed.  313,  a  contract  by 
which  a  bankrupt  commission  firm, 
some  years  before  its  bankruptcy, 
agreed  to  do  all  its  business  through 
another  firm,  obtaining  the  benefit  of 
the  latter's  credit,  held  not  invalid, 
as  a  scheme  to  hinder,  delay  or  de- 
fraud its  creditors;  Jenkins  v.  Ein- 
stein, Fed.  Cas.  No.  7,265,  3  Biss. 
128,  the  fact  that  an  attorney  who 
thinks  he  knows  the  title,  having 
confidence  in  the  vendor,  purchases 
without  an  abstract  or  examination  of 
title  of  real  property,  is  not  proof  of 


226 


Fbaudulbnt  Convbyanobs, 


property,  or  the  misrepresentation  of  the  liability  or  obligation 
secured  by  it,  is  a  badge  or  evidence  of  fraud."    It  is  undoubtedlj 


fraud,  in  a  suit  to  set  aside  the  oon- 
▼eyanoe  as  made  to  hinder  creditors; 
Bank  of  the  United  States  v.  Lee,  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  922  (5  Cranch,  C.  C.  319), 
aifd  38  U.  S.,  13  Ptet.  107,  10  L.  Ed. 
81,  failure  of  a  first  incumhrancer  to 
give  notice  after  a  second  incum- 
brancer has  advanced  his  mon^  is  no 
eridenoe  of  fraud. 

Ala. — Chipman  v.  Stem,  89  Ala. 
207,  7  So.  409;  Sandlin  ▼.  Anderson, 
82  Ala.  330,  3  So.  28. 

Ark. — ^Blass  v.  Anderson,  67  Ark. 
483,  22  S.  W.  94,  the  fact  that  a  sale 
is  illegal  because  against  the  prohibi- 
tion  of  a  statute,  as  because  it  was 
made  on  Sunday,  does  not  establish 
that  it  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors. 
(?a.— Phimzy  v.  Clark,  62  Ga.  623; 
Colquitt  T.  Thomas,  8  Ga.  268. 

lU. — ^Freishenm^er    ▼.    Lehmlcuhl, 
29  111.  App.  466. 
/nd.-— Kane  v.  Drake,  27  Ind.  29. 
af<i.— Wilson    ▼.    Russell,    13    Ifd. 
494,    71    Am.    Dec.    646;    BuUett   t. 
Worthington,  3  Md.  Ch.  99. 

Mich. — ^Bendetson  v.  Moody,  100 
Mich.  663,  69  N.  W.  262. 

Jftnn.^Derby  v.  Gallup,  6  Minn. 
119. 

Jfw.— Donly  v.  Ray  (1889),  6  So. 
324. 

V.  J. — Emerald,  etc..  Brewing  Co. 
▼.  Sutton,  68  N.  J.  L.  246,  60  AtL 
302,  refusal  of  a  debtor  to  apply  the 
proceeds  of  his  property  to  a  particu- 
lar creditor. 

y.  O. — Cannon  v.  Toimg,  89  N.  C. 
264,  conversion  by  an  insolvent  debtor 
of  his  land  into  money  or  property 
not  subject  to  execution. 

Pa. — ^Barncord  v.  Kuhn,  36  Pa.  St. 
383,  the  husband's  possession  of  his 


wife^s  property  is  not  a  badge  of 
fraud;  Forsyth  v.  Matthews,  14  Pft. 
St  100,  63  Am.  Dec.  622;  Strong  v. 
Burdick,  1  Pennyp.  498. 

8.  (7.— Leake  v.  Anderson,  43  8.  C. 
448,  21  S.  E.  439. 

7e0.— Made  v.  Block  (1888),  8  S. 
W.  496;  Eason  v.  Garrison,  36  Ter. 
Civ.  App.  674,  82  S.  W.  800. 

Ft— Wallace  v.  Berry,  61  Vt.  602. 

Fa.— Harvey  v.  Anderson  (1896)» 
24  S.  E.  914. 

Wash. — Commercial  Bank  v.  Chil- 
berg,  14  Wash.  47,  44  Pac.  112. 

TTit.- Portner  v.  Whelan,  87  Ww. 
88,  68  N.  W.  263;  Peninsula  Stove 
Co.  V.  Sacket,  74  Wis.  626, 43  N.W.  491 . 

14.  N.  F.— McKinster  v.  Bab- 
cock,  26  N.  Y.  378;  Griffin  v.  Cran- 
stor,  1  Bosw.  (N.  Y.)  281;  Lawraiee 
Bros.  V.  Heylman,  98  N.  Y.  Supp. 
121. 

U.  fif.— Davis  V.  SchwartB,  166  U.  8. 
631,   16  S.   a.  237,  39  L.  Ed.  289; 
Stinson  v.  Hawkins,  16  Fed.  860,  5 
MeCrary,  284. 

Ato.— Harris  v.  Russell,  93  Ala.  69,. 
9  So.  641,  enlarging  the  debt  by  add- 
ing usury;  Pickett  v.  Pipkin,  64  Ala. 
620;  Stover  v.  Herrington,  7  Ala.  142, 
41  Am.  Dec  86. 

Arfc.— Henry  v.  Harrell,  67  Ark. 
669,  22  S.  W.  433. 

CoMfi.— North  V.  Belden,  18  Ck>nn. 
376,  36  Am.  Dec.  83. 

/».— Adams  v.  Pease,  113  HL  App. 
866. 

/ful.— Goff  V.  Rogers,  71  Ind.  469. 

/otoo.- Bussard  v.  Bullitt^  96  Iowa,. 
736,    64    N.    W.    668;    Lombard    v. 
Dows,  66  Iowa,  243,  23  N.  W.  649; 
l^ylor  V.  Wendling,  66  Iowa,  662,  24 
N.  W.  40. 


Badges  of  Fbaub. 


227 


always  advisable  to  state,  fairly  and  plainly,  the  true  considera- 
tion, and  when  this  is  not  done,  the  instrument  may  be  open  to 
suspicion,  and  the  question  may  be  fairly  raised  whether,  in  stat- 
ing an  untrue,  instead  of  the  true,  consideration,  'thene  was  not  a 
design  to  mislead  and  deceive  the  creditors  of  the  grantor  or  mort- 
gagor, or  judgment  debtor,  and  to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  them.^^ 
But  the  mere  fact  that  the  consideration  expressed  in  a  conveyance 
of  any  kind  was  not  the  true  one  does  not  conclusively  show  that 
the  conveyance  was  in  fraud  of  creditors."    The  conveyance  may 


Kff. — Enden  v.  SwaTiie,  38  Ky.  (S 
Dana)    103. 

JfoM.— Lynde  v.  McGregor,  13  Al- 
len (Mass.),  372. 

Ificfc.— Patrick  v.  Riggs,  106  Mich. 
616,  63  N.  W.  632;  Ferris  v.  McQueen, 
04  Mich.  367,  64  N.  W.  165;  Show- 
man v.  Lee,  86  Mich.  656,  49  N.  W. 
578;  King  t.  Hubbell,  42  Mich.  497,  4 
N.  W.  440;  Williams  t.  Desenberg, 
41  Mich.  156,  2  N.  W.  201. 

Minn, — Hanson  v.  Bean,  61  Minn. 
546,  38  Am.  St.  Rep.  516,  53  N.  W. 
871. 

aro.— Glasgow  Milling  Co.  v.  Bums, 
144  Mo.  192,  45  S.  W.  1074;  Benne 
V.  Schnecko,  100  Mo.  260,  13  S.  W. 
82. 

^6&.—- Ellis  Y.  Musselman,  61  Neb. 
262,  86  N.  W.  76. 

N,  ff.— Kennard  v.  Gray,  68  N.  H. 

51. 

y.  j.—Newman  v.  Kirk,  45  N.  J. 
Eq.  677,  8  Atl.  224;  Heintxe  v.  Bent- 
ley,  34  N.  J.  Eq.  562. 

y.  C.— Perry  v.  Hardison,  99  N.  C. 
21,  5  S.  E.  230;  Peebles  v.  Horton,  64 
N.  C.  374;  Poster  v.  Woodfln,  38  N. 

C.  339. 
Pa, — Gordon  v.  Preston,  1  Watte, 

385,  26  Am.  Dec.  76. 

8^  (7.— Hipp  V.  Sawyer,  Rich.  Eq. 
Cas.  410. 


Tenn. — ^Thurman  v.  Jenkins,  61 
Tenn.  (2  Bazt.)  426. 

W.  Va. — ^Bartlett  ▼.  OleaTenger,  36 
W.  Va.  718,  14  S.  E.  273. 

TFt».— Rice  V.  Momer,  64  Wis.  699, 

25  N.  W.  668;  Blakeslee  v.  Rossman, 
43  Wis.  1161;  Butts  v.  Peacock,  23 
Wis.  359.  See  Fraudulent  intent  and 
knowledge.  Recital  of  false  considera- 
tion, post, 

15.  McKinster  v.  Baboock,  26  N.  Y. 
378. 

16.  N.  F.— McKinster  t.  Baboock, 

26  N.  Y.  378. 

Ala. — Cottingham  v.  Greely-Bam- 
ham  Grocery  Co.,  137  Ala.  149,  34  So. 
956;  Troy  Fertilizer  Co.  v.  Norman^ 
107  Ala.  667,  18  So.  201;  Pique  ▼. 
Arendale,  71  Ala.  91;  McCain  ▼. 
Wood,  4  Ala.  268,  where  a  deed  of 
trust  expressed  a  legal  consideration, 
it  is  not  void  per  se,  because  the 
amount  of  debts,  etc.,  assigned  by  it 
is  not  set  out,  or  the  names  of  the 
debtors  specified. 

Colo. — Jefferson  County  Bank  ▼. 
Hummel,  11  Colo.  App.  337,  63  Pac. 
286. 

Conn. — ^Merrills  v.  Swift,  18  Conn. 
267,  46  Am.  Dec.  316. 

/ZZ.— Wooley  v.  Fry,  30  HI.  158. 

Ind. — ^Adams  ▼.  Laugel,  144  Ind. 
608,  42  N.  £.  1017;  Goff  ▼.  Rogers, 
71  Ind.  459. 


228 


Feaudulbnt  Cohtveyances. 


have  been  executed  in  good  faith,  and  for  a  valuable  considera- 
tion,  without  any  intent  to  defraud  creditors,  and,  if  this  be 
shown,  it  will  be  held  to  be  valid,  notwithstanding  the  misrepie- 
eentation  of  the  consideration  or  of  the  obligation  or  liability  in 
fact  secured  and  intended  to  be  secured  by  it  The  real  considera- 
tion may  be  shown  to  repel  an  attack  by  creditors.^^  It  must 
appear  that  the  misrepresentation  was  so  made  intentionally,  and 
not  by  mere  mistake,  in  computation  or  otherwise."  There  must 
be  a  fraudulent  intent  on  the  part  of  the  purchaser  or  mortgagee^ 
as  well  as  on  the  part  of  the  vendor  or  mortgagor."  Courts  will 
not  strive  to  force  conclusions  of  fraud.  If  the  circumstances 
relied  on  to  sustain  the  allegation  of  fraud  are  fairly  susceptible 
of  an  honest  intent,  that  construction  will  be  placed  upon  them.*^ 
But  a  mortgage  or  deed  of  trust  executed  to  hinder  or  delay  the 
mortgagor's  or  grantor's  creditors,  and  which  purposely  exag- 
gerates the  mortgagee's  demand  or  the  debts  secured  by  the  deed 
of  trust,  and  the  object  of  which  is  known  to  the  mortgagee  or  the 
grantee  at  the  time  of  its  execution,  is  void  as  against  sudi  cred* 


Iowa, — ^Mason  ▼.  Franklin,  68  fowa, 
506,  12  N.  W.  664;  Wood  v.  Scott, 
65  Iowa,  114,  7  N.  W.  466;  Oulbert- 
son  ▼.  Luckey,  13  Iowa,  12. 

Kan, — Rexroad  ▼.  Johnson,  6  Kan. 
App.  607,  4»  Pac.  699;  Bowling  ▼. 
Armourdale  Bank,  57  Kan.  174,  46 
Pac.  584;  Bush  v.  Bush,  33  Kan.  666, 
6  Pac.  794. 

Ky.  —  Highland  v.  Anderson's 
Adm'r,  13  Ky.  Law  Rep.  710,  17  S. 
W.  806. 

l,a, — ^Brown  v.  Brown,  30  La.  Ann. 

966. 

Jfiofc.— Louden  v.  Vinton,  108  Mich. 
313,  66  N.  W.  222. 

Jfinn,— Heim  v.  Chapel,  62  Minn. 
338,  64  N.  W.  826;  Berry  v.  O'Con- 
nor, 33  Minn.  29,  21  N.  W.  840; 
Manor  v.  Sheehan,  30  Minn.  419,  15 
N.  W.  687. 

jfo.— Wall  V.  Beedy,  161  Mo.  625, 
61  S.  W.  864;  Schroeder  v.  Bobhitt, 


108  Mo.  289,  18  S.  W.  1093;  Finke  v. 
Pike,  60  Mo.  App.  664. 

y.  ff.— Whittredge  v.  Edmunds,  63 
N.  H.  248. 

Fi.— Brackett  v.  Wait,  6  Vt  411. 

Ftt.— Norris  v.  Lake,  89  Va.  613, 
16  S.  E.  663 ;  Keagy  v.  Trout»  85  Va. 
390,  7  S.  E.  329. 

'Wis. — ^Barkow  v.  Sanger,  47  Wis. 
600,  3  N.  W.  16. 

17.  McKinster  v.  Babcock,  26  N.  Y. 
378;  Manor  v.  Sheehan,  30  Minn.  419, 
16  N.  W.  687. 

18.  Kalk  V.  Fielding,  50  Wis.  339, 
7  N.  W.  296. 

10.  Waterbury  v.  Stnrtevant,  18 
Wend.  (N.  Y.)  363;  Carpenter  ▼. 
Muren,  42  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  300;  Kevan 
T.  Crawford,  46  L.  J.  Ch.  729,  6  Ch. 
D.  29,  37  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  8.  822,  26 
Wkly.  Rep.  49. 

20.  Alabama  L.  Ins.  k  T.  Co.  ▼. 
Pettway,  24  Ala.  544. 


Badges  of  Fbaub. 


229 


itonk'^  And  the  recital  of  a  false  oonfiideration  in  an  abeolute 
oonveyanoe  mtended  as  a  mortgage  to  secure  a  much  smaller  sum 
than  that  recited  is  s4;rong  evidence  of  participation,  in  the 
grantor's  fraudulent  intent." 

§  S.  Consideration  fictitious  in  whole  or  in  part — ^Almoet  in- 
variably some  honest  consideration  is  made  the  agen<7  for  floating 
a  scheme  of  fraud  against  creditors.  Where  the  balance  of  the 
consideration  for  a  transfer  of  property^  however,  is  made  up  of 
a  false  and  pretended  debt  or  daimy  which  is  wholly  fictitious 
and  never^  in  fact,  existed^  and  which  both  parties  to  the  trans- 
action falsely  concocted  to  make  up  a  full  and  fair  consideration 
for  the  conveyance,  the  courts  almost  invariably  hold  that  such  a 
conveyance  is  wholly  void  and  cannot  stand  to  any  extent  as 
security  or  indemnity."    That  a  part  of  the  alleged  indebtedness 


21.  Stinson  v.  Hawkins,  16  Fed. 
850,  5  McCrary,  284,  13  Fed.  833,  4 
McCrary,  600;  Alabama  L.  Ins.  A  T. 
Co.  ▼.  Pettway,  24  Ala.  644;  WaUis 
▼.  Adoue,  76  Tex.  118,  13  8.  W.  63; 
Taylor  v.  Wood  (N.  J.  Ch.),  6  Atl. 
818. 

22.  Bailey  v.  Cheatham,  4  Ky.  Law 
Rep.  361. 

23.  N.  F.— Baldwin  ▼.  Short,  125 
N.  Y.  663,  26  N.  E.  928. 

17.  /6r.~Kellogg  y.  Clyne,  64  Fed. 
606,  4  C.  C.  A.  664,  the  acceptance  by 
a  creditor  of  a  mortgage  from  his 
debtor  for  a  greater  amount  than  the 
sum  actually  due  renders  the  mort- 
gage presumptively  fraudulent,  and 
it  cannot  be  upheld  as  a  valid  security 
for  the  sum  actually  due. 

Mo. — Gregory  v.  Ktlington,  64  Mo. 
App.  60;  Boland  v.  Ross,  120  Mo.  208, 
25  S.  W.  624;  National  Tube  Works 
V.  Ring  Refrigerating,  etc.,  Co.,  118 
Mo.  366,  22  S.  W.  047,  where  part  of 
the  indebtedness  secured  by  the  mort- 
gage of  a  corporation  was  the  indi- 
vidual   indebtedness    of    one    of    its 


officers;  Hayden  v.  Alkire  Grocery 
Co.,  88  Mo.  App.  241,  including  ficti- 
tious claims  in  a  conveyance  to  se- 
cure a  valid  debt  avoids  the  whole  se- 
curity; but  while  a  claim  is  honest 
in  itself,  and  the  parties  probably  con- 
sider such  debt  might  be  properly  so 
secured,  it  must  be  shown  that  such 
debt  was  included  with  a  fraudulent 
purpose,  and  instructions  should  sub- 
mit the  existence  of  such  purpose  to 
the  jury;  Seger  v.  Thomas,  107  Mo. 
636,  18  S.  W.  33,  where  the  considera- 
tion included  an  obligation  upon 
which  the  transferee  was  liable  only 
as  security,  and  which  he  had  neither 
paid  or  assumed  and  would  not  be 
called  upon  to  pay  because  it  was 
amply  secured  by  the  insolvent ;  Bow- 
man V.  Victor  Min.  Co.,  78  Mo.  App. 
676,  2  Mo.  A.  Repr.,  where  part  of 
the  consideration  was  to  be  subse- 
quently advanced  and  the  residue 
was  to  cover  a  note  then  due  to  the 
mortgagee,  which  was  to  be  cancelled, 
and  no  part  of  the  agreement  was 
carried  out;  Webb  City  Lumber  Co. 


230 


Feaudulent  Cokveyancks. 


for  which  a  chattel  mortgage  is  given  by  an  insolvent  debtor  is 
fraudulent  as  against  his  creditors  will  taint  the  entire  transaction 
and  avoid  the  whole  mortgage  as  to  creditors.^  It  has  been  said 
that  no  devioe  can  be  more  deceptive,  and  more  likely  to  bafiSe, 
delay,  or  defeat  creditors^  than  the  creating  of  incumbrances  upon 
their  property  by  embarrassed  men,  for  debts  that  are  fictitious 
or  mainly  so." 

§  4.  Consideration  inadequate. — ^Inadequacy  of  consideration 
is  generally  held  to  be  a  badge  or  evidence  of  fraud,  a  fact  to  be 
considered  in  determining  the  good  faith  of  the  parties  to  the 
transaction."    Great  inadequacy  of  price  is  a  strong,  though  not 


V.  Victor  Min.  Co.,  Id.;  Ball  ▼. 
0*Nea],  64  Mo.  App.  388,  2  Mo.  App. 
Rep.  100,  a  chattel  mortgage  given  to 
secure  three  notes,  two  of  which  were 
fraudulent;  State  v.  Hope,  102  Mo. 
410,  14  S.  W.  985. 

N,  C, — Hawkins  ▼.  Alston,  39  N.  C. 
137. 

Tesr.— Watts  ▼.  Dubois  (Tex.  Civ. 
App.),  66  S.  W.  698,  but  a  mort- 
gage in  good  faith  on  firm  property 
to  secure  a  firm  debt  and  an  indi- 
vidual partner's  debt  is  valid, 
though  the  firm  was  insolvent  when 
the  mortgage  was  given,  and  known 
to  be  insolvent  by  the  mortgagee. 

W«.— Liver  v.  Thielke,  116  Wis. 
389,  91  N.  W.  975,  where  a  husband 
fraudulently  conveys  land  to  his  wif^ 
and  she  executes  a  mortgage  thereon 
to  her  father,  based  on  unauthorised 
payments  by  him  of  insurance  money 
due  by  the  husband,  such  mortgage 
being  largely  in  excess  of  the  real  in- 
debtedness of  the  husband  to  the 
father,  is  presumptively  fraudulent; 
Butts  V.  Peacock,  23  Wis.  359. 

Contra. — Can. — Campbell  v.  Pat- 
terson, 21  Can.  S.  C.  645,  a  mortgage 
fraudulent  in  part  and  partly  for  a 
bona  fide  advancement  is  not  wholly 


void,  but  may  be  upheld  to  the  extent 
of  the  bona  fide  consideration. 

Hie  traaaaotioa  is  mot  a  sdaiv- 
Iftted  one,  when  an  actual  considera- 
tion, however  inadequate,  has  been 
paid  by  the  purchaser  in  an  alleged 
sale.  Brown  v.  Brown,  30  La.  Ann. 
966. 

ftA.  Roland  v.  Ross,  120  Mo.  208, 
25  S.  W.  524.  But  see  Rider  v.  Hunt, 
6  Tex.  Civ.  App.  238,  25  S.  W.  314. 
holding  that  the  fraudulency  of  the 
debts  secured  to  some  of  the  creditors 
by  a  deed  of  trust  does  not  vitiate 
the  instrument  as  to  honest  debts  se- 
cured to  other  creditors  thereby, 
where  the  latter  took  the  security  in 
good  faith,  without  knowledge  of  the 
fraud;  Bradley  Co.  v.  Paul,  94  Wis. 
488,  69  N.  W.  168,  chattel  mortgages 
are  not  fraudulent  as  purporting  to 
secure  a  debt  larger  than  actual  debt 
and  future  advances,  where  the  agree- 
ment was  that  the  remainder  of  the 
money  was  to  be  advanced  substan- 
tially at  once. 

M.  Hawkins  v.  Alston,  39  N.  C. 
(4  Ired.  Eq.)  137,  145. 

26.  V,  r.— First  Nat.  Bank  of 
Amsterdam  v.  Miller,  163  N.  T.  164, 
57  N.  E.  308;   Masch  v.  Qrauer,  58 


Badges  op  Fiuud. 


231 


<xmclu8iye  badge  of  fraud,  and  in  many  casea  will  renidcfr  a  sale 


App.  DiT.  560,  60  N.  Y.  Supp.  187; 
Andreae  ▼.  Bonrke,  33  App.  Dir.  638, 
53  N.  Y.  Supp.  885;  Laidlaw  ▼.  Gil- 
more,  47  How.  Pr.  67;  Delaware  ▼. 
Ensign,  21  Barb.  86;  Stoddard  ▼. 
Butler,  20  Wend.  507;  Osgood  ▼. 
Franklin,  2  Johns.  Ch.  1,  7  Am.  Dee. 
513. 

Ala. — Marshall  v.  Croon,  52  Ala. 
554;  McCaskle  ▼.  Amarine,  12  Ala. 
17;  Seamans  v.  White,  8  Ala.  656. 

Ark. — ^Apperson  v.  Burgett,  33  Ark. 
328. 

Colo. — ^Bose  ▼.  Dunklee,  12  Colo. 
App.  403,  56  Pac.  342. 

Conn. — Clarke  v.  Black,  78  Conn. 
467,  62  Atl.  757;  Shelton  ▼.  Church, 
38  Conn.  416. 

Fla. — Loring  ▼.  Dunning,  16  Fla. 
119;  Barrow  v.  Bailey,  5  Fla.  9. 

Ga.— Hawkinsville  Bank,  etc.,  Co. 
▼.  Walker,  99  6a.  242,  25  S.  E.  205; 
Scott  ▼.  Winship,  20  Qa.  429. 

ill.— Mathews  v.  Reinhardt,  149  111. 
635,  37  N.  E.  85;  Stevens  v.  Dillman, 
86  HI.  233;  Steere  t.  Hoagland,  39 
111.  264;  McArtee  v.  Engart,  13  111. 

242. 

/nd.— Hubbe  v.  Bancroft,  4  Ind. 
388.  But  see  Milbum  ▼.  Phillips,  136 
Ind.  680,  34  N.  E.  983,  36  N.  E.  360. 

/o«oa._Urdangen  A  Greenburg 
Bros.  V.  Doner,  122  Iowa,  533,  98  N. 
W.  317;  Mertens  v.  Welsing,  85  Iowa, 
608,  52  N.  W.  362;  Bickler  ▼.  Ken- 
dall, 66  Iowa,  703;  Boyd  ▼.  Ellis,  11 
Iowa,  97. 

Kan, — ^Dodson  v.  Cooper,  50  Kan. 
680,  32  Pac.  370;  Douthitt  v.  Apple- 
gate,  33  Kan.  396. 

£y.— Behan  ▼.  Warfield,  90  Ky. 
151,  11  Ky.  L.  Rep.  960,  13  8.  W. 
439;  Easum  ▼.  Pirtle,  81  Ky.  563, 
5  Ky.  L.  Rep.  572;  Herrin  ▼.  Mor- 


ford,  9  Dana,  450;  Smead  ▼.  William- 
son, 16  B.  Mon.  492;  Diamond  Coal 
Co.  ▼.  Carter  Dry  Goods  Co.,  20  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  1444,  49  S.  W.  438. 

Md. — ^Fuller  ▼.  Brewster,  53  Md. 
868;  City  of  Baltimore  t.  Williams^ 
6  Md.  235. 

Ma88. — F.  A  M.  Schaefer  Brewing 
Co.  v.  ModMy  187  Mass.  571,  73  N.  E. 
858. 

Ifo.— State  v.  Mason,  112  Mo.  374, 
34  Am.  Rep.  390, 20  S.  W.  629;  White 
▼.  Gibson,  113  Mo.  App.  568;  Stem 
Auction,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Mason,  16  Mo. 
App.  473;  Ames  ▼.  Gilmore,  59  Mo. 
537;  Robinson  ▼.  Robards,  15  Mo. 
459. 

N.  ff.-— daflin  v.  Batchelder,  65  N. 
H.  29,  17  Atl.  1060. 

N.  /.--Case  ▼.  MoGill  (Ch.),  60 
Atl.  569,  where  a  firm  was  heavily 
indebted,  a  sale  by  a  member  thereof, 
at  the  unusual  discount  of  $150,  of 
two  city  warrants  for  $1,000  each, 
payable  to  his  order,  for  money  due 
the  firm  from  the  city  <m  a  paving 
contract,  was  void  as  to  the  firm's 
creditors.  See  also  Metropolitan 
Bank  v.  Durante  22  N.  J.  £q.  36; 
Gnitchel  v.  Jewell  (Ch.),  41  Atl.  227. 

Or.— Brown  v.  Case,  41  Or.  221,  69 
Pac.  43. 

Pa.— Rhoads  v.  Blatt,  84  Pa.  St. 
81;  Re  Bossart's  Estate,  77  Pa. 
Super.  Ct.  100.  But  see  Schate  v. 
Kirker,  17  Wkly.  Notes  Cas.  43. 

R.  /.—Re  Sweet,  20  R.  I.  157,  159, 
40  Atl.  502. 

Tex. — ^Bown  v.  Texas  Cactus  Hedge 
Co.,  64  Tex.  396s  Moore  v.  Lowery. 
27  Tex.  541;  Clark  v.  Bell  (Civ. 
App.  1905),  89  S.  W.  38. 

Fa.— Tebbs  v.  Lee,  76  Va.  744 ;  Wil- 
liamson V.  Goodwyn,  9  Gratt  503. 


282 


Fbaudulbnt  ComnSYANCBS. 


void;  but  it  may  be  explained.^  Mere  inadequacy  of  price  or 
consideration  alone,  however,  unattended  by  other  circumstances 
casting  suspicion  upon  the  f  aimess  of  the  transaction,  is  not  suflt 
cient  to  establish  fraud."    A  debtor  may  sell  his  property  to  pay 


WU. — Sommermejer  ▼.  Schwarts, 
S9  Wi%,  66,  61  N.  W.  311;  Fisher  ▼. 
Shelver,  63  Wis.  498,  10  N.  W. 
681. 

U.  8. — Bartles  ▼.  Gibson,  17  Fed. 
293;  Hudgins  v.  Kemp,  20  How.  45, 
16  L.  Ed.  853;  Wright  ▼.  Stanard,  30 
Fed.  Gas.  No.  18,094,  2  Brock.  11. 
But  see  Voorhees  ▼.  Blanton,  83  Fed. 
234,  holding  that  mere  inadequaoy 
of  consideration  in  honest  family  set* 
tlements  is  not  a  badge  of  fraud. 

Can. — Carradice  v.  Carrie,  19 
Qrant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  108;  Crawford  ▼. 
Meldoum,  3  Qrant  Err.  App.  (U.  C.) 
101. 

Where  a  deed  was  latesded  mm 
a  mortcas^f  although  absolute  on 
its  face,  inadequacy  of  consideration 
is  not  material  on  the  question  of 
fraud  as  against  the  grantor's  credi- 
tors. Cathcart  ▼.  Grieve,  104  Iowa, 
330,  73  N.  W.  835. 

27.  U.  flf.— Surget  ▼,  Byers,  24  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  13,629,  Hemp.  115,  aff^ 
Byers  v.  Surget,  60  U.  S.  (19  How.) 
303,  15  L.  Ed.  670. 

Al€k — ^Bozman  v.  Draughan,  3  Stew. 
243.  See  also  Fairfield  Packing  Co. 
y.  Kentucky  Jeans  Clothing  Co.,  110 
Ala.  536,  20  So.  63;  Ck>rdon  ▼. 
Tweedy,  71  Ala.  202. 

Ark. — Galbreath  v.  Cook,  30  Ark. 
417;  Beebe  v.  De  Baun,  8  Ark.  510. 

Flo.— Oainer  v.  Russ,  20  Fla.  157. 

/jj.-^ew€tt  V,  Cook,  81  HI.  260; 
Monell  T.  Schenick,  54  111.  269;  Bay 
V.  Cook,  31  ni.  336. 

JBTy. — Carter  v.  Richardson,  22 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  1204,  60  S.  W.  397;  Cin- 
cinnati   Tobacco   Warehouse    Co.    v. 


Matthews,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep.  2446,  74 
S.  W.  242. 

La, — ShultE  v.  Morgan,  27  La.  Ann. 
616. 

Ifd.— Jones  ▼.  Light,  86  Me.  437, 
30  AtL  71;  Wyman  v.  Brown,  50  Me. 
139. 

If  t0/k.— Shay  T.  Wheeler,  69  Mieh. 
254,  37  N.  W.  210. 

Minn, — Carson  ▼.  Hawl^,  82  Minn. 
204,  84  N.  W.  746. 

Miss. — Foster  v.  Pugh,  12  Sm.  ft 
M.  416;  Taylor  ▼.  Eckford,  11  Sm. 
ft  M.  21. 

Jfo. — ^Knoop  V.  Kelsey,  121  Mo. 
642,  26  S.  W.  683;  State  ▼.  Mason, 
112  Mo.  374,  34  Am.  St.  Rep.  390, 
20  S.  W.  629;  St.  Louis  Brewing 
Assoc.  ▼.  Steimke,  68  Mo.  App.  52; 
Ames  T.  Gilmore,  59  Mo.  537. 

N,  C— Shober  v.  Wheeler,  113  N. 
C.  370,  18  S.  E.  328;  Darden  ▼.  Skin- 
ner, 4  N.  C.  259. 

Pa, — ^Hamet  v.  Dundass,  4  Pa.  St. 
178.  If  the  parties,  although  mis- 
takenly, believe  that  the  price  is  a 
fair  one  the  transaction  is  not  fraud- 
ulent. Re  Bossart's  Estate,  11  Pa. 
Super  Ct.  100. 

Tew, — ^Bryant  t.  Kelton,  1  Tex.  415. 

Fa.— Hickman  v.  Trout,  83  Va.  478, 
3  S.  E.  131. 

W,  Fa.— Liyesay  v.  Beard,  22  W. 
Va.  585. 

Eng, — Strong  y.  Strong,  18  Beau. 
408,  52  Eng.  Reprint,  161;  Heme  ▼. 
Meeres,  1  Vem.  Ch.  465,  23  Eng.  Re- 
print, 591. 

Can, — ^Toronto  Bank  v,  Irwin,  28 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  397. 

M.  N.  7.— Jaeger  ▼•  KMey,  62 


BaDOSB   of  FllAITB. 


383 


bis  debts  for  such  ooneideration  as  he  may  agree  to  aooept ;  and 
if  there  is  nothing  illegal  in  the  transaction,  it  will  be  good  as 
against  his  creditors.^  Inadequacy  of  price  upon  the  sale  of  prop- 
er^ is  a  badge  of  fraud,  though  in  itself  it  may  not  be  sufBciemt 
to  avoid  the  sale,  unless  the  disparity  between  the  true  value  and 
the  price  paid  or  agreed  to  be  paid  is  so  great  as  to  strike  the 
understanding  with  the  conviction  that  the  transaction  was  not 
bona  fide.^  A  conveyance  will  not  be  set  aside  as  in  fraud  of 
creditors  for  inadequa<7  of  consideration,  unless  it  is  grossly 


N.  Y.  274;  Hardt  t.  Dentseh,  22  Misc. 
Rep.  66,  4S  N.  Y.  Supp.  664.  See 
also  O'Connor  v.  Dooen,  60  App.  Dir. 
610,  64  N.  Y.  Snpp.  206;  Andreae  ▼. 
Boiirke,  33  App.  Div.  63S,  53  N.  Y. 
Supp.  S86. 

U.  £f.— Kempner  ▼.  ChurohiU,  8 
Wall.  362, 19  L.  Ed.  461. 

Conn, — ^Washband  ▼.  Washband,  27 
Conn.  424. 

D.  C. — Clark  ▼.  Krauie,  2  Maekegr, 
660. 

Ga.— Sharp  t.  Hicks,  04  Qa.  624, 
21  S.  E.  208. 

/U.— Klemm  ▼.  Bishop,  66  111.  App. 
613. 

/oimi.— Rnsie  t.  Jameson,  62  Iowa, 
62,  17  N.  W.  103. 

JBTy.— Talbott  v.  Hooser,  75  Ky.  408. 

La. — Montgomery  ▼.  Wilson,  31  La. 
Ann.  106;  Keller  ▼.  Blanchard,  10  La. 
Ann.  53. 

ar<f.— Feigley  v.  Feigley,  7  Md. 
637,  61  Am.  Dec.  375.  But  see 
Worthington  ▼.  Bullitt,  6  Md.  172. 

arw«.— Foster  ▼.  Pugh,  20  Miss.  416. 

Mo, — Demnth  ▼.  Bochler,  11  Mo. 
App.  588;  Nelson  Distilling  Co.  t. 
Yossmeyer,  25  Mo.  App.  578;  Lion- 
berger  v.  Baker,  88  Mo.  447. 

Jfofit— Mueller  v.  Renkes,  77  Pac 
512;  Maloy  t.  Berkin,  11  Mont  138, 
27  Pac.  442. 

y.  J.— Hudnit's  Adm'rs  v.  Tom* 
eon,  26  N.  J.  Eq.  230. 


y.  O. — ^Waehonia  Loan,  etc.,  Co.  v. 
Forbes,  120  N.  C.  356,  27  8.  B.  43. 

OMo.-^ones  ▼.  Leeds,  7  Ohio  N.  P. 
480,  10  Ohio  S.  dL  C.  PI.  Dec.  173. 

Or.— Brown  t.  Case,  41  Or.  221,  60 
Pm.  43. 

Pa.— Goddard  ▼.  Weil,  165  Pa.  St. 
410,  30  Atl.  1000,  36  Wkly.  Notes  Cas. 
08;  ShatE  ▼.  Kirker,  1  Pa.  Cas.  332, 
2  Atl.  03. 

S.  C. — ^McPherson  v.  McPherson,  21 
S.  C.  261. 

Tev.— Moore  t.  Lowery,  27  Tex.  541. 

Fa.— Moore  ▼.  Triplet,  23  S.  B.  60; 
Sutherlin  ▼.  March,  75  Va.  223. 

W.  Fa.— Bieme  ▼.  Bay,  37  W.  Va. 
571,  16  S.  B.  804. 

^np.— Blount  ▼.  Blount,  3  Atk.  481, 
26  Eng.  Reprint  1076. 

20.  Lowry  v.  Howard,  35  Ind.  170, 
0  Am.  Rep.  676;  Frank  ▼.  Peters,  0 
Ind.  343;  Hubbs  v.  Bancroft,  4  Ind. 
388;  Mumsen  t.  Ellis,  3  Tez.  App. 
CiT.  Cas.,  (  134.  But  see  Farmers* 
Bank  ▼.  Douglass,  11  Sm.  ft  M. 
(Miss.)  469. 

30.  N.  F.— Morris  v.  Morris,  71 
Hun,  45,  24  N.  Y.  Supp.  579,  where 
the  nominal  consideration  was  land 
worth  $1,000,  while  the  grantor's 
equity  in  the  land  conveyed  was 
worth  $3,500. 

Ala. — Borland  v.  Mayo,  8  Ala.  104; 
Prosser  v.  Henderson,  11  Ala.  484,  the 
consideration    must    be    clearly    in- 


234 


Fbaudui^nt  Convstakoes. 


inadequate,  and  such  as  to  indicate  the  existence  of  unfair 
and  fairly  to  induce  the  belief  of  fraud."  Fraud  in  the  sale  of 
goods  will  not  be  inferred  from  inadequacy  of  consideration, 
unless  such  inadequacy  is  so  great  as  to  impress  every  person  with 
its  grossness."  It  has  been  held  that  "  grossly  inadequate  con- 
sideration" means  a  consideration  so  far  short  of  the  real  value  of 
property  as  to  shock  a  correct  mind;"  that  inadequacy  of  con- 
sideration to  constitute  fraud  must  shock  the  conscience  of  the 
court  ;'^  and  that  the  consideration  must  be  so  inadequate  as  to 
shock  the  conscience  in  order  to  render  a  conveyance  void  as  to 
creditors  for  thie  reason  alone."  Gross  inadequacy  of  price, 
coupled  with  other  circumstanoes  tending  to  prove  fraud,  becomee 
conclusive,"  and  controlling  proof  of  dishonesty  and  fraud." 


adequate;  Pope  ▼.  Brandon,  2  Stew. 
401,  20  Am.  Dec.  49.  And  flee  Gam- 
ble ▼.  C.  Aultman  &  Co.,  126  Ala.  372, 
28  So.  30.  The  disparity  between  the 
consideration  paid  and  the  actual 
value  of  the  property  transferred 
must  be  shown  to  have  existed  at  the 
time  of  the  sale.  Miller  ▼.  WaUer, 
Dall.  (Tex.)  416. 

ir<icA.— Noble  v.  Laidlaw,  100  N.  W. 
179,  11  Det.  Leg.  N.  199,  land  worth 
$4,000  conveyed  for  a  consideration 
of  $2,000. 

Mo, — ^Kuykendall  v.  McDonald,  16 
Mo.  416,  67  Am.  Dec.  212;  Wells  ▼. 
Thomas,  10  Mo.  237. 

^e&.— Knight  v.  Darby,  66  Neb.  16, 
76  N.  W.  48. 

Ofcto.— ^tizens'  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Wehrle,  18  Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  636,  9  0.  C. 
D.  330;  Hamill  ▼.  Wright,  18  Ohio  S. 
^  C.  P.  Dec.  467,  6  Ohio  N.  P.  9. 

R.  /,— Re  Sweet's  Petition,  20  R.  I. 
667,  40  Atl.  602. 

B,  C— MePherson  v.  McPherson,  21 
S.  C.  261. 

Tenn.— McTeer  v.  Huntsman  (Ch. 
App.),  49  S.  W.  67;  Merriman  ▼. 
Lacefield,  4  Heisk.  209,  inadequacy  of 


price,  to  set  aside  sale,  must  be  such 
as  to  omistitute  evidence  of  fraud. 

Tern. — ^Munson  ▼.  EUis,  3  Tex.  App. 
Cfv.  Gas.,  i  134,  3  Willson,  136. 

F«.— Church  v.  Chapin,  36  Vt.  223. 

W.  Fa.— Douglass  ▼.  Douglass,  41 
W.  Va.  13,  23  S.  E.  671,  the  fact  that 
a  larger  price  could  have  been  ob- 
tained for  the  property  by  the  dditor, 
had  he  sold  on  credit  instead  of  for 
cash,  was  no  ground  for  setting  the 
conveyance  aside. 

1Fi«.— Crocker  v.  Huntsicker,  133 
Wis.  181,  88  N.  W.  232. 

Wyo.— Stirling  v.  Wagner,  4  Wyo. 
6,  31  Pac.  1032,  32  Pac.  1128. 

31.  Jenkins  v.  Hinstein,  13  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  7,266,  3  Biss.  128;  Wood  v. 
Harmison,  41  W.  Va.  376, 23  S.  E.  660. 

32.  Cagney  v.  Cuson,  77  Ind.  494. 

33.  McGhee  ▼.  Wells,  67  S.  C.  280, 
36  S.  E.  629. 

34.  Harbottle  v.  Rawlins,  11 
Hawaii,  106. 

35.  Flook  V.  Armentrouf  s  Adm'r, 
100  Va.  638,  42  S.  E.  686. 

36.  Boyd  v.  Ellis,  11  Iowa,  97. 

37.  Dodson  v.  Cooper,  60  Kan.  680, 
32  Pac.  379. 


Badges  of  Fsaub. 


385 


§  6.  Excessive  security. — ^The  fact  that  a  mortgage  or  other 
similar  oonvejance  givem  by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  covers  more 
property  than  will  seeore  the  mortgage  or  otber  indebtedness 
is  not  itself  a  badge  of  f rand^  and  will  not>  of  itself,  establish  a 
fraudulent  intent  and  render  the  oonvejance  invalid,"  or  author- 


88.  V.  fif.~-Da¥is  ▼.  Sehwarts,  165 
U.  8.  S31,  39  L.  Ed.  280,  16  Sup.  Ct. 
287,  where  the  nominal  value  of  prop- 
erty included  in  a  chattel  mortgage 
was  more  than  twice  the  amount  of 
debts  secured  thereby,  but  the  prop- 
erty was  a  stock  of  goods  of  somewhat 
uncertain  value  which  realized  on  the 
flale  but  little  more  than  the  amount 
of  the  debt;  Downs  v.  Ejlssam,  61  U. 
S.  102,  13  L.  Ed.  346. 

D,  O.—Birdsall  v.  Welch,  6  D.  C. 
316,  since  other  creditors  may,  by 
paying  the  debt,  release  the  property, 
or  avail  themselves  by  other  modes  of 
the  equity  of  redemption;  but  the 
hima  fides  of  such  a  transaction  is  al- 
wa3rs  one  of  fact. 

Fla. — ^Mercantile  Exeh.  Bank  ▼. 
Taylor  (1900),  41  So.  22. 

Ofo. — Ctirey  v.  Giles,  10  Ga.  9. 

Kan, — Clement  v.  Hartaell,  67  Kan. 
482,  46  Pac.  961. 

JffoA.— Michigan  Trust  Co.  v.  Ben- 
nett, 106  Mich.  381,  64  N.  W.  330,. 
where  the  receiver  of  a  firm,  by  pay- 
ing the  amount  of  the  secured  claim, 
was  entitled  to  have  a  reconveyance 
of  the  property;  Warner  v.  Uttle- 
field,  89  Mich.  329,  60  N.  W.  721. 

Mis8.-^Taylor  v.  Watkins,  13  So. 
811,  where  the  grantor's  creditors 
under  a  deed  of  trust  had  a  remedy 
by  proceedings  for  the  sale  of  his 
equity  of  redemption. 

Jfeh. — Tackaberry  v.  Gilmore,'  67 
Neb.  460,  78  N.  W.  32;  Kilpatrick- 
Koeh  Dry  Goods  Co.  v.  Straus,  46 
Neb.    793,    64    K.    W.    223;    Grand 


Island  Banking  Co.  v.  Costello,  45 
Neb.  119,  63  N.  W.  876;  Grimes  v. 
BVtrrington,  19  Neb.  44,  26  N.  W. 
618;  Whitney  v.  Levon,  34  Neb.  443, 
51  N.  W.  972;  Sherwin  v.  Gagfaagen, 
39  Neb.  238,  7  N.  W.  1006;  Dayton 
Spice  Mills  v.  Sloan,  49  Neb.  622,  68 
N.  W.  1040;  Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry 
Goods  Co.  V.  Bremers,  44  Neb.  863, 
62  N.  W.  1106;  Kilpatrick-Koeh  Dry 
Goods  Co.  V.  McPheely,  37  Neb.  800, 
66  N.  W.  389. 

N.  C— Burgin  v.  Burgin,  23  N.  C. 
463. 

8.  D.— Black  Hills  Mercantile  Co. 
V.  Gardiner,  6  S.  D.  246,  266,  68  N. 
W.  667,  669;  Sprague  v.  Gardiner,  id. 

Tenn. — ^Roane  v.  Bank  of  Nashville, 
38  Tenn.  626,  especially  when  the 
property  conveyed  is  subject  to  liens. 

Wit.— Cunningham  v.  Eagan,  102 
Wis.  272,  78  N.  W.  402;  Menzeshei- 
mer  v.  Kennedy,  76  Wis.  411,  44  N. 
W.  608. 

M ortsftce  bold  to  be  am  assign- 
aMat< — ^A  finding  that  a  mortgage  of 
land  was  an  assignment  by  the  mort- 
gagor of  his  property  to  one  creditor 
to  the  exclusion  of  other  creditors, 
will  not  be  disturbed  where  it  appears 
that  the  mortgage  covered  all  of  the 
mortgagor's  land,  and,  with  other 
mortgages  on  the  land,  amounted  to 
over  seven-eighths  of  its  value,  and 
there  was  no  other  property  out  of 
which  creditors  for  over  $4,000  could 
collect  their  claims.  Mitchell  v. 
Mitchell,  42  S.  C.  476,  20  S.  E.  405. 

8tip«latioa  for  dolay  im  ft 


236 


Fbauduuskt  CoNYisTAncxa. 


ize  a  presumption  of  fraud.  It  does  not  raise  a  preBunq[>tion  of 
fraud  in  the  absence  of  circnmstanceB  showing  bad  faith."  But 
that  the  property  conyejed  is  greater  in  value  than  the  debt  se- 
cured is  a  circumstance  to  be  submitted  to  a  jury,  in  connection 
with  other  facts  to  aid  them  in  deteormining  whether  the  inten- 
tion of  the  parties  was  hana  fide  or  otherwise^  or  to  be  con- 
sidered by  the  court  in  determining  whether  the  transaction  was 
in  fraud  of  creditors.^  And  where  the  property  exceeds  greatly 
in  value  the  amount  of  the  debts  secured,  it  is  a  circumstance 
from  which  fraud  may  be  inferred,^  is  prima  facie  evidence  of 
fraud,^  and  raises  a  presumption  of  fraud,^  whidi  may,  how- 
ever,  be  explained  by  other  evidence. 


elomure* — ^A  mortgage  of  nearly  all 
the  debtor's  estate  to  a  principal 
creditor,  fifty  per  cent,  more  in  valne 
than  the  d^it  secured,  with  a  stipu- 
lation for  two  years'  delay  in  its  fore- 
closure, is  void.  Reynolds  v.  Welsh, 
47  Ala.  200. 

Bereral  ekattel  atovtsAces 
sbBvltameovaly  ezeevted  to  se* 
ewe  de1its»  the  aggregate  of  which 
is  not  unreasonably  less  than  the 
value  of  the  property  mortgaged,  are 
not  void,  because  no  one  of  such 
debts  is  in  itself  sufficient  to  justify 
so  great  a  security.  Jones  ▼.  Loree,  37 
Neb.  816,  66  N.  W.  390. 

EzeewdTe  aeenrlty  im  a  tnut 
deed* — ^Where  there  is  more  property 
included  in  a  trust  deed  than  is  suffi- 
cient to  satisfy  all  the  debts  secured 
by  it,  a  pursuing  creditor  may  file  a 
bill  against  all  the  parties  interested 
to  have  the  trust  closed  and  the  prop- 
erty subjected,  first  to  the  payment 
of  the  trust  debts,  and  the  excess  to 
the  satisfaction  of  the  complainant's 
debts.    Cornish  t.  Dews,  18  Ark.  172. 

SpeevlatiTe  Talve. — ^The  assign- 
ment of  a  right  of  action  with  a 
speculative  value  is  not  fraudulent 
as  to  other  creditors  because  its  value 
is  in  excess  of  the  debts  secured.  Hut- 


maeher  t.   Anheuser-Busch   Biewing 
Co.,  71  111.  App.  154. 

89.  Boessneck  t.  Cohn,  7  N.  Y. 
Supp.  620. 

40.  U.  flf.— Smith  v.  New  York  L. 
Ins.  Co.,  57  Fed.  133. 

louxjL — ^Richards  v.  Schreiber,  98 
Iowa,  422,  67  N.  W.  669;  Lycoming 
Rubber  Ck>.  ▼.  King,  90  Iowa,  343,  57 
N.  W.  864. 

Mich, — Showman  v.  Lee,  86  Mich. 
566,  49  N.  W.  678;  King  v.  HubbelU 
42  Mich.  597,  4  N.  W.  440. 

Mo. — Golbem  v.  Robinson,  80  Mo. 
541 ;  McKinney  ▼.  Wade,  43  Mo.  App. 
152. 

Neh, — Tackaberry  ▼.  Qilmore,  67 
Neb.  450,  78  N.  W.  32;  Kilpatriek- 
Koch  Dry  Goods  Go.  ▼.  Strauss,  45 
Neb.  793,  64  N.  W.  223;  Smith  v. 
Boyer,  29  Neb.  76,  45  N.  W.  265,  26 
Am.  St.  Rep.  373. 

N.  J, — Clinton  Hill  Lumber  Co.  ▼. 
Strieby,  52  N.  J.  Eq.  576,  29  Atl.  589. 

N,  0.— Burgin  v.  Burgin,23  N.C.463. 

Ohio, — Brinkerhoff  v.  Tracy,  55 
Ohio  St.  558,  45  N.  E.  1100. 

41.  Sukeforth  v.  Lord,  87  Cal.  399, 
25  Pac.  497. 

42.  Howerton  v.  Holt,  23  Tex.  52. 

43.  Ala, — ^Benedict  ▼.  Renfro,  75 
Ala.  121,  51  Am.  Rep.  429. 


Baboss  of  Fbaud. 


287 


I  6.  Excess  in  amount  secured — A  mortgage  executed  by  a 
debtor  in  failing  circumstances,  for  a  sum  known  by  the  creditor  at 
the  time  to  be  in  excess  of  what  is  actually  due,  is  presumptively 
fraudulent.**  A  judgment  obtained  by  a  creditor  from  his  dehor 
by  confession  for  a  sum  greater  than  is  actually  due  is  likewise 


JTan.— WiUiams  ▼.  StoweU    (Kan. 

App.)f  48  Pac.  894. 

2^66.— First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  East 
Omaha  Box  Ck>.,  90  N.  W,  223,  2  Neb. 
(Unoff.)  820;  Whitney  ▼.  Levon,  34 
Neb.  443,  61  N.  W.  972;  Thompson  v. 
Richardson  Drug  Co.,  33  Neb.  714,  29 
Am.  St.  Rep.  606,  60  N.  W.  948. 

Tew, — Crosby  ▼.  Huston,  1  Tex.  203. 

Where  ekattel  mortgage  is 
only  a  lien*— Under  a  statute  which 
makes  a  chattel  mortgage  a  lien  only 
on  the  mortgaged  property,  and  al- 
lows a  creditor  to  levy  on  the  mort- 
gaged property  after  paying  or  ten- 
dering the  amount  for  which  such  a 
mortgage  is  a  hona  fide  lien,  the  tok- 
ing  of  a  mortgage  on  $10,000  worth 
of  property,  to  secure  a  debt  of  $1,800, 
is  not,  on  that  account,  fraudulent. 
Black  Hills  Mercantile  Co.  v.  Gardi- 
ner, 6  8.  D.  246,  266,  68  N.  W.  667, 

669. 
OosTayaaioea  to  aeewe  debt  aot 

jet  due*— A  trust  deed  of  all  the 
debtor's  property  to  secure  a  debt  of 
one-third  the  value  of  such  property, 
and  which  has  2%  years  to  run,  is  a 
fraudulent  conveyance.  Hartman  v. 
Allen,  77  Tenn.  L.  667. 

Where  a  person  owns  property 
to  the  amount  of  $6,700,  and  Is  in- 
debted to  the  amount  of  $6,000,  and 
executes  mortgages  on  all  his  prop- 
erty to  secure  $1,800,  not  yet  due,  to 
one  creditor,  these  mortgages  are 
fraudulent  as  to  the  rest  of  his  cred- 
itors. Brown  v.  Work,  30  Neb.  800, 
47  N.  W.  192, 


A  mortgage  given  to  secure  the  pay- 
ment of  a  debt  not  due  for  three 
years,  covering  land  worth  three  times 
the  amount  of  the  debt,  and  executed 
when  the  grantor  was  threatened  by 
another  creditor  with  suit,  is  fraudu- 
lent as  to  creditors.  Lee  v.  Wathen, 
42  Ky,  297. 

Surplve  llalile  to  trvstee  pro« 
••■•• — ^Where  an  assignment  of  a 
large  amount  of  property  was  made 
for  the  payment  of  a  small  amount  of 
debts,  it  was  held  that  if  it  was  made 
in  good  faith  to  secure  debts  fairly 
due,  and  with  the  intention  that  the 
surplus  should  be  liable  to  the  trus- 
tee process  in  the  assignee's  hands, 
the  assignee  received  and  could  con- 
vey a  valid  title.  George  ▼.  Kimball, 
41  Mass.  234. 

44.  U.  £f.— Kellogg  v.  Clyne,  64 
Fed.  696,  4  C.  C.  A.  664. 

Ala. — Stover  v.  Herrington,  7  Ala. 
142,  41  Am.  Dec.  86. 

lU. — Strauss  v.  Kranert,  66  HI.  264. 

Iowa, — Carson  ▼.  Byers,  67  Iowa, 
606,  26  N.  W.  826;  Lombard  v.  Dows, 
66  Iowa,  243,  23  N.  W.  649;  Daven- 
port V.  Cummings,  16  Iowa,  219. 

JSTon.— Smith  v.  Parry  Mfg.  Co.,  9 
Kan.  App.  877,  61  Pac.  966. 

Jfiofc.— Patrick  v.  Riggs,  106  Mich. 
616,  63  N.  W.  632. 

ifo.— Imhoff  V.  McArthur,  146  Mo. 
371,  48  S.  W.  456.  See  also  Consider- 
ation; excess  in  amount  secured,  chap. 
Vni,  9  20,  infra. 


238 


Fkaudulbnt  Cohyxyances. 


presumptively  frandulezit'  A  trust  deed  given  for  a  greater 
sum  than  is  actually  due  is  void.^  A  bond  taken  for  more  tlian 
the  real  debt,  i;vith  intent  to  defraud  the  obligor's  creditors, 
is  aitirely  void  as  to  such  <9reditors.^^  Judgment  notes  purposely 
given  to  preferred  creditors,  or  judgments  confessed,  for  sums 
largriy  in  excess  of  the  amounts  due  them,  and  afterwards  satis- 
fied in  full,  are  fraudul^it  as  to  other  creditors  thereby  pre- 
vented from  receiving  payment^  But  the  mere  fact  that  a 
mortgage  given  by  an  insolvent  secures  a  greater  sum  than  is 
actually  due  is  not  necessarily  conclusive  of  f  raud.^  A  mortgage 
in  excess  of  the  actual  indebtedness,  executed  without  any  in- 
tention to  defraud,  to  take  up  a  prior  mortgage  for  an  actual 
indebtedness,  all  the  credits  on  the  old  note  to  be  applied  to  the 
new,  is  not  void  in  toto.^ 

§  7.  Transfers  in  anticipation  of  or  pending  legal  proceedings. 
— A  voluntary  conveyance  of  properfy  made  by  a  debtor  in 


45.  Werner  v.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa.  St. 
360,  29  Atl.  737 ;  Appeal  of  Meeklef  , 
lOS  Pa.  St.  636;  Clark  t.  Douglaas, 
62  Pa.  St.  416;  Davenport  ▼.  Wright, 
51  Pa.  St.  292. 

46.  Bateg  County  Bank  t.  Oailey, 
177  Mo.  ISl,  75  S.  W.  646. 

47.  Whiting  v.  Johnson,  11  Serg.  ft 
R.  (Pa.)  328,  14  Am.  Dec.  633. 

48.  Hardt  v.  Heidweyer,  162  U.  S. 
147,  17  Sup.  Ct.  671,  38  L.  Ed.  548; 
Wilooxeon  v.  Burton,  27  Cal.  228,  87 
Am.  Dec.  66. 

49.  /».— Sawyer  v.  Bradshaw,  125 
111.  440,  17  N.  E.  812;  Mitchell  v. 
Sawyer,  115  Dl.  650,  5  N.  E.  109; 
Upton  ▼.  Craig,  57  111.  257;  Wooley  ▼. 
Fry,  30  111.  158. 

Ind. — ^Adams  v.  Laugel,  144  Ind. 
608,  42  N.  £.  1017;  Ooff  v.  Rogers,  71 
Ind.  459. 

Iowa. — ^Wood  Y.  Scott,  55  Iowa, 
114,  7  N.  W.  465. 

Kan. — ^Bowling  v.  Searles,  57  Kan. 
174,  45  Pac.  584;  Bush  ▼.  Bush,  33 


Kan.  556,  6  Pac.  794.  Oompar^  Me- 
Cord,  etc.,  Mereantile  Co.  ▼.  Bnrsoii, 
38  Kan.  278,  16  Pae.  664. 

arioik.— Louden  v.  Vinton,  108  Mich. 
313,  66  N.  W.  222;  Braee  ▼.  Berdan, 
104  Mich.  356,  62  N.  W.  568;  Lycm  ▼. 
Ballentine,  63  Mich.  97,  29  N.  W. 
837,  6  Am.  St.  Rep.  284. 

Minn. — ^Heim  ▼.  Chapel,  62  Mion. 
338.  64  N.  W.  825;  Nam)  v.  Ware, 
38  Minn.  443,  38  N.  W.  359. 

N.  ff.— Whittredge  v.  Edmunds,  63 
N.  H.  248;  Putnam  ▼.  Osgood,  62  N. 
H.  148. 

Pa.— <;k>rdon  v.  Preston,  1  Watts, 
385,  26  Am.  Dec.  75. 

Wit.— Liner  ▼.  Thielke,  116  Wis. 
389,  91  N.  W.  975 ;  Barkow  ▼.  Sao^er, 
47  Wis.  500,  3  N.  W.  16;  Bradky  Co. 
V.  Paul,  94  Wis.  488, 69  N.  W.  168.  See 
also  Consideration;  excess  in  amoont 
secured,  chap.  VIII,  (  20,  imfra. 

50.  Huc^es  ▼.  ShuU,  33  Kan.  127» 
133,  5  Pac.  414,  770. 


Badges  op  Fbaud. 


239 


anticipation  of  a  suit  against  him  or  in  appreheiDsion  of  fu- 
ture litigation  is  a  badge  of  fraud.^^  A  transfer  by  a  debtor 
of  his  property  during  the  pendency  of  a  suit  against  him  is  a 
badge  of  fraud."    But  the  mere  pendency  of  a  suit  against  him 


61.  y.  r.— Puller  ▼.  Brown,  76 
Hun  (K.  T.),  667,  28  N.  Y.  Supp. 
189. 

AUl — Soott  ▼.  Brown,  106  Ala.  604, 
17  So.  7S1. 

/n.— Dunawaj  t.  Roberteon,  06  111. 
410. 

Ind. — Sbean  ▼.  Shaj,  42  Ind.  376, 
13  Am.  Bep.  866. 

ioiM.— Corder  ▼.  WilliauM,  40 
Iowa,  682;  Weir  ▼.  Day,  67  Iowa, 
84,  10  N.  W.  304. 

La. — See  Riska  ▼.  Rotan  Grocery 
Go. 

ifd.— <3ebhart  ▼.  Merfeld,  61  Md. 
322. 

Jf.  J, — ^Morris  Canal,  etc.,  Co.  ▼. 
Steams,  23  N.  J.  Eq.  414,  oonTcyance 
after  a  daim  was  in  the  hands  of  an 
attorney  for  collection  and  the  prose- 
cution was  being  delayed  at  the 
debtor's  request;  Boid  v.  Dean,  48 
N.  J.  Eq.  103,  21  AU.  618,  a  transfer 
of  property  without  consideration  for 
the  purpose  of  enabling  the  trans- 
ferrer thereafter  to  commit  a  tort 
with  impunity,  is  fraudulent  and  void 
as  against  a  creditor  by  judgment 
founded  on  such  tort. 

Oikto.— -McVeigh  v.  Ritenonrj  40 
Ohio  St  107;  LaRoche  ▼.  Brower,  8 
Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  608,  5  Ohio  Cir.  Dec. 
432. 

Teiin.— Lewis  v.  Gibson,  1  Tenn. 
Cas.  163,  Thomp.  Cas.  234.  But  a 
conveyance  made  in  contemplation  of 
an  action  of  tort  and  a  recovery 
therein,  which  provides  for  the  pay- 
ment of  certain  preferred  claims,  and 
then  for  the  payment  of  all  creditors 
of  the  maker,  is  not  fraudulent,  as  it 


provides,  whether  so  intended  or  not, 
for  the  recovery  in  the  action  of 
tort.    Vance  v.  Smith,  2  Heisk.  343. 

Tew, — See  Riske  v.  Rotan  Grocery 
Co.  (Civ.  App.  1006),  03  S.  W.  708. 

W.  Fow— State  v.  Burkeholder,  30 
W.  Va.  603,  6  S.  E.  430. 

Bng, — ^Alton  v.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4 
Ch.  622,  38  L.  J.  Ch.  660,  21  L.  T. 
Rep.  K.  a  282,  17  Wkly.  Rep.  1034. 

62.  N.  F.-~Cole  v.  Millerton  Iron 
Co.,  133  K.  Y.  164,  30  N.  E.  847,  28 
Anu  St.  Rep.  616,  a  transfer  by  a  cor- 
poration of  all  its  property  and  ef- 
fects, which  had  the  effect  of  termi- 
nating the  regular  business  of  the 
corporation,  and  was  made  and  ac- 
cepted by  the  transferee  with  that 
purpose,  is  illegal  as  against  credi- 
tors of  the  corporation,  whose  rights 
are  thereby  sacrificed  and  their  reme- 
dies destroyed;  Maasch  v.  Grauer,  68 
App.  Div.  660,  60  N.  T.  Supp.  187; 
Ford  V.  Johnston,  7  Hun,  663;  Stod- 
dard V.  Butler,  20  Wend.  607 ;  1  Hill, 
143. 

ReeoBTeyaaee  after  illegal 
oosTeyaiiAe. — ^Wheie  land  was  con- 
veyed for  the  purpose  of  qualifying 
the  grantor  to  be  a  voter,  no  con- 
sideration being  paid  and  the  grantor 
remaining  in  possession,  a  reconvey- 
ance to  such  grantor  during  the 
pendency  of  a  suit  against  the 
grantor,  was  not  void  by  the  Statute 
of  Frauds,  not  being  made  to  defraud 
creditors,  nor  was  it  void  as  against 
a  purchaser  even  for  valuable  consid- 
eration at  sheriff's  sale  on  execution 
against  the  grantor;  for  those  volun- 
tary deeds  which  the  statute  avoids 


240 


FeATOITLENT   CoirVEYAKCES. 


will  not  preclude  a  debtor  from  conveying  his  property  in  good 


as  to  a  Bubseqaent  purchaser  must 
have  been  made  with  intent  to  deceive, 
the  evidence  of  which  is  the  voluntary 
conveyance,  coupled  with  a  subse- 
quent agreement  to  sell,  which  can- 
not be  the  case  where  the  purchase  is 
made,  not  of  the  party,  but  through 
the  intervention  of  the  law.  Jackson 
V.  Ham,  15  Johns.  (N.  Y.)  261. 

U.  8, — Dent  v.  Ferguson,  132  U.  S. 
50,  10  S.  Gt.  13,  33  L.  Ed.  242; 
Hudgins  v.  Kemp,  61  U.  8.  46,  15  L. 
Ed.  853. 

Ala, — Crawford  v.  Eliksey,  50  Ala. 
590;  Williams  v.  Jones,  2  Ala.  314. 

Arki — ^Reeves  v.  Sherwood,  45  Ark. 
520. 

Gk». — Gregory  v.  Gray,  88  Go.  172, 
14  S.  E.  187;  Hoffer  v.  Gladden,  75 
Ga.  532;  Smith  v.  Wellborn,  75  Ga. 
799;  Barber  v.  Terrell,  54  Ga.  146. 

Ind. — ^Ray  v.  Roe,  2  Blackf.  258,  18 
Am.  Dec.  159. 

Ky, — ^Anglin  v.  Conley,  114  Ky. 
741,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1651,  71  S.  W. 
926;  Behan  v.  Warfield,  90  Ky.  151, 
11  Ky.  L.  Bep.  960,  13  S.  W.  439; 
Ward  V.  Totter,  19  Ky.  1;  Herrin  v. 
Morford,  9  Dana,  450;  Lillard  v.  Mc- 
Gee,  4  Bibb.  165. 

La, — Dallas  Brewing  Go.  v.  Holz- 
ner,  116  La.  719,  41  So.  48;  Good- 
well  V.  Minchew,  26  La.  Ann.  621. 

Me. — ^Thompson  v.  Robinson,  89  Me. 
46,  35  Atl.  1002;  Hartshorn  v.  Eames, 
31  Me.  93. 

Md. — Shaferman  v.  O'Brien,  28  Md. 
565,  92  Am.  Dec.  708. 

Mo, — ^Mason  v.  Perkins,  180  Mo. 
702,  79  S.  W.  683,  103  Am.  St.  Rep. 
591;  McCollum  v.  Grain  (App.)>  74 
S.  W.  650,  the  fact  that  the  suit  is 
in  tort  makes  no  difference. 

2^.  J. — ^Thorp  V.  Leibrecht,  56  N.  J. 
Eq.    499,    39    AU.    361;    Christie    v. 


Bridgman,  51  N.  J.  Eq.  331,  30  Atl. 
429,  25  Atl.  939;  Moore  v.  Roe,  35  N. 
J.  £q.  90;  Randall  v.  Vroom,  30  N. 
J.  Eq.  353;  Morris  Ganal,  etc,  Co.  ▼• 
Steams,  23  N.  J.  Eq.  414. 

OMo^— Fisher  v.  Schlosser,  41  Ohio 
St.  147;  Barr  v.  Hatch,  8  Ohio,  527. 

Po.— Redfield,  etc.,  Mfg.  Go.  ▼. 
Dysart,  62  Pa.  St.  62;  Streeper  ▼. 
Eckart,  2  Whart.  302,  30  Am.  Dec. 
258;  Avery  v.  Street,  6  Watts,  247. 

8,  C— Smith  v.  Culberton,  9  Rich. 
L.  106;  Pettus  v.  Smith,  4  Rich.  Eq. 
197;  Watson  v.  Kennedy,  3  Strob.  Eq. 
1;  Smith  v.  Henry,  2  Bailey,  118; 
Hipp  V.  Sawyer,  1  Rich.  Eq.  Gas. 
410. 

Tettn.— Garter  v.  Baker,  10  Heisk. 
640. 

Fa.— Hickman  v.  Trout,  83  Va.  478, 
3  S.  E.  131;  Glick  v.  Green,  77  Va. 
827. 

W,  Va, — Butler  v.  Thompson,  45 
W.  Va.  660,  72  Am.  St.  Rep.  838,  31 
S.  E.  960;  Goshom's  Ex'r  ▼.  Snod- 
grass,  17  W.  Va.  717. 

Wis, — ^Bragg  v.  Gaynor,  86  Wis. 
468,  21  L.  R.  A.  161,  55  N.  W.  919; 
Hoffman  v.  Junk,  51  Wis.  613,  8  N. 
W.  493;  Godfrey  v.  Germain,  24  Wis. 
410. 

Eng, — ^Barling  v.  Bishopp,  29  Beav. 
417,  8  Wkly.  Rep.  631,  6  Jur.  N.  S. 
812,  54  Eng.  Reprint,  689;  Blenldn- 
sopp  V.  Blenkinsopp,  1  DeG.  M.  &  G. 
495,  21  L.  J.  Gh.  401,  16  Jur.  787, 
50  Eng.  Ch.  379,  42  Eng.  Reprint, 
644;  Twyne's  Case,  3  Coke,  80a,  1 
Smith's  Lead.  Gas.  1. 

Jndsntent  for  eosts. — ^A  volun- 
tary conv^ance  of  land,  made  in  good 
faith  by  a  plaintiff  pending  a  personal 
action,  is  valid  as  against  a  judg- 
ment and  execution,  for  costs,  subse- 
quently    recovered    therein    against 


Badges  of  Fsaud. 


241 


faith  for  a  good  consideration.^     A  gift,"  confession  of  judg- 


him.  Inhabitants  of  Pelham  v.  Aid- 
rich,  78  Mass.  515,  69  Am.  Dec.  266. 

Mutual  rislita  and  UabUitles 
of  partiea* — ^A  bill  for  the  recovery 
of  realty  alleged  that  a  divorce  suit 
was  .pending  against  plaintiff,  and 
that  she  deeded  the  land  to  defendant 
^'on  account  of  said  litigation,  and 
to  protect  herself  in  the  matter  of 
alimony;"  that  defendant  gave  plain- 
tiff a  bond  for  reconveyance,  fully  de- 
scribing the  property,  which  was  re- 
corded; and  that  the  decree  for  ali- 
mony rendered  against  plaintiff  had 
been  paid.  Held  not  demurrable  for 
disclosing  fraud  in  plaintiff  preclud- 
ing relief.  Stockwell  v.  Stockwell,  72 
N.  H.  69,  64  Atl.  701. 

Rooeipt  to  a  ganialiee. — ^A  jury 
are  not  warranted  in  finding  that  a 
receipt  given  by  a  defendant  to  a  gar- 
nishee is  false  and  fraudulent,  when 
there  is  no  evidence  to  falsify  it  or 
cast  suspicion  upon  the  honesty  of  the 
settlement,  except  that  it  bore  date 
on  the  day  before  the  rendition  of  the 
judgment  against  the  defendant. 
Howard  ▼.  Crawford,  21  Tex.  399. 

53.  Ala, — Crawford  v.  Kirksey,  50 
Ala.  690. 

D.  C— Birdsall  v.  Welch,  6  D.  C. 
dl6,  as  by  assignment  of  his  property 
as  security  for  the  payment  of  a  cred- 
itor's claim. 

III. — Coan  V.  Morrison,  34  HI.  App. 
352,  where  a  deed  was  given  in  good 
faith  to  secure  bona  fide  claims 
against  the  debtor  in  favor  of  his 
mother,  pending  a  bastardy  suit. 

Ind. — ^Lowry  ▼.  Howard,  35  Ind. 
170,  9  Am.  Rep.  676. 

Kan, — Berkley  v.  Tootle,  46  Kan. 
335,  26  Pac.  730. 

Ky, — ^Ward  v.  Trooter,  19  Ky.  1. 

Ifi9«.-— Surget  v.    Boyd,   57    Miss. 

16 


485,  a  trust  deed,  made  by  a  debtor  to 
secure  pre-existing  debts  due  his 
friends  and  relatives,  is  valid  if  ex- 
ecuted without  any  fraudulent  in- 
tent. 

Ifo. — ^Kuykeydall  v.  McDonald,  15 
Mo.  416,  57  Am.  Dec.  412,  a  debtor 
may  give  preference  to  particular 
creditors  by  a  direct  payment  or  as- 
signment, if  he  does  so  in  payment  of 
their  just  demands,  and  not  as  a  mere 
screen  to  secure  the  property  to  him- 
self. 

Or, — Qamier  v.  Wheeler,  4  Or.  198, 
66  Pac.  812. 

Va, — Sipe  v.  Earman,  26  Grat.  563. 

Traasf er  after  ezteaslom  of 
tia&e  to  answer. — ^In  the  absence  of 
fraud,  judgments  by  confession  will 
not  be  set  aside  simply  because  they 
were  given  by  defendant  after  obtain- 
ing from  plaintiff  an  extension  of 
time  to  answer  in  an  action  then 
pending.  Wood  v.  Mitchell,  63  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  629,  17  N.  Y.  Supp.  782. 
But  when  the  right  to  enter  judg- 
ment is  postponed  by  the  fraud  of  the 
defendant  in  securing  such  extension 
of  time  the  judgments  so  confessed 
are  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the 
plaintiff,  though  the  persons  in  whose 
favor  they  were  confessed  did  not  par- 
ticipate in  the  fraud.  H.  B.  Clafiin 
Co.  V.  Amheim,  87  Hun  (N.  Y.), 
236,  33  N.  Y.  Supp.  1037,  1  N.  Y. 
Ann.  Cas.  391;  Clark  v.  Taylor,  37 
Hun  (N.  Y.),  312;  Jaques  v.  Green- 
wood, 12  Abb.  Pr.  (N.  Y.)  232. 

Transfer  pending  ezeentloii. — 
The  sale  by  a  debtor,  apparently  in- 
solvent, of  his  personal  property, 
after  issuing  of  an  execution  against 
him,  to  one  who  had  notice  that  the 
execution  was  in  the  hands  of  the 
sheriff,  is  void  as  against  the  creditors 


242 


Fkaudulent  Conveyances- 


ment,"  assignment,^  or  other  transfer  of  property,"  made  by  a 
debtor  in  anticipation  of  an  attacdunent  and  to  prevent  it  from 


of  the  vendor,  as  fraudulent  both  in 
law  and  in  fact.  Reinheimer  v.  Hem- 
ingway, 35  Pa.  St.  432;  Streeper  v. 
Eckart,  2  Whart.  (Pa.)  302,  30  Am. 
Dec.  258.  But  a  conveyance  of  land, 
made  by  a  debtor  after  he  is  charged 
in  execution,  if  bona  fide  and  for  a 
reasonable  consideration,  and  with- 
out any  secret  trust  for  the  benefit  of 
the  debtor,  is  valid  against  creditors. 
Bullock  V.  Gordon,  4  Munf.  (Va.) 
450. 

Traaaf er*  pfmdlug  aetton  to 
reTleiFy  of  property,  without  consid- 
eration, is  fraudulent,  since  the  plain- 
tiff in  review  is  not  to  be  regarded  as 
a  subsequent  creditor.  Parsons  v. 
McKnight,  8  N.  H.  35. 

Effeot  of  transfer  as  to  anbse-i 
qvent  oreditora. — A  conveyance  of 
real  estate  pending  an  action  against 
the  grantor  does  not  of  itself  render 
such  conveyance  void  as  to  subsequent 
creditors.  Ray  v.  Roe,  2  Blackf. 
(Ind.)  258,  18  Am.  Dec.  159. 

Effect  of  failure  to  reooTer. — 
If  a  conveyance  be  made  to  defeat  an 
expected  recovery  in  a  suit,  it  will 
not  be  deemed  fraudulent  to  defeat 
creditors,  should  the  recovery  not 
take  place.  Bardy  v.  Ellison,  3  N.  G. 
533,  2  Hayw.  348. 

A  transfer  pending  nipple- 
ntentary  prooeedings,  of  property 
by  mortgage  to  other  creditors,  to  se- 
cure debts  for  about  one-half  the 
amount  of  the  mortgage,  is  void  as  to 
the  claim  of  the  judgment  creditor. 
DeWitt  V.  Van  Sickle,  29  N.  J.  Eq. 
209. 

The  ezeention  of  a  ntortsase 
upon  the  same  day  that  a  Jndg- 
aaent  was  rendered  against  the  mort- 


gagor is  not  alone  sufficient  to  at- 
tach to  it  the  imputation  of  fraud. 
Thornton  v.  Davenport,  2  111.  296,  29 
Am.  Dec.  358. 

54.  Trager  v.  Feibleman,  95  Ala. 
60,  10  So.  213. 

56.  Ryan  v.  Daly,  6  Cal.  238. 

56.  Gr^gg  V.  Martin,  12  Allen 
(Mass.),  498,  90  Am.  Dec.  164,  an  as- 
signment of  future  wages. 

57.  Marsh  v.  Davis,  24  Vt.  363,  a 
transfer  of  promissory  note. 

ISridenee  of  fraudulent  intent* 
— ^A  general  intent  to  defraud  cannot 
be  inferred  from  the  mere  fact  that  a 
debtor  made  a  general  assignment  for 
the  benefit  of  creditors,  or  that  he  pre- 
ferred some  of  his  creditors  to  others,, 
or  that  he  turned  out  property  in 
payment  to  certain  creditors  after  an 
attachment  had  been  levied  in  favor 
of  another  creditor,  and  before  exe- 
cuting his  general  assignment.  Lord 
V.  Devendorf,  54  Wis.  491,  11  N.  W. 
003,  41  Am.  Rep.  58;  Messersmitb  v. 
Devendorf,  54  Wis.  498,  11  N.  W.  906. 

Where  attaehment  la  dis- 
missed*— Where  at  the  time  of  a 
conveyance  of  a  debtor's  land,  an  at- 
tachment had  been  delivered  to  the 
sheriff,  but  had  not  been  levied,  of 
which  the  grantee  had  no  knowledge, 
and  the  attachment  was  not  levied, 
but  was  thereafter  dismissed,  the  con- 
veyance is  not  affected  or  rendered 
fraudulent  by  the  pendency  of  the  at- 
tachment. Lowry  v.  Howard,  35  Ind. 
170,  9  Am.  Rep.  676. 

Payment  nnder  mistake  of 
laiF* — The  facts  that  at  the  time  of 
the  payment  by  a  mortgagor  to  the 
mortgagee  of  the  proceed  of  his  crops, 
his  creditors  was  pressing  him,  and 


Badges  of  Fbaub. 


243 


being  attacbed,  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.  A  conveyance  in. 
anticipation  of  a  deficiency  judgment  on  foreclosure  is  fraudu- 
lent as  against  the  mortgagee."  A  conveyance  made  pending 
a  suit  against  the  grantor,  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  the 
collection  of  such  judgment  for  damages  as  may  be  recovered 
against  him,  and  with  knowledge  of  the  grantee  that  it  is  so 
made,  may  be  set  aside  at  the  instance  of  the  plaintiff  in  such 
suit,  after  judgment  for  him  therein,  whether  made  with  or 
without  adequate  consideration.^  A  conveyance  made  pending 
an  action  of  tort  against  the  grantor,  with  intent  to  defeat  the 
collection  of  any  judgment  that  may  be  recovered  against  the 
grantor  in  such  action  is  fraudulent  and  void,*^  even  though 
such  conveyance  is  made  on  good  consideration,  if  the  grantee 
had  knowledge  of  or  participated  in  this  purpose.**  It  is  a 
badge  of  fraud  that  a  conveyance  was  made  after  the  rendition 
of  a  verdict  in  favor  of  a  creditor,  and  while  a  stay  of  proceed- 
ings was  in  f  orce.^ 


§  8.  Transfer  of  all  the  debtor's  property. — The  voluntary 
conveyance  or  disposition  of  all  or  substantially  all  of  his  prop- 
erty by  a  debtor,  who  is  insolvent  or  largely  in  debt  with  credi- 
tors pressing,  is  a  badge  of  fraud."    A  prima  facie  case  of  fraud 


fears  were  expressed  that  the  same 
might  be  attached,  did  not  render  the 
payment  fraudulent  as  to  creditors, 
where  it  was  made  under  mistake  of 
law  by  all  the  parties  that  the  mort- 
gagee was  entitled  thereto.  Gregory 
V.  Clabrough's  Ex'rs,  129  Cal.  476,  62 
Pac.  72. 

58.  Hoboken  Sav.  Bank  v.  Beek- 
man,  36  N.  J.  Eq.  83;  33  N.  J.  Eq. 
53. 

69.  Rogers  v.  Evans,  3  Ind.  574,  56 
Am.  Dec.  537;  Wright  v.  Brandis,  1 
Ind.  336;  Smith  v.  Culbertson,  9 
Rich.  (S.  C.)  106;  Goshom  v.  Snod- 
grass,  17  W.  Va.  717. 

60.    y.   r.—Ford  ▼.   Johnston,   7 


Hun,  563;  Jackson  v.  Myers,  18 
Johns.  425. 

D,  C— Barth  v.  Heider,  7  D.  C.  71. 

Me. — Tobie,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Wal- 
dron,  75  Me.  472. 

y,  J. — Scott  V.  Hartman,  26  N.  J. 
Eq.  89. 

Tenn, — Farnsworth  v.  Bell,  2  Sneed, 
531. 

Va. — Johnson  v.  Wagner,  76  Va. 
587. 

61.  Cooke  V.  Cooke,  43  Md.  522. 

62.  Maasch  v.  Parkin,  58  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)  560,  69  N.  Y.  Supp.  187. 

63.  N.  y.— St.  John  Wood-Work- 
ing Co.  V.  Smith,  178  N.  Y.  629,  71 
N.  E.  1139,  affg  82  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.) 


244 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


is  made,  requiring  a  full  and  satisfactory  explanation  on  the 
part  of  the  grantee  or  purchaser  in  respect  to  the  nature  of  the 


348,  82  N.  Y.  Supp.  1025;  Barker  ▼. 
Franklin,  37  Misc.  Rep.  292,  75  N. 
Y.  Supp.  305;  aark  ▼.  Wise,  46  N.  Y. 
612,  rexfg  39  How.  Pr.  97;  Wheeler 
V.  Brady,  4  Thomp.  ft  C.  547 ;  Brown- 
ing V.  Hart,  6  Barb.  91;  Litchfield  v. 
Pelton,  6  Barb.  187.  But  see  Buhl  ▼. 
Phillips,  48  N.  Y.  125,  8  Am.  Rep. 
522,  rev^g  2  Daly,  45,  holding  that  the 
sale  of  all  the  effects  of  an  insolvent 
copartnership,  upon  credit,  at  a  fair 
valuation,  to  a  responsible  purchaser, 
although  made  by  the  vendor,  with  in- 
tent to  hinder,  delay  and  defraud  cred- 
itors, and  although  the  purchaser 
knew  of  this  in8olT«ncy,  is  not  void- 
able unless  the  purchaser  knew  of  the 
fraudulent  intent. 

TJ,  iSf.— Sexton  v.  Wheaton,  8  Wheat. 
229,  5  L.  Ed.  603. 

Ark. — Ringgold  v.  Waggoner,  14 
Ark.  69. 

Cal. — Ballon  v.  Andrews  Banking 
Co.,  128  Cal.  562,  61  Pac.  102,  a 
transfer  of  all  the  firm  account  books 
and  accounts  is  prima  facie  fraud- 
ulent; Daugheriy  v.  Daugherty,  104 
Cal.  221,  37  Pac.  889. 

Conn. — ^Redfield  v.  Buck,  35  Conn. 
328,  95  Am.  Dec.  241»  such  a  convey- 
ance is  constructively  fraudulent 
against  a  subsequent  judgment  debtor. 
A  conveyance  made  without  consider- 
ation by  a  husband  to  his  wife  of  all 
his  real  estate,  is  void  as  to  his  cred- 
itors, although  not  executed  with  in- 
tent to  defraud  them,  when  his  lia- 
bilities exceeded  his  remaining  assets. 
Quinnipiac  Brewing  Co.  v.  Fitzgib- 
bons,  71  Conn.  80,  40  Atl.  913.  But 
mere  proof  that  the  parties  were  hus- 
band and  wife,  and  that  the  convey- 
ance was   made   while   the   husband 


owed  a  debt  to  the  plaintiff  which 
he  had  not  paid,  does  not,  as  matter 
of  law,  establish  fraud,  either  actual 
or  constructive.  Fishel  ft  Levy  v. 
Motta,  76  Conn.  197,  56  Atl.  558. 

Go.— Hoffer  v.  Gladden,  75  Ga.  532. 
But  the  rule  that  the  sale  of  the  whole 
of  one's  property  is  a  badge  of  fraud 
as  against  creditors  does  not  apply 
between  the  creditors  and  the  pur- 
chaser of  a  small  part  thereof.  Scott 
V.  Winship,  20  Ca.  429. 

/otMT. — ^Barhydt  v.  Perry,  67  Iowa, 
416,  10  N.  W.  820,  the  voluntary 
transfer  by  an  outgoing  partner  of  a 
firm,  which  was  largely  indebted,  of 
all  his  individual  property,  is  con- 
structively fraudulent;  Glenn  v. 
Glenn,  17  Iowa,  498.  But  a  transfer 
of  all  the  debtor's  property  to  pay  a 
bona  fide  preexisting  debt  is  not,  per 
se,  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.  O>wle0 
V.  Ricketts,  1  Iowa,  582. 

Kan. — ^Roberts  v.  Raddiff,  35  Kan. 
502,  11  Pac.  436,  where  a  failing  mil- 
liner sold  his  stock  to  a  lawyer,  re- 
siding in  a  distant  town,  for  one-half 
its  cost,  on  a  long  credit,  unsecured 
notes  being  given,  and  the  milliner 
remaining  in  possession  in  the  em- 
ploy of  the  lawyer,  it  was  held  that 
a  verdict  finding  the  sale  invalid 
should  not  be  disturbed. 

Ky, — ^Herrin  v.  Morford,  39  Ky. 
450;  Heiatt  v.  Barnes  Adm'r,  35  Ky. 
219;  Bradley  v.  Buford,  2  Ky.  12,  2 
Am.  Dec.  703,  especially  when  secretly 
made. 

La. — Gregg  v*  1^»  37  La.  Ann.  164, 
a  sale  by  an  insolvent  of  all  his  prop- 
erty on  credit  to  an  impecunious 
buyer  is  fraudulent.  Emswiler  v. 
Burham,  6  La.  Ann.  710. 


Badqss  op  Fkaud. 


245 


consideration  and  the  honesty  of  the  transaction.^  The  pur- 
chaser is  charged  with  notice  of  the  circumstances  and  the 
probable  effect  upon  creditors  of  the  seller  in  hindering^  delay- 
ing or  defrauding  them.^  Persons  taking  a  confession  of  judg- 
ment virtually  swallowing  up  the  whole  estate  of  a  failing  debtor 
have  the  burden,  when  such  judgment  is  attacked  by  other  credi- 
tors, of  giving  a  reasonable  explanation  of  the  transaction,  and 
satisfactorily  showing  the  consideration  on  which  it  was  founded ; 
and  unless  they  do  so,  it  may  fairly  be  inferred  that  the  judg- 
ment was  without  consideration  and  f  raudulent."^  But  it  is  not  a 
badge  of  fraud  that  the  debtor  conveys  away  his  whole  property 


Me. — ^Hartshorn  y.  Eames,  81  Me. 
93. 

Md.—Zimmer  t.  Miller,  64  Md.  296, 
1  Atl.  858;  Ecker  v.  McAllister,  46 
Md.  290. 

Miss. — Pope  V.  Andrews,  Sm.  &  M. 
Ch.  136. 

Mo. — Jacob  Furth  Grocery  Ck>.  v. 
May,  78  Mo.  App.  323;  Seger  ▼. 
Thomas,  107  Mo.  636,  18  S.  W.  33; 
Benne  v.  Schnecko,  100  Mo.  260,  13  S. 
W.  82. 

If  eh. — ^Nebraska  Moline  Plow  Go.  ▼. 
Klingman,  48  Neb.  204,  60  K.  W. 
1101,  such  a  sale  is  evidence  of  fraud- 
ulent intent,  but  is  not  in  itself  con- 
clusiTC  evidence;  Karll  v.  Kubn,  38 
Neb.  639,  57  N.  W.  397.  But  see 
Goldsmith  v.  Erickson,  48  Neb.  48,  66 
N.  W.  1029,  holding  that  a  convey- 
ance by  a  debtor  to  one  of  his  credi- 
tors will  not  be  deemed  fraudulent 
merely  because  the  property  conveyed 
was  substantially  all  that  the  vendor 
owned* 

N.  J.— Moore  v.  Roe,  36  N.  J.  Eq. 

90. 
Pa.— Ditchbum  v.  Jermyn,  13  Pa. 

Co.  Ct.1. 

R.  /.— Sarle  v.  Arnold,  7  R.  I.  682. 


8.  C— Wade  v.  Cdlvert,  2  Mill 
Const.  26,  12  Am.  Dee.  662. 

Tew, — Green  v.  Banks,  24  Tex.  622 ; 
Reynolds  v.  Lansford,  16  Tex.  286; 
Wallace  v.  Butts  (Tex.  Civ.  App.),  31 
S.  W.  687,  it  is  not  necessary  that  a 
fraudulent  sale  should  have  placed  all 
the  debtor's  property  beyond  the  reach 
of  his  creditors,  in  order  to  have  it 
declared  void  in  an  action  against  the 
vendee. 

Ft.— Amsden  v.  Pitch,  67  Vt.  622, 
32  Atl.  478,  such  a  sale  is  prima  facie 
evidence  of  fraud  under  the  statute, 
as  not  made  in  the  usual  and  ordi- 
nary course  of  business. 

W.  Fa.— Reilly  v.  Barr,  34  W.  Va. 
95,  11  S.  E.  750. 

TFi».— Bigelow  v.  Doolittle,  36  Wis. 
115,  it  affords  a  presumption  of 
fraudulent  intent  so  far  as  existing 
creditors  are  concerned, 

Eng, — ^Twyne^s  Case,  3  Coke,  80a, 
1  Smith  Lead.  Cas.  1. 

64.  Welch  V.  Bradley,  46  Minn. 
540,  48  N.  W.  440. 

65.  Beels  v.  Flynn,  28  Neb.  676, 
26  Am.  St.  Rep.  351,  44  N.  W.  732. 

66.  Ditchbum  v.  Jermyn,  13  Fft. 
Co.  Ct.  1. 


246  Fbaudulestt  Conveyances. 

at  different  times  by  deeds  and  levies  of  exeeations,  althongbL 
tliej  passed  chiefly  into  the  hands  of  one  person.*' 

§  9.  Excessive  effort  to  give  appearance  of  fairness* — Cir- 
cumstances connected  with  the  transfer  or  disposition  of  prop- 
erty indicating  excessive  effort  to  give  it  the  appearance  of  r^u- 
larity  or  fairness,  which  are  not  the  nsnal  attendants  of  sudi 
business  transactions,  are  badges  of  fraud.^  Honesty  requires 
no  strat^em  or  subterfuge  to  support  and  aid  it.  Over^saution 
is  one  of  the  settled  indicia  of  fraud  and  evinces  a  diffidence  in 
the  rectitude  of  the  transaction  and  excites  a  corresponding  solici- 
tude  to  provide  defences  for  its  protection.*  Among  the  signs 
and  marks  of  fraud  enumerated  in  the  famous  Twyne's  Case  was 
the  fact  that  the  deed  expressed  that  the  gift  was  made  honestly, 
truly  and  bona  fide;  et  clausulae  inconsueto  semper  inducunt 
auspidonem!^  But  it  has  been  held  that,  although  the  title, 
upon  a  sale  of  personal  property,  passes  to  the  purchaser  by  de- 
livery, and  no  bill  of  sale  is  necessary,  the  taking  of  a  bill  of  sale 
attested  by  a  witness  is  not  of  itself  a  badge  of  fraud  ;^  and  that 
the  fact  that  a  tranfer  of  personal  property  was  evidenced  by  an 
elaborate  written  instrument  is  a  circumstance  of  but  slight  im- 
portance in  determining  fraud." 

§  10.  Suspicious  circumstances  unexplained. — iWliere  1^ 
circumstances  attending  a  transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  are 
suspicious,  the  failure  of  the  parties  to  furnish  some  proof  of 
the  hona  fides  of  the  conveyance,  or  to  offer  themselves  as  witr 
nesses,  or  to  testify,  or  to  produce  explanatory  evidence  to  rebut 
the  suspicious  circiunstances,  is  a  badge  of  fraud.*" 

67.  Preston  v.  Griffin,  1  Conn.  393.      Pr.   (N.  T.)    160;  Sands  r.  Codwise, 

«    X       «     .     ».  ^  TT     «^^       4  Jo^»«-  (N.  Y.)  667,  601. 

""l  ^V.'  ^''^!:  't  ^- 1':.^'  •'«•  Twyne'8  Case,  supra. 

20  8.  E.  665;  Comstock  v.  Rayford,  ^^   ^^  ^  ^^  j^^  ^ 

12  8m    &  M.   (M.88.)   369;  Twyne's  „  ^  ^  ^  ^^  ^  ^ 

Case,    3    Coke    80a,    1    Smith    I^«d.      ^^^  53  ^  j^  ^^ 

^•'  ^'  78.    /(HTflk— Olenn    ▼.    Glenn,    17 

69.  Loeschigk  ▼.  Addison,  10  Abb.      Iowa,  408. 


Badoes  of  Fraud. 


247 


§  11.  Transfer  without  change  of  possession, — ^The  fact  that 
a  transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  was  imaocompanied  by  an 
actual  and  contiuAied  change  of  possesdion^  management^  or  con- 
trol is,  in  the  absence  of  explanation,  a  badge  of  fraud.*^^  The 
unexplained  retention  of  the  possession  or  apparent  title  by  the 
grantor  is  a  badge  of  fraud,  going  to  the  fact  of  the  sale  and 
the  sufficiency  of  the  consideration,  and  casts  upon  the  purchaser 
the  burden  of  explaining  the  vendor's  continued  possession,  so 


ITy.— -Behan  v.  Warfield,  90  Ky. 
151,  11  Ky.  L.  Rep.  960,  13  S.  W.  439. 
Jfo.-^Leeper  v.  Bates,  85  Mo.  224; 
CSoldflhy  V.  Johnson,  82  Mo.  602; 
Henderson  v.  Henderson,  55  Mo.  534. 
y.  C— Helms  v.  Green,  106  N.  C. 
^51,  18  Am.  St.  Rep.  893,  11  S.  £. 
470. 

Tenn. — Shapira  v.  Paletz  (Ch.  App. 
1900),  69  S.  W.  774. 

W.  Va.— Knight  ▼.  Capito,  23  W. 
Va.  639. 

Wis. — Mace  v.  Roberts,  97  Wis. 
199,  72  N.  W.  866. 

Wyo. — Stirling  v.  Wagner,  4  Wyo. 
^,  31  Pac.  1032,  32  Pac.  1128. 

74.  N,  y.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Mil- 
ler, 163  N.  Y.  164,  67  N.  E.  308;  St. 
John  Wood-Working  Co.  v.  Smith, 
178  N.  Y.  629,  71  N.  E.  1139,  aff'g 
82  App.  Div.  348,  82  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1026. 

.42a. — ^Marshall  y.  Croom,  62  Ala. 
554,;  Moog  v.  Benedicks,  49  Ala.  612. 
Ark, — ^Ringgold    v.    Waggoner,    14 
Ark.  69. 

Cal. — ^Daugherty  v.  Daugherty,  104 
Cal.  221,  37  Pac.  889. 

Oa, — Ross  V.  Gooley,  113  Ga.  1047, 
39  8.  E.  471;  Peck  v.  Land,  2  Ga.  1, 
46  Am.  Dec.  368. 

Iowa, — Glenn  y.  Glenn,  17  Iowa, 
498. 

JTy. — ^Behan  ▼.  Warfield,  90  Ky. 
161,   11  Ky.  L.  Rep.  960,  13  8.  W. 


439;  Herrin  v.  Morford,  9  Dana,  460. 

La, — Goothye  v.  DeLatonr,  111  La. 
766,  36  So.  896. 

ifrf.— Thompson  v.  Williams,  100 
Md.  196,  60  Atl.  26. 

1/0.— White  V.  Gibson,  113  Mo. 
App.  668,  88  S.  W.  120. 

N.  C.—Darden  v.  Skinner,  4  N.  C. 
259. 

Pa.— Avery  v.  Street,  6  Watts,  247. 

Fa.— Hickman  v.  Trout,  83  Va.  478, 
3  S.  £.  131. 

Eng.—Twyne's  Case,  3  Ck)ke,  80a,  1 
Smith  Lead.  Gas.  1. 

Can.— Waddle  v.  McGinty,  15  Grant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  261.  The  mere  fact  that 
personal  property  remains  in  the 
hands  of  the  seller  is  not  a  fraud  in 
itself,  but  only  a  matter  for  the  con- 
sideration of  the  trial  court,  in  de- 
ciding whether  or  not  fraud  exists. 
Fraser  v.  Murray,  34  N.  S.  (Can.) 
186.  See  Retention  of  possession  or 
apparent  title,  chap.  XII,  infra. 

Reteatioii  of  the  ntasacoiitent 
of  oertain  lota,  after  a  conveyance 
by  a  husband  who  was  financially  em- 
barrassed to  his  wife  in  satisfaction 
of  a  debt  due  her,  is  not  a  badge  of 
fraud,  nor  does  it  show  that  the  con- 
veyance was  merely  colorable,  where 
the  wife  knew  nothing  concerning  the 
business  of  selling  lots.  Dresser  v. 
Zabrinkie  (N.  J.  Ch.),  39  Atl.  1066. 


248 


FbAUDULENT   ComrETANCBS. 


as  to  make  the  facts  consisteoit  with  the  bona  fides  of  the 
sala'* 

§  12.  Reservation  of  trust  or  benefit  for  grantor. — ^The 
reservation  in  a  oonveyanoe  by  one  indebted  at  the  time  of  some 
trust  or  benefit  to  himself  at  the  expense  of  creditors,  or  by 
which  creditors  are  prevented  from  compelling  an  immediate 
appropriation  of  the  debtor's  property  to  the  payment  of  hia 
debts,  is  generally  a  badge  of  fraud.^* 


:§  18.  Relationship  of  parties. — Belationship  between  the  par* 
ties  is  not  in  itself  a  badge  of  fraud  and  fraud  will  not  be  im* 
plied  therefrom.  It  is  not  sufficient  in  itself  to  establish,  want 
of  good  faith  in  a  purchaser  or  mortgagee.  But  while  not  neces- 
sarily a  badge  of  f  raud,  it  is  to  be  considered  upon  the  question 
of  intent  and  as  a  circumstance  in  deciding  the  question  of 
the  good  faith  of  the  parties.^     Relationship  may  lessen  the 


75.  Teagae  t.  Bbm,  131  Ala.  422, 
31  8o.  4. 

76.  y.  r.— Young  ▼.  HcermaiiB,  66 
N.  Y.  374. 

ife.— Hapgood  t.  Fisher,  34  Me. 
407,  56  Am.  Dec.  663,  a  contract  for 
the  future  support  of  the  seller  of  the 
property,  as  part  of  the  consideration 
for  the  sale,  does  not  render  the  sale 
necessarily  fraudulent  as  to  credi- 
tors. It  must  also  appear  that  he  has 
not  sufficient  other  property  to  pay 
his  debts. 

ira*«.— Pacific  Nat.  Bank  v.  Wind- 
ram,  133  Mass.  175,  where  a  married 
woman  settled  an  estate  upon  herself 
in  trust,  the  conveyance  containing 
a  clause  restricting  the  power  of 
alienating  the  income  by  anticipation, 
a  creditor's  rights  under  an  assign- 
ment of  her  right  to  future  income  by 
way  of  security  for  a  loan  are  not  re- 
stricted by  the  limitation  of  the  trust. 


N.  ff.— Drew  ▼.  Rust,  36  K.  H.  335, 
a  quitclaim  deed,  without  considera- 
tion, from  a  mortgagor  to  the  mort- 
gagee, will  be  without  effect,  as 
against  an  attaching  creditor  of  the 
mortgagor,  and  if  a  mortgagee,  after 
such  quitclaim  deed,  purchase  the^ 
claim  of  a  creditor,  and  cause  the 
right  in  equity  to  be  levied  upon  and 
sold,  he  cannot  set  up  his  quitdaim 
against  the  purchaser. 

Eng. — ^Twyne's  Case,  3  Coke,  80a,  1 
Smith  Lead.  Cas.  1.  See  Reserva- 
tions and  trusts  for  grantors,  chap.. 
X,  infra, 

77.  y.  r.— DuBois  V.  Barker,  4 
Hun,  80,  6  Thomps.  &    C.  340. 

U.  £f.— Vansickle  v.  Welk,  Fargo  k 
Co.,  105  Fed.  16. 

J.2a.— Moog  V.  Fraley,  70  Ala.  246, 
conveyance  to  a  brother. 

/ZI.— Oliphant  v.  Liverridge  (111.),. 
27  N.  E.  021. 


Badqbs  of  Fbaub. 


249 


effect  of  the  statemente  of  the  parties  when  other  circamfltances 
exist  pointing  to  f raud.^  Where  a  son  of  a  decedent  was  prac- 
tically insolvent,  and  his  interest  in  the  decedent's  property  had 
been  exhausted  by  advaocements  made  during  the  decedent's 
lifetime,  the  act  of  the  decedent's  daughters  in  conveying  to  an 
infant  son  of  their  insolvent  brother  their  interest  in  a  tract  of 
land  which  descended  to  them  from  the  decedent,  was  not  fraudu- 
lent as  against  the  creditors  of  their  brother.^ 


§  14.  Indebtedness  or  insolvency  of  grantor*— Mere  in- 
debtedness of  the  grantor  at  the  time  of  making  a  voluntary 
conveyance  of  his  property  will  not  render  the  conveyance  fraud- 
ulent and  void  as  to  his  creditors.^  But  indebtedness  on  the  part 
of  the  grantor  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance  is  a  badge  of  f raud,^ 
and  evidence  of  large  indebtedness,  or  of  complete  in^lvency,  is 


ITy.-— WilliaHiB  v.  Ty^  19  Kj.  L. 
Hep.  818,  42  S.  W.  90,  deed  from 
father  to  daughter;  MiUs  v.  Hunt, 
12  Ky.  L.  Eep.  866,  15  S.  W.  518. 

Ifo.— Martin  ▼.  Fox,  40  Mo.  App. 

664. 

Fa.— Hidanan  v.  Trout,  83  Va.  478, 

3  8.  E.  131. 

W««.— Missinskie  v.  McMurdo,  107 
Wis.  678,  83  N.  W.  758.  See  TranB- 
actions  between  persons  in  oonflden* 
tial  relations,  chap.  IX,  infra. 

78.  Oliphant  v.  Liverridge  (HL), 
27  N.  E.  921 ;  Mills  ▼.  Hunt,  12  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  866,  15  S.  W.  518;  Martin  v. 
Fox,  40  Mo.  App.  664. 

79.  Hiek^  v.  Davidson  (Iowa 
1906),  105  N.  W.  678. 

80.  N.  y.— Spicer  v.  Ayers,  53 
How.  Pr.  405;  Van  Wyck  v.  Seward, 
e  Paige,  62. 

Oa.— Clayton  v.  Brown,  17  Ga.  217. 
/H.— Bittinger  v.  Kasten,  111  HL 

260. 

7fuf.— Huhhe   ▼.   Bancroft,   4    Ind. 

388. 


If d^Atkinson  v.  FhiUips,  1  Md. 
Ch.  507. 

lfa««.~Thacher  v.  Phinney,  89 
Mass.  146;  Green  y.  Tanner,  49  Mass. 
411. 

Iftfifi. — Filley  v.  Register,  4  Minn. 
391. 

Misa, — Cowen  y.  Alsop,  51  Mis8« 
168. 

ifo. — Buckner  v.  Stine,  48  Mo.  407; 
Hickey  v.  Ryan,  15  Mo.  63. 

Pa — Mateer  v.  Hissim,  3  Pen.  & 
W.  160. 

Te«.— Willis  v.  Whitsitt,  67  Ter. 
673,  4  S.  W.  253. 

81.  U,  8. — ^Hudgins  v.  Kemp,  61 
U.  S.  45,  15  L.  Ed.  853. 

Ala.— Harkins  v.  Bailey,  48  Ala. 
376. 

Ind. — ^Huhba  v.  Baneroft,  4  Ind. 
388. 

Jfi§«. — ^Edmonson  v.  Meaeham,  60 
Miss.  34. 

Te».— Reynolds  v.  Lansford,  16  Tex. 
286. 


250 


Fbaudulent  Cokveyakces. 


an  important  elemeat  in  marshaling  badges  of  fraud  to  overttini 
fraudulent  conveyances  and  transfers."  In  a  suit  to  set  aside 
Bn  alleged  fraudulait  conveyance,  it  is  not  necessary  that  the 
plaintiff  allege  or  prove  the  debtor's  insolvency  at  the  time  he 
executed  the  conveyance,  though  such  fact  is  material  as  bearing 
on  the  purposes  of  the  oonveyance.** 

§  15.  Absolute  transfer  intended  as  security. — ^The  giving  of 
an  absolute  conveyance  which  is  intended  to  operate  only  as  a 
security,  or  putting  in  the  form  of  a  conveyance  absolute  on  its 
face  a  transaction  which  is  in  fact  a  mortgage^  is  held  to  be  a 
badge  of  fraud  as  to  the  creditors  of  the  grantor  or  mortgagor,^ 
and  such  a  conveyance  or  transfer  by  a  debtor  is  held  by  some  of 


J 


82.  N.  y.— St.  John  V^ood-Working 
Co.  V.  Smith,  178  N.  Y.  620,  71  N.  E. 
1139,  atf'g  82  App.  Div.  348,  82  N.  Y. 
Supp.  1025. 

V,  fif.— McRea  ▼.  Mobile  Branch 
Bank,  10  How.  376,  15  L.  Ed.  688. 

Ark. — Ringgold  v.  Waggoner,  14 
Ark.  60.  Compare  Reeves  v.  Sher- 
wood, 45  Ark.  520;  Cox  v.  Fraley,  26 
Ark.  20. 

Cal. — Daugherty  v.  Daugherty,  104 
Cal.  221,  37  Pac.  889;  Purkitt  v.  Po- 
lack,  17  Cal.  327. 

^2a.— Ballard  v.  Eckman,  20  Fla. 
661 ;  Barrow  v.  Bailey,  5  Fla.  0. 

lotca, — Glenn  v.  Glenn,  17  Iowa, 
408. 

iCy.— Bibb  V.  Baker,  17  B.  Mon. 
202. 

La, — Dallas  Brewery  v.  Holzner, 
116  La.  710,  41  So.  48. 

Jf  e.— Blodgett  v.  Chaplin,  48  Me. 
322;  Hartshorn  v.  Eames,  31  Me.  03. 

Md. — ^Applegarth  v.  Wagner,  86 
Md.  468,  38  All.  940;  Earnshaw  v. 
Stewart,  64  Md.  513,  2  Atl.  734;  Ful- 
ler V.  Brewster,  53  Md.  358. 

1/0.— -State  V.  Merritt,  70  Mo.  275. 

2Ve5. — ^Leifel  v.  Schemerhorn,  13 
Neb.  342,  14  N.  W.  418. 


N.  C.—Darden  v.  Skinner,  4  N.  C.  250. 

Pa.— Clark  v.  Depew,  25  P«.  St 
500,  64  Am.  Dec.  717. 

Tew. — Stephens  v.  Allen  (Cir.  App. 
1805),  31  S.  W.  314. 

Va. — ^Hickman  v.  Trout,  83  Va. 
478,  3  S.  E.  131. 

Enff. — Grogan  ▼.  Cooke,  2  Ball  ft  B. 
234;  Clements  v.  Eocles,  11  Ir.  Eq. 
220;  Holmes  v.  Penny,  3  Jur.  N.  S. 
80,  3  Kay  &  J.  00,  26  L.  J.  Ch.  170, 
5  Wkly.  Rep.  132;  Penhall  v.  Elwin. 
1  Smale  ft  G.  258.  See  also  Indebted- 
ness or  insolvency  of  grantor,  chap. 
VI,  infra, 

83.  Crary  v.  Eurte  (Iowa,  1006), 
105  N.  W.  600. 

84.  Brown  v.  Bradford,  103  Iowa, 
378,  72  N.  W.  648;  Earnshaw  ▼.  Stew- 
art, 64  Md.  513,  2  Atl.  734;  and 
cases  cited  in  following  note. 

But  see  Rigney  v.  Tallmadge,  17 
How.  Pr.  (N.  Y.)  556,  a  conveyance 
of  real  estate  absolute  on  its  face, 
but  in  fact  for  the  purpose  of  secur- 
ing the  grantee  as  a  bona  fide  credi- 
tor, where  the  object  is  shown  to  be 
one  which  can  be  sustained,  cannot 
be  declared  to  be  evidence  of  a  fraud- 
ulent intent  as  to  other  creditors. 


Badges  of  Fraud. 


251 


the  authorities  to  be  condusivelj  f rauduleiit  as  to  existing  credi- 
tors,  although  there  may  be  no  actual  fraudulent  intent.^  Other 
cases  hold  that  a  conveyance  or  transfer  absolute  in  terms,  but 
given  as  security  for  a  present  debt  or  future  advances,  is  not 
conclusively  or  as  matter  of  law  fraudulent  as  against  creditors, 
and  that  the  security  may  be  enforced,  if  no  fraud  was  in  fact 
intended,**  to  the  extent  of  the  amount  actually  advanced." 

§  16.  Concealment  of  or  failure  to  record  or  file  instrument. 
— The  mere  withholding  of  a  deed  or  mortgage  from  record 


85.  Ala. — Sims  v.  Gkiinefl,  64  Ala. 
392 ;  Hartshorn  v.  WUliams,  31  Ala.  149. 

Cal. — Chenery  v.  Palmer,  6  Cal. 
119,  65  Am.  Dec.  493. 

Conn. — Hough  v.  Ives,  1  Root,  492. 

/{{.--Beidler  v.  Crane,  135  111.  92, 
25  N.  £.  655,  25  Am.  St.  Rep.  349. 

Iowa. — Fuller  v.  Griffith,  91  Iowa, 
632,  60  N.  W.  247. 

Mo, — Pattison  v.  Letton,  56  Mo. 
App.  325. 

N.  H.— Watkins  v.  Arms,  64  N.  H. 
99,  6  Atl.  92;  Stratton  v.  Putney, 
63  N.  H.  577,  4  Atl.  876;  Badger  v. 
Story,  16  N.  H.  168. 

N.  J.— VHiite  V.  MegiU  (Ch.  1899), 
18  Atl.  355. 

y.  C. — ^Bernhardt  v.  Brown,  122  N. 
C.  587,  29  S.  E.  884,  65  Am.  St.  Rep. 
725 ;  Gulley  v.  Macy,  84  N.  C.  434. 

y<.— Gibson  v.  Seymour,  4  Vt.  618. 

86.  V.  8. — Chickering  v.  Hatch,  5 
Fed.  Cas.  No.  2,672,  3  Sumn.  474; 
Gaffney  v.  Signaigo,  9  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
5,169,  1  Dill.  158. 

Ala. — Killough  v.  Steele,  1  Stew. 
&  P.  262. 

ArJb.— Doswell  v.  Adler,  28  Ark.  82. 

CoIo.^McClure  v.  Smith,  14  Colo. 
299,  23  Pac.  786;  Ross  ▼.  Duggan,  5 
Colo.  85. 

Iowa, — ^Brown  v.  Bradford,  9upra; 


Fuller  V.  Griffith,  91  Iowa,  632,  60  N. 
W.  247. 

iSTan.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Jaffray, 
41  Kan.  694,  21  Pac.  242. 

Me. — Emmons  v.  Bradley,  56  Me. 
333;  Stevens  v.  Hinckley,  43  Me.  440; 
Ulmer  v.  Hills,  8  Me.  326;  Reed  v. 
Jewett,  5  Me.  96. 

Mastf. — Harrison  v.  Phillips  Acad- 
emy, 12  Mass.  456. 

Miss. — ^Bank  of  Mobile  v.  Tisho- 
mingo Sav.  Inst.,  62  Miss.  250. 

N.  D. — McCormick  Harvesting 
Mach.  Co.  V.  Citizens'  Bank  (1906), 
106  N.  W.  122. 

Or, — ^Haseltine  v.  Espey,  13  Or. 
301,  10  Pac.  423. 

Ft.— Bigelow  V.  Topliff,  25  Vt.  273, 
60  Am.  Dec.  264;  Smith  v.  Onion,  19 
Vt.  427. 

Wash. — Samuel  v.  Kittenger,  6 
Wash.  261,  33  Pac.  509. 

Wm.— Rock  V.  Collins,  99  Wis.  630, 
75  N.  W.  426,  67  Am.  St.  Rep.  885; 
McFarlane  v.  Louden,  99  Wis.  620, 
75  N.  W.  394,  67  Am.  St.  Rep.  883. 
See  also  Reservations  and  trusts  for 
grantor;  absolute  conveyance  in- 
tended as  security,  chap.  X,  §  16, 
infra, 

87.  Joseph  M.  Smith  Co.  v.  O'Brien, 
57  N.  J.  Eq.  365,  41  Atl.  492. 


252 


FSAUDULENT   CoNVETAKGES. 


does  not  render  it  fraudulent  as  to  creditors^  where  no  fraud 
is  intended  and  no  one  is  misled,  or  unless  there  is  a  fraudulent 
purpose  to  give  the  grantor  or  mortgagor  a  fictitious  credit  or  he 
is  thereby  enabled  to  obtain  a  fictitious  credit,"  whether  such 
withholding  from  record  is  the  result  of  mere  inattention,  in- 
difference, or  agreement."  But  the  fact  that  the  instrument  of 
conveyance  is  withheld  from  record,  or  is  concealed  by  fraudulent 
representations  or  otherwise,  is  generally  held  to  be  a  badge  of 
fraud.**  The  mere  failure  to  record  a  oonveyance,  however,  of 
itself,  furnishes  no  ground  for  declaring  it  invalid.  It  is,  at 
best,  only  a  circumstance  which  may  be  considered,  in  connection 
with  other  proof  of  a  preconceived  purpose  to  deceive  and  de- 


88.  Hardin  v.  Dolge,  46  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)  416,  61  N.  Y.  Siipp.  763; 
National  State  Bank  v.  Sanford  Fork, 
etc.,  Co.,  167  Ind.  10,  60  N.  E.  699; 
Brown  v.  Bradford,  103  Iowa,  378, 
72  N.  W.  684;  Jones  ▼.  Levering,  116 
Mo.  App.  377,  91  S.  W.  980.  See  also 
VTithholding  instrument  from  record, 
chap.  Xn,  §  36,  infra. 

88.  Robertson  &  Co.  ▼.  Columbus 
Ins.  &  B.  Co.,  85  Miss.  234,  38  So. 
100.  An  agreement  not  to  record  is 
a  badge  of  fraud.  Clayton  ▼.  Ex- 
change Bank,  121  Fed.  630,  57  C.  C. 
A.  656. 

90.  N,  r.— St.  John  Wood-Work- 
ing Co.  V.  Smith,  178  N.  Y.  629,  71 
N.  E.  1139,  alfg  82  App.  Div.  348,  82 
N.  Y.  Supp.  1026;  Guy  v.  Craighead, 
21  App.  Div.  460,  47  N.  Y.  Supp.  676; 
White  y.  Benjamin,  3  Misc.  Rep.  490, 
23  N.  Y.  Supp.  981 ;  Talcott  v.  Levy, 
20  N.  Y.  Supp.  440,  29  Abb.  N.  C.  3 ; 
United  States  Bank  v.  Housman,  6 
Paige,  526;  Hildreth  v.  Sands,  2 
Johns.  Ch.  35.  Compare  Billings  v. 
RuBseU,  101  N.  Y.  226,  4  N.  E. 
531. 

17.  flf.— Davis  V.  Schwartz,  165  U. 
S.  631,  15  Sup.  Ct.  237,  39  L.  Ed. 


289;  Brown  v.  Easton,  112  Fed.  692; 
Th<nnp6on  Nat.  Bank  v.  Corwine,  89 
Fed.  774;  Dobson  v.  Snyder,  70  Fed. 
10;  Beecher  v.  Clark,  8  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
1,223,  12  Blatchf.  256;  McLean  v. 
Lafayette  Bank,  16  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
8,888,  3  McLean,  587. 

Ato.— Crawford  v.  Kirksey,  50  Ala. 
590. 

Colo, — Stock-Growers'  Bank  ▼.  New- 
ton, 13  Colo.  245,  22  Pae.  444. 

Conn, — Curtis  v.  Lewis,  74  Conn. 
367,  50  Atl.  878. 

/U.— Hass  V.  Stembach,  156  Dl. 
44,  41  N.  E.  51;  McNeil,  etc.,  Co.  v. 
Plows,  83  111.  App.  186;  Blackman  v. 
Preston,  24  lU.  App.  237. 

lofDa, — ^MuU  V.  Dooley,  89  Iowa, 
312,  56  N.  W.  513. 

Kan, — ^Wafer  v.  Harvey  County 
Bank,  46  Kan.  597,  26  Pac.  1032. 

Ky, — ^Hildebum  v.  Brown,  17  B. 
Mon.  779;  Scrivenor  v.  Scrivener,  7 
B.  Mon.  374. 

ififftf.— Day  V.  Goodbar,  69  Miss. 
687,  12  So.  30;  Klein  v.  Richardson, 
64  Miss.  41,  8  So.  204. 

Mo. — Boone  County  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Newkirk,  144  Mo.  472,  46  8.  W.  606; 
Gentry  v.  Field,  143  Mo.  399,  45  8. 


Badoes  of  Fsaud. 


253 


fraud;  but  as  an  independanl;,  isolated  fact,  disconnected  from 
other  suspicious  circumstances,  it  is  insufficient  to  establish  a 
fraudulent  intent*^  Where  it  is  either  found  that  all  the  acts 
of  the  parties  were  done  honestly  and  in  good  faith,  or  it  is  not 
found  that  they  were  dishonest  or  fraudulent,  a  deed  or  mort- 
gage cannot  be  adjudged  fraudulent  and  void  on  the  ground 
that  it  was  not  recorded,  and  that  in  ignorance  of  the  existenpe 
of  the  instrument  assailed  credit  was  given  to  the  grantor  upon 
the  faith  of  his  supposed  ownership  of  the  property.*'  The  fact 
that  a  person  who  gives  a  mortgage  wishes  it  to  be  kept  secret 


W.  286;  Williams  ▼.  Kirk,  68  Mo. 
App.  457. 

N.  J.-— Claflin  v.  Freudenthal,  68 
N.  J.  Eq.  298,  43  Ail.  529;  Fleming- 
ton  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Jones,  50  N.  J.  Eq. 
244,  24  Atl.  928;  Thouron  v.  Pear- 
son, 29  N.  J.  Eq.  487.  . 

N.  C.—Hafner  ▼.  Irwin,  23  N.  C. 
490. 

OAio.— Stewart  ▼.  Hopkins,  30  Ohio 
St.  502. 

Pa. — Coates  v.  Gerlach,  44  Pa.  St 
43. 

8.  D.— Jewett  ▼.  Sundback,  5  S.  D. 
Ill,  58  N.  W.  20. 

Tex, — Banner  v.  Bobinson  (Civ. 
App.  1896),  34  S.  W.  355. 

ra.— Hickman  ▼.  Trout,  83  Va. 
478,  3  S.  E.  131. 

Tri«.— KickbuBch  v.  Corwith,  108 
Wis.  634,  85  N.  W.  148;  Standard 
Paper  Co.  v.  Guenther,  67  Wis.  101, 
30  N.  W.  298.  Compare  McFarlane 
V.  Louden,  99  Wis.  620,  75  N.  W.  394, 
67  Am.  St.  Rep.  883. 

Eng. — ^Hungerf ord  ▼.  Earle,  2  Vem. 
Ch.  261,  23  Eng.  Rep.  768. 

01.  2^.  r.— Delaney  v.  Valentine, 
154  N.  Y.  692,  49  N.  E.  65;  Hardin 
T.  Dolge,  46  App.  Dlv.  416,  61  N.  Y. 
Supp.  753. 

U.  £f.— Blennerhassett  ▼.  Sherman, 


105  U.  S.  100,  26  L.  Ed.  1080;  Curry 
T.  McCauley,  20  Fed.  583. 

rai.— Pettit  ▼.  Coachman  (Pla. 
1906),  41  So.  401. 

Kan, — First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Jkffraj, 
41  Kan.  694,  21  Pac.  242. 

Mass, — Folsom  v.  Clemence,  111 
Mass.  273. 

Mies, — Day  v.  Goorbar,  69  Miss. 
687,  12  So.  30. 

Ifo.— Wall  V.  Beedy,  161  Mo.  625, 
61  S.  W.  864;  State  ▼.  O'Neill,  151 
Mo.  67,  52  S.  W.  240;  First  Nat. 
Bank  y.  Rohren  138  Mo.  369,  39  S. 
W.  1047. 

N,  J, — ^Asbury  Park  BIdg.,  etc., 
Assoc.  ▼.  Shepherd  (Ch.  1901),  50 
Atl.  65;  Andrus  v.  Burke,  61  K.  J. 
Eq.  297,  48  Atl.  228. 

8.  0, — ^McElwee  ▼.  Kennedy,  56  S. 
C.  154,  34  S.  E.  86. 

Wis, — ^McFarlane  v.  Louden,  99  Wis. 
620,  75  N.  W.  394, 67  Am.  St.  Rep.  883. 

Can, — ^Bertrand  v.  Parkes,  8  Mani- 
toba, 175. 

92.  State  Bank  v.  Backus,  160  Ind. 
682,  67  N.  E.  512.  Compare  Green  & 
Sons  ▼.  Weems,  85  Miss.  566,  38  So. 
561,  as  to  effect  of  statute  providing 
that  a  deed  between  husband  and 
wife  must  be  filed  for  record  to  be 
valid  as  against  a  third  person. 


254 


Fbaudulekt  Convetances, 


for  the  sake  of  his  credit  does  not  of  itself  show  fraud,**  and  the 
withholding  of  a  deed  from  record  merely  to  gratify  the  feelings 
of  a  proud  debtor  is  not  a  fraudulent  act.**  But  the  withholding 
of  a  mortgage  executed  by  a  corporation  from  record  until  after 
it  becomes  insolvent,  under  an  implied  agreement,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  strengthening  its  credit  while  the  directors  test  the 
success  of  the  corporate  business  at  the  risk  of  future  creditors, 
is  fraudulent  as  against  the  creditors  of  the  corporation.*^ 


§  17.  Secrecy  and  haste. — Secreoy,**  and  particularly  an  un- 
usual degree  of  secrecy,*^  in  a  sale  or  conveyance  by  an  insolvent 
debtor  is  generally  held  to  be  a  badge  of  fraud  and  to  throw 
suspicion  on  the  transaction.  But  if  a  man's  disposition  of  his 
property  is  fair  and  lawful,  the  concealment  of  the  transaction 
cannot  render  it  fraudulent.**    A  pledge  of  securities  may  be,  and 


93.  Clark  v.  WatsoD,  141  Mass. 
248,  5  N.  E.  298. 

94.  CampbeU  v.  Remaly,  112  Micb. 
214,  70  N.  W.  432,  67  Am.  St.  Rep. 
393;  Claflin  v.  Freudenthal,  58  N.  J. 
Eq.  298,  43  Atl.  529;  Flemington  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Jones,  50  N.  J.  Eq.  244,  24 
Atl.  928. 

95.  Montgomery  v.  Phillips,  53  N. 
J.  Eq.  203,  31  Atl.  622. 

96.  U.  fir. — ^DaTis  v.  Schwartz,  155 
U.  S.  631,  15  Sup.  Ct.  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
289;  Warner  v.  Norton,  20  How.  448, 
15  L.  Ed.  950;  Foster  ▼.  McAlester, 
114  Fed.  145,  52  C.  C.  A.  107. 

CaX, — ^Daugherty  v.  Daugherty,  104 
Cal.  221,  37  Pac.  889. 

Conn, — New  Haven  Steamboat,  etc., 
Co.  V.  Vanderbilt,  16  Conn.  420. 

Iowa, — Stewart  v.  Mills  County 
Nat  Bank,  76  Iowa,  571,  41  N.  W. 
318.  ComfNire  Nicholas  v.  Higby,  35 
Iowa,  401. 

Ky, — Herrin  v.  Munford,  9  Dana, 
450. 

Mom, — Folsom    ▼.    Clemenoe,    111 


Mass.  273,  the  secrecy  is  matter  for 
the  jury  to  consider;  Gould  v.  Ward, 
4  Pick.  104. 

^V.  C— Peebles  v.  Horton,  64  N.  C. 
374;  Dardftn  v.  Skinner, .  4  N.  C. 
259. 

Pa. — ^Avery  v.  Street,  6  Watts, 
247. 

Fa.— Hickman  v.  Trout,  83  Va.  478, 
3  S.  E.  131. 

iBn^.— Twyne's  Case,  3  Coke,^80a,  1 
Smith  Lead.  Cas.  1.  Compare  Nege- 
ler  V.  First  Nat.  Bank,  129  IH.  157, 
21  N.  E.  812,  16  Am.  St.  Rep.  257, 
aff*g  28  111.  App.  112;  Fortner  v.  Whe- 
lan,  87  Wis.  88,  58  N.  W.  253;  Penin- 
sula StOTC  Co.  V.  Sacket,  74  Wis. 
526,  43  N.  W.  491.  See  also  Secrecy 
and  haste  in  giving  preferences,  chap. 
XI,  §  24,  infra. 

97.  Fishel  v.  Lockhard,  52  Ga.  632; 
Filley  v.  Register,  4  Minn.  391,  77 
Am.  Dec.  522. 

98.  Small  v.  Small,  56  Kan.  1, 
42  Pac.  323,  54  Am.  St  Rep.  681,  30 
L.  R.  A.  243. 


Baixjes  of  Fraud. 


25'5 


usually  is,  done  in  secrecy,**  and  the  fact  that  such>  a  transfer  is 
kept  secret  until  after  a  general  assignmeait  by  the  debtor  may  be 
strong  evidence  of  a  fraudulent  intent  or  purpose,  yet  if  all  the 
parties  to  the  transfer  believed  when  it  was  made  that  the  debtor 
was  solvent,  and  there  was  no  one,  to  whom  he  was  under  obliga- 
tions to  reveal  the  transfer,  who  was  injured  by  the  secrecy,  and 
publication  of  it  would  have  precipitated  a  failure  which  was  then 
believed  to  be  avoidable,  the  secrecy  observed  was  not  the  subject 
of  criticism.^  Secrecy  is  a  circumstance  which  may  give  force  to 
other  evidence,*  and  from  which  in  connection  with  other  circum- 
stantial evidence  fraud  may  be  established."  Undue  or  unusual 
haste  in  consummating  a  sale  or  transfer  of  his  property  by  a 
debtor  is,  as  a  rule,  held  to  be  a  badge  of  f  raud,^  su£5cient  to  throw 
the  burden*  of  proving  the  good  faith  of  the  transaction  on  the 
grantor.^ 


99.  Stackhouse  v.  Holden,  66  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  423,  73  N.  Y.  Supp. 
203. 

1.  National  Hudson  River  Bank  v. 
Davison,  28  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  311, 
51  N.  Y.  Supp.  64. 

2.  V,  8. — Blennerhasfsett  v.  Sher- 
man, 105  U.  S.  100,  26  L.  Ed.  1080; 
Neslin  v.  Wells,  104  U.  S.  428,  26 
L.  Ed.  802. 

Ky, — ^Hildeburn  v.  Brown,  17  B. 
Hon.  779. 

Md,—Qm  ▼.  Gnffith,  2  Md.  Ch. 
270. 

lfi««.— -Hilliard  t.  Cagle,  46  Miss. 
309. 

N.  B, — ^Haven  v,  Richardson,  5  N. 
H.  113. 

y,  J. — Thouron  v.  Pearson,  29  N. 
J.  Eq.  487. 

y.  C— Hafner  v.  Irwin,  23  N.  C. 
490. 

W.  Fa.— Greer  v.  (VBrien,  36  W. 
Va.  277,  15  S.  E.  74;  Reynolds  v. 
Gawthrop,  37  W.  Va.  3,  16  S.  E.  364. 

Eng, — Worseley  v.  De  Mattos,  1 
Burr.  467,  2  Ld.  Ken.  218;  Griffn  ▼. 


Stanhope,  Cro.  Jac  454;  Corlett  v. 
Raddiff,  14  Moore  P.  C.  121,  4  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  1,  15  Eng.  Reprint,  251; 
Leonard  v.  Baker,  1  M.  &  S.  251. 

3.  Wiggington  v.  Winter,  28  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  79;  Dobson  t.  Snyder,  70  Fed. 
10;  Ross  V.  Crutsinger,  7  Mo.  245. 

4.  U,  8, — Foster  v.  McAlester,  114 
Fed.  146,  52  C.  C.  A.  107. 

Ala, — Schaungut  v.  Udell,  03  Ala. 
302,  9  So.  550;  Carter  v.  Coleman, 
84  Ala.  256,  4  So.  151;  Hodges  v. 
Coleman,  76  Ala.  103. 

Ark, — ^Adler-Goldman  Commission 
Co.  T.  Hathcock,  55  Ark.  579,  18  S. 
W.  1048. 

Mich, — Bendetson  v.  Moody,  100 
Mich.  553,  59  N.  W.  252. 

Mo, — St.  Louis  Brewing  Assoc,  v. 
Steimke,  68  Mo.  App.  52. 

y,  J.— Kimmouth  v.  White  (Ch. 
1900),  47  Atl.  1. 

Eng. — ^Heme  v.  Meeres,  1  Vem.  Ch. 
465,  23  Eng.  Reprint,  591. 

5.  Hetterman  Bros.  Co.  v.  Young 
(Tenn.    Ch.    App.    1898),    52    S.    W. 

532. 


256 


FSAUDULENT   CoKVBYANOES. 


§  18.  Sales  on  credit — The  mere  fact  that  goods  or  other 
property  are  sold  bj  a  debtor  on  credit  does  not  render  the  sale 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  or  require  that  the  transaction  should  be 
declared  invalid.  There  is  no  legal  presumption  of  fraud  from  a 
sale  on  credit*  The  sale  of  all  the  effects  of  an  insolvent  or  em- 
barrassed debtor,  upon  credit,  at  a  fair  valuation  to  a  responsible 
purchaser,  although  madei  by  the  vendor  with  intent  to  hinder, 
delay,  and  defraud  his  creditors,  and  although  the  purchaser  knew 
of  the  insolvency,  is  not  voidable  unless  the  purchaser  knew  of  the 
fraudulent  intent^  But  the  fact  that  a  sale  of  all  or  a  portion  of 
his  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  was  made  on  credit  is  a  cir- 
cumstance to  be  considered  with  other  evidence  by  the  jury  in 
determining  the  question  of  fraud  as  bearing  upon  the  question 
of  fraudulent  intent*  The  sale  of  a  debtor's  property  made  upon 
an  unusually  long  term  of  credit  has  a  tendency  to  delay  and 
hinder  creditors  by  interposing  a  legal  title  between  them  and  the 
debtor,  and  consequently  is  held  to  be  a  badge  of  fraud.*    The 


6.  N,  r.— Matthews  v.  Riee,  31  N. 
T.  457;  Evans  v.  Sims,  82  Hun,  396, 
31  N.  Y.  Supp.  259. 

Ala. — ^Lienkauf  v.  Morris,  66  Ala. 
406 ;  Andrews  v.  Jones,  10  Ala.  400. 

Cfa. — ^Niooll  y.  Crittenden,  65  Ga. 
497. 

/n.— Nelson  v.  Smith,  28  HI.  495. 

Iowa. — ^Ray  v.  Teabout,  65  Iowa, 
157,  21  N.  W.  497;  Hughes  v.  Monty, 
24  Iowa,  499. 

iffoA.— Lewis  T.  Rioe,  61  Mich.  97, 
27  N.  W.  867. 

Mo. — John  Deere  Plow  Co.  v.  Sulli- 
van, 158  Mo.  440,  59  S.  W.  1005,  the 
fact  that  the  vendee  gave  a  note  pay- 
able in  two  years  is  not  a  badge  of 
fraud;  Adam  Roth  Grocery  Co.  v. 
Lewis,  69  Mo.  App.  463.  Compare 
Seger  v.  Thomas,  107  Mo.  635,  18  S. 
W.  33,  a  sale  of  goods  to  a  creditor, 
where  they  exceeded  in  value  the 
amount  of  his  debt,  and  the  sale  as  to 
the  excess  was  on  credit,  is  void. 


N.  O.— Beasli^  v.  Bray,  98  N.  C. 
266,  3  S.  £.  497. 

Tenn. — McCasland  v.  Carson,  1 
Head,  117,  a  sale  of  lands  on  eredit 
of  one,  two  and  three  years  is  not 
fraudulent  in  law;  Harper  v.  Trent 
(Ch.  App.  1899),  63  S.  W.  245. 

But  compare  Elser  v.  Graber,  69 
Tex.  222,  6  S.  W.  560;  Blum  v.  Mc- 
Bride,  69  Tex.  60,  5  S.  W.  641,  where 
a  sale  of  land  on  credit  was  held 
void. 

7.  Ruhl  V.  Phillips,  48  N.  Y.  125,. 
8  Am.  Rep.  522,  rev^g  4  Daly,  45; 
Loeschiglc  v.  Bridge,  42  N.  Y.  421. 

8.  Roberts  v.  Shepard,  2  Daly  (N. 
Y.),  110;  Hughes  v.  Monty,  24  Iowa, 
499;  Smead  v.  Williamson,  16  B. 
Mon.  (Ky.)  492;  Tillman  v.  Heller 
(Tex.  1890),  14  S.  W.  271. 

9.  Ato.— Borland  v.  Walker,  7  Ala. 
269. 

III. — Cowling  T.  Estes,  15  111.  App. 
255. 


Badobb  of  Fbaud* 


267 


transfer  by  an  embarrassed  debtor  of  his  property  on  a  long  credit 
to  an  irresponsible  purchaser,  taking  his  notes  without  security^ 
has  been  held  to  be  a  badge  of  fraud.^^  But  the  fact  that  the 
vendee  is  an  inf ant,  and  purchased  partly  on  credit  from  a  firm  in 
straightened  drcumstancee,  does  not  render  the  sale  void  in  law 
as  against  creditors  of  the  firm.^^  And  it  has  been  held  that  long 
credit,  failure  to  take  security,  great  value,  and  present  inability 
of  the  purchaser  to  pay  are  not  so  necessarily  badges  of  fraud  in  a 
sale  as  that  the  court  should  so  designate  them  in  charging  the 
jury  without  any  direct  request  to  do  so." 

!§  19.  Transactions  not  in  usual  course  of  business. — The 

fact  that  the  sale  or  mortgage  of  his  property  by  an  insolvent 
debtor  was  made  out  of  business  hours  or  otherwise  out  of  the 
usual  course  of  business,  or  in  an  unusual  mode,  has  been  held  to 
foe  a  badge  of  fraud,  or  a  circumstance  indicative  of  fraud."    By 


louM. — Spaulding  v.  Adams,  63 
Iowa,  437,  19  N.  W.  341. 

fofk— Roberts  ▼.  Raddiff,  36  Kan. 
£02,  11  Pac.  406. 

Mi88, — ^Pope  V.  Andrews,  Sm.  &  M. 
Cb.  135. 

T60.— Jacobs  y.  Totly,  76  Tez.  343, 
13  S.  W.  372,  indefinite  credit 

Fa.— Hickman  ▼.  Trout^  83  Va.  478, 
3  S.  E.  131. 

10.  Litchfield  v.  Pelton,  6  Barb. 
(N.  Y.)  187;  Glenn  ▼.  Gl^n,  17  Iowa, 
408;  Fulkerson  ▼.  Sappington,  104 
Mo.  472,  15  S.  W.  041;  Robinson  ▼. 
Frankel,  85  Tenn.  475,  3  S.  W.  652; 
Hickman  v.  Trout,  9upra. 

11.  IklaUhews  ▼.  Rice,  31  N.  T. 
457. 

12.  Nicol  ▼.  Crittenden,  55  Ga.  407. 

13.  N.  y.— Wick  y.  Kunaeman,  30 
Misc.  Rep.  457,  62  K.  Y.  Supp.  637, 
sale  of  stock  of  merchandise  by  an 
employer  to  an  employee,  who  was 
without  apparent  means,  at  midnight 
for  one  thousand  four  hundred  dol- 
lars. 

17 


U.  fif.— Walbnin  v.  Babbitt,  16 
Wall.  577,  21  L.  Ed.  480,  sudden  sale 
by  oountiy  merchant  of  oitire  stock; 
Foster  ▼.  McAlester,  114  Fed.  145, 
52  G.  C.  A.  107;  Judson  t.  Courier 
Co.,  15  Fed.  541,  sale  held  prima 
facie  fraudulent;  Nisbet  ▼.  Quinn,  7 
Fed.  760,  sale  held  prima  facie  fraud- 
ulent under  Rev.  St.,  88  5120,  5130. 

AZa.^Hodge8  ▼.  Coleman,  76  Ala. 
103,  sale  of  stock  of  goods  at  night. 

Go.— Hoffer  v.  Gladden,  sale  in  un- 
usual mode  of  entire  stock. 

La, — ^Emswiler  ▼.  Burham,  6  La. 
Ann.  710.  Compare  Hirsch  ▼.  Fu- 
dicker,  43  La.  Ann.  886,  0  So.  742. 

ifMs.— Killam  v.  Pierce,  153  Mass. 
502,  27  N.  E.  520,  sale  of  stock  of 
goods  late  at  night. 

Mich. — ^Bendetson  ▼.  Moody,  100 
Mich.  553,  50  N.  W.  252,  sale  of  stock 
of  goods  at  night. 

If 0.— State  V.  Merritt,  70  Mo.  275. 

R*  /.— Tillinghast  v.  Champlin,  4  R. 
I.  173,  67  Am.  Dec.  510,  conveyance 
made  secretly  and  at  night. 


268 


FbAUDULENT   COKVETAIIOSS. 


express  statutory  provision  in  some  states,  the  fact  that  a  sale, 
assignmeoity  transfer,  or  oonveyanoe  is  not  made  in  the  usual  and 
ordinary  course  of  business  of  the  debtor  is  prima  facie  evidence 
of  fraud.^^  Whether  a  transaction  was  in  the  usual  and  ordinary 
course  of  business  is  usually  a  question  of  f act,^  but  it  may  be  a 
question  of  law  under  some  circumstances.^*  The  former  federal 
bankruptcy  act  declared  prima  facie  fraudulent  sales,  assignments, 
transfers,  or  conveyances  Aot  made  in  the  usual  and  ordinary 
course  of  business  of  the  debtor,  and  this  provision  was  oonstrued 
and  applied  in  many  cases  cited  in  the  note  below. ^^ 


71.— Read  ▼.  Moodj,  60  Vt  668,  16 
Atl.  846,  where  defendant* 8  son  called 
on  him  at  an  earlj  hour  in  the  morn- 
ing and  handed  him  certain  notes, 
without  anj  explanation  or  direction 
as  to  their  use,  simply  sajing  that 
he  had  sold  out  and  was  going 
away,  the  transfer  was  not  in 
the  usual  course  of  business  and 
consequently  presumptively  fraudu- 
lent. 

Can. — ^Upper  Canada  Bank  ▼• 
Beatty,  9  Grant  Gh.  321. 

Compare  Reeves  v.  John,  96  Tenn. 
434,  32  S.  W.  312,  where  the  convey- 
ance was  made  to  secure  6ona  fide 
debts. 

14.  Bliss  V.  Crosier,  169  Mass.  498, 
34  N.  B.  1076;  Killam  v.  Pierce,  153 
Mass.  620,  27  N.  E.  620 ;  Nary  v.  Mer- 
rill, 8  Allen  (Mass.),  461;  Read  v. 
Moody,  60  Vt.  668,  15  Atl.  346,  it 
must  appear  that  the  transaction  was 
not  according  to  the  usual  and  ordi- 
nary course  of  business  of  the  par- 
ticular person  whose  conveyance  is  in 
question. 

15.  Bliss  V.  Crosier,  •upra;  Leigh- 
ton  V.  Morrill,  169  Mass.  271,  34  N. 
E.  266;  Killam  v.  Pierce,  supra; 
Peabody  v.  Knapp,  163  Mass.  242,  20 
^.  £.  696;  Bridges  v.  Miles,  162  Mass. 
249,  26  N.  E.  249;  Stevens  v.  Pierce, 


147  Mass.  610,  18  N.  E.  411;  Buffum 
V.  Jones,  144  Mass.  29,  10  N.  E.  471; 
Alden  v.  Marsh,  97  Mass.  160;  State 
V.  Merritt,  70  Mo.  276. 

16.  Walbrun  v.  Babbitt,  16  Wall. 
(U.  S.)  677,  21  L.  Ed.  489;  Naiy  v. 
Merrill,  8  Allen  (Mass.)  461. 

17.  Walbrun  v.  Babbitt,  supra; 
Judson  V.  Courier  Co.,  16  Fed.  641; 
Nisbet  V.  Quinn,  7  Fed.  760;  Norton 
V.  Billings,  4  Fed.  623;  Brooks  v. 
Davis,  4  Fed.  Cas.  No.  1,950;  Davis 
V.  Armstrong,  7  Fed.  Cas.  No.  3,624; 
Graham  v.  Stark,  10  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
6,676,  3  Ben.  620;  In  re  Hunt,  12  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  6,881;  Hurley  v.  Smith, 
12  Fed.  Cas.  No.  6,920,  1  Hask.  308; 
Judson  V.  Kelty,  14  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
7,567,  5  Ben.  348;  In  re  Kahley,  14 
Fed.  Cas.  No.  7,693,  2  Biss.  383; 
Main  v.  Glen,  16  Fed.  Cas.  No.  8,973, 
7  Biss.  86;  Moore  v.  Young,  17  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  9,782,  4  Biss.  128;  North  v. 
House,  18  Fed.  Cas.  No.  10,310; 
RiBon  V.  Knapp,  20  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
11,861,  1  Dill.  187;  Sehrenkeisen  v. 
Miller,  21  Fed.  Cas.  No.  12,480,  9 
Ben.  55;  Webb  v.  Sachs,  29  Fed.  Cas. 
No.  17,325,  4  Sawy.  168;  Wilson  v. 
Stoddard,  30  Fed.  Gas.  No.  17,838; 
Ecker  v.  McAllister,  46  Md.  290,  54 
Md.  362;  Otis  v.  Hadley,  112  Mass. 
100. 


Badges  of  Fsaub. 


259 


§  20.  Other  circumstances  indicating  fraud. — ^Various  other 
oircumfitances  have  been  held  by  the  courts  to  be  indicative  of 
fraud  as  against  creditors,  such  as  the  failure  of  the  purchaser  to 
take  an  inyentory,  invoice^  or  appraisement  of  the  goods  bought;^ 
or  to  examine  them;^*  insufficient  description  or  misdescription  of 
the  property  transferred;*^  conoealmeint  of  an  alteration  in  the 
« attestation  of  the  conveyance  ;'^  a  demand  that  two-thirds  of  the 
price  should  at  once  be  paid  in  cash  ;^  payment  by  check  which 
was  afterwards  taken  up  by  giving  money  and  a  note;^  a  trans- 
action in  the  form  of  a  cash  sale  of  real  estate^  followed  a  few 
days  later  by  the  payment  of  an  unsecured  note  due  by  the  vendor 
to  the  vendee;^  the  fact  that  the  notes  given  are  made  payable  to 
a  relative  of  the  grantor  living  in  a  distant  state;"  the  fact  that 
the  purchaser  offered  soon  after  the  sale  to  resell  the  property 
bought  at  a  much  less  price;"  the  fact  that  the  grantee  was  the 


18.  Chamberlain  t.  Dorranoe,  69 
Ala.  40;  Adler-Goldman  Commission 
Co.  T.  Hathcock,  65  Ark.  679,  18  S. 
W.  1048;  J.  S.  Brittain  Dry  Goods 
Co.  ▼.  Plowman,  113  Iowa,  624,  85  K. 
W.  810;  Kolander  v.  Dunn,  95  Minn. 
422,  104  N.  W.  371,  483,  the  statute 
providing  that  a  sale  of  a  stock  of 
merchandise  in  gross  will  be  deemed 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  unless  an 
inventory  is  made  and  notice  given, 
does  no  apply  to  a  sale  of  fixtures;  Ir- 
win Phillips  ft  Co.  V.  Rule  (Mo.  App. 
1907),  102  S.  W.  32;  St.  Louis  Brew- 
ing Assoc.  V.  Steimke,  68  Mo.  App.  52; 
Rusho  V.  Richardson  (Neb.  1906), 
109  N.  W.  394;  Blum  v.  Simpson,  66 
Tex.  84,  17  S.  W.  402.  But  see  Nel- 
son V.  Smith,  28  111.  495. 

19.  Schaungut  v.  Udell,  93  Ala. 
302,  9  So.  550. 

20.  Rodenberg  v.  H.  B.  Claflin  Co. 
104  Ala.  660,  16  So.  448,  a  bill  of 
sale;  H.  B.  Claflin  ft  Co.  v.  Roden- 
berg, 101  Ala.  213,  13  So.  272;  Du- 
van  V.  Waters,  1  Bland  (Md.),  569, 


18  Am.  Dec.  350,  conveyanoe  of  land, 
plantation  utensils,  furniture,  etc.; 
Lang  V.  Lee,  3  Rand.  (Va.)  410. 
Compare  Jones  v.  Sleeper,  18  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  7,496;  McCain  v.  Wood,  4 
Ala.  258;  Carr  v.  Brigg,  166  Mass.  78, 
30  N.  £.  470,  where  the  property  in 
a  chattel  mortgage  given  by  a  firm 
was  not  described  as  the  property  of 
the  firm  the  mortgage  is  good  as 
against  subsequent  attaching  cred- 
itors; Judge  V.  Houston,  34  N.  C.  108» 
the  fact  that  a  deed  includes  more 
land  than  was  sold  is  not  a  badge  of 
fraud. 

21.  Hoffer  v.  Gladden,  75  Qa.  532. 

22.  Adler-Goldman  Commission 
Co.  V.  Hathcock,  55  Ark.  579, 18  S.  W. 
1048. 

23.  Schaungut  v.  Udell,  93  Ala. 
302,  9  So.  550. 

24.  New  Orleans  Add,  etc,  Co.  v.  0. 
Guillory  ft  Co.  (La.  1906),  42  So.  320. 

25.  Blum  V.  Simpson,  66  Tex.  84, 
17  S.  W.  402. 

26.  Hodges  v.  Coleman,  76  Ala.  103. 


260 


FbAUDULBNT   CONVEYAITGES. 


grantor's  mother  and  a  non-resident;*'  the  fact  that  the  convey^ 
ance  was  so  made  as  to  concentrate  the  property  in  the  debtor's 
two  son»-in-Iaw^  who  had  no  use  for  the  property  and  never  applied 
it  to  their  persaual  use;^  the  fact  that  but  little,  if  any,  of  the 
property  transferred  had  been  assessed  for  taxes  against  the 
vendee  ;^  the  fact  that  notes  had  not  been  actually  executed  at  the 
time  of  the  making  of  a  mortgage  to  secure  them,  but  were  made 
subsequently  so  as  to  correspond  with  the  mortgage  f^  the  fact  that 
the  grantor  in  a  conveyance  delivers  the  same  to  the  recorder  for 
the  purpose  of  having  such  deed  recorded  f^  and  the  fact  that  a 
grantor  keeps  his  other  property  inaccessible  to  his  creditors.** 
On  the  contrary,  an  erroneous  recital  of  what  a  part  of  the  con- 
sideration for  the  conveyance  consisted  of  has  been  held  not  to  be 
a  badge  of  fraud,**  and  the  employment  of  the  vendor  on  a  salaiy 
by  the  vendee  is  held  not  to  be  necessarily  evidence  of  fraud  in  a 
transfer.*^  An  agreement  between  a  debtor  and  a  creditor  that  the 
former  will  give  the  latter  a  mortgage  when  demanded  to  secure 
his  indebtedness,**  or  the  fact  that  an  attorney  who  thinks  he  knows 
the  title,  having  confidence  in  the  vendor,  purchases  real  proper^ 
without  an  abstract  or  examination  of  title,**  does  not  indicate  * 
fraud  as  to  creditors.  And  where  a  creditor,  to  whom  property  is 
conveyed  in  payment  of  a  bona  fide  debt,  about  a  year  after  the 


27.  Behan  ▼.  Warfield,  00  Ky.  151, 
11  Ky.  L.  Rep.  960,  13  S.  W.  439. 

88.  Herrin  ▼.  Morford,  9  Dana 
(Ky.)  450. 

29.  Glenn  ▼.  Olenn,  17  Iowa,  498. 

80.  Prior  v.  White,  12  HI.  261. 

31.  Ward  v.  Wehman,  27  Iowa,  279. 
Compare  Kason  ▼.  Franklin,  58  Iowa, 
506,  12  N.  W.  564. 

3S.  Cohen  ▼.  Parish,  100  Ga.  335, 
28  S.  E.  122. 

33.  Strop  V.  Hnghes  (Mo.  App. 
1907),  101  S.  W.  146,  149. 

34.  McKenzie  v.  Thomas,  118  Ga. 
728,  45  S.  E.  610;  Reed  ▼.  Wilson,  22 
HI.  377,  74  Am.  Dec.  159;  Brown  t. 
Riley,  22  111.  45;  Pease  v.  Dawson, 


97  ni.  App.  620;  Blakely  Printing 
Co.  ▼.  Pease,  95  111.  App.  341;  Mc- 
Cord  ▼.  Gilbert,  64  111.  App.  233;  Jones 
T.Whitbread,  11  C.B.406,15  Jur.612, 
20  L.  J.  C.  P.  217,  73  B.  C.  L.  406. 

Whether  the  Tmdee'a  eaploj- 
nm&t  of  a  clerk  of  the  Temdor  is 
a  badge  of  fraud  depends  npon  the 
circumstances  of  the  case.  Ivanoorich 
V.  Stem,  14  Nev*.  341.  See  also  Paunee 
▼.  Lesley,  6  Pfc.  St.  121. 

35.  Foster  ▼.  McAlester,  114  Fed. 
145,  52  C.  C.  A.  107.  See  also  Groet- 
zinger  ▼.  Wyman,  105  Iowa,  674,  75 
N.  W.  612. 

36.  Jenkins  v.  Einstein,  14  Fed. 
Cas.  Ko.  7,265,  8  Biss.  128. 


Badoss  of  Fbattb.  261 

conveyfoioe  denuaids,  as  a  condition  of  selling  snch  property  to  an 
unsecured  creditor,  that  he  be  reimbursed  for  expenses  incident  to 
the  transfer,  including  a  loan  later  made  to  the  debtor,  and  attor- 
ney's fees  necessitated  by  proceedings  brought  by  the  unsecured 
creditor  in  relation  to  the  property  so  conveyed,  it  does  not  indicate 
that  the  original  conveyance  "was  fraudulent^  But,  as  is  shown 
elsewhere,"  fraud  as  against  creditors  in  the  sale  of  property  must 
be  clearly  and  distinctly  proved,  and  cannot  be  assumed  on  doubt- 
ful evidence  or  circumstances  of  suspicion,  or  from  the  fact  that 
the  dealing  was  not  perfectly  clear.** 

§  21.  Repelling  badges  of  fraud — Signs  or  badges  of  fraud 
as  against  creditors  in  a  conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  by  a 
debtor  are  repelled  by  showing  that  a  full  consideration  was  paid 
for  the  property,  but  the  proof  of  fairness  would  be  more  stringent 
than  if  such  badges  of  fraud  did  not  exist.^  Where  numerous 
signs  or  badges  of  fraud  exist  it  is  incumbent  on  the  party  seeking 
to  uphold  the  transfer  to  meet  and  overcome  them.^ 

87.  (yConnor  T.  Dooen,  60  App.  Div.  National  Furniture  Co.  (Va.  1006), 
(N.  Y.)  610,  64  N.  Y.  Supp.  206^  66  S.  E.  679. 

38.  See  Evidence,  chap.  XVII,  40.  Sbealy  t.  Edwards,  75  Ala. 
infra.  411;  Terrell  ▼.  Green,  11  Ala.  807. 

89.  Harrisonbarg  Hamees  Co.  t.         41.  Trice  v.  Boee,  79  Oa.  75,  8  8. 

E.  701. 


262 


FsA.VDnL£KT   O0IXTEXASCE&. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

Ifdbbtbdnsss  or  Iksolveitct  of  Obaktob. 

Beetton   1.  Effect  of  indebtednesB  of  grantor  upon  conveyances  for  ▼aluable 
cooBideration. 

2.  Effect  of  indebtedness  of  grantor  upon  Toluntary  conveyancea. 

3.  What  constitutes  indebtedness. 

4.  Payment  or  provision  for  payment  of  debts  by  grantor. 

6.  Assumption  and  payment  of  debts  by  grantor. 

0.  Effect  of   insolvency  of  grantor  upon  conveyances   for   valuable 
consideration. 

7.  Effect  of  insolvency  of  grantor  upon  voluntary  conveyances. 

8.  What  constitutes  insolvency. 

9.  Retention  of  property  sufficient  to  pay  debts. 

10.  Effect  of  insolvency  subsequent  to  transfer. 

11.  Executory  contract  or  gift  consummated  after  insolvency. 

12.  Insolvency  at  time  suit  is  brou^t. 


SeotioDi  1.  Effect  of  indebtedness  of  grantor  upon  conve]rance 
for  valuable  consideration. — ^Where  a  transfer  of  property  is 
made  for  a  valuable  consideration,  it  will  not  be  preeumed  to  be 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  from  the  mere  fact  that  the  grantor  was 
indebted  to  another  person  at  the  tima^  A  person,  though  in 
debt,  may  sell  his  property  to  any  one  he  pleases,  for  an  honest 
and  fair  consideration.  If  the  transaction  is  an  honest  one,  made 
in  good  faith,  and  for  an  adequate  consideration,  it  matters  not 
how  many  creditors  may  be  prevented  thereby  from  reaching  the 
property.*     The  fact  that  the  grantor  was  in  debt  will  not  of 


1.  Mercantile  Excb.  Bank  v.  Tay- 
lor (Fla.  1906),  41  So.  22;  Nelson  v. 
Smith,  28  111.  495;  Waddams  v. 
Humphrey,  22  111.  661;  Faringer  v. 
Ramsay,  4  Md.  Ch.  33;  Missouri  Lead 
Min.,  etc..  Go.  v.  Reinhard,  114  Mo. 
218,  35  Am.  St.  Rep.  746,  21  S.  W. 
4«8;  Willis  v.  Whitsitt,  67  Tex.  673, 
4  8.  W.  253. 

2.  Hessing  v.   McCloekey,   37   111. 


341 ;  Arundell  v.  Phipps,  10  Ves.  Jr. 
139,  32  Eng.  Reprint,  797,  a  pur- 
chase by  a  married  wmnan  from  her 
husband,  through  the  medium  of  trus- 
tees, for  her  separate  use  and  appoint- 
ment, may  be  sustained  against  credi- 
tors,  if  bona  fide,  although  the  hus- 
band is  indebted  at  the  time;  aad 
even  though  the  object  is  to  preserve 
from  his  creditors  for  the  family  the 


Ikdebteditess  OB  Insolvenot  of  Obaktob. 


263 


itaelf  invalidate  the  sale^  although  the  purchaser  may  have  known 
that  fact  at  the  time  of  purchasing.'  Where  all  the  circumstances 
surrounding  the  sale  of  the  property  of  one  corporation  to  another 
show  that  the  transfer  was  made  in  good  faith,  the  failure  to  pro- 
vide for  the  payment  of  a  contested  claim  does  not  wurrant  the 
condusion  that  such  transfer  was  made  to  defraud  creditors*^ 
Neither  the  pecuniary  embarrassment  nor  the  actual  insolvenqy 
of  a  husband  is  any  obstacle  to  a  transfer  by  a  husband  to  the 
wife,  in  good  faith,  for  the  replacing  of  her  money  or  property 
used  or  alienated  by  him.^  In  case  of  an  absolute  and  uncon- 
ditional sale  of  goods,  the  fact  that  the  vendor  was  indebted  at 
the  time,  that  the  sale  was  on  credit,  and  that  the  notes  taken- 
for  the  unpaid  price  were  to  be  used  in  the  payment  of  his 
debts,  will  not  establish  fraud  in  the  sale,  as  to  creditors.*  But 
a  conveyance  of  personal  property,  by  a  debtor  in  embarrassed 
circumstances,  for  the  purpose,  known  to  the  purchaser,  of  se- 
curing the  same  from  execution  or  attachment,  is  void  as  against 
creditors,  although  the  debtor,  at  the  time,  believed  that  such  con- 
veyance was  for  the  benefit  of  his  creditors,  and  intended  that 
his  creditors  should  ultimately  be  paid.^ 

§  2.  Effect  of  indebtedness  of  grantor  upon  voluntary  con- 
veyance* — A  voluntary  conveyance  by  one  indebted  at  the  time 
is  presumptively  or  prima  facie  fraudulent.'     Indebtedness  on 


subject  of  the  pureliase,  such  as  an- 
cient family  pictures,  furniture  and 
other  articles,  of  a  peculiar  nature 
and  value. 

3.  DaTis  ▼.  Qetchell,  32  Neb.  792, 
49  N.  W.  776. 

4.  Missouri  Lead  Min.,  etc.,  Co.  v. 
Reinhard,  114  Mo.  218,  35  Am.  St. 
Rep.  746,  215  W.  488. 

5.  Lehman  v.  Levy,  30  La.  Ann. 
746;  Hume  ft  W.  Co.  v.  Condon,  44 
W.  Va.  653,  30  S.  E.  56;  Adams  ▼. 
Irwin,  44  W.  Va.  740,  30  S.  B.  59,  a 
husband  may  return  his  wife  a  loan 
of  money  augmented  by  a  portion  of 


the  profits  of  a  business  conducted  by 
him,  if  he  retains  an  amount  of  tan- 
gible property  largely  in  excess  of 
his  Just  indebtedness. 

6.  Miller  v.  Kirby,  74  111.  242. 

7.  Hall  V.  Frith,  51  Misc.  Rep.  (K. 
Y.)  600,  101  N.  Y.  Supp.  31;  Kim- 
ball ▼.  Thompson,  4  Cush.  (Mass.) 
441,  50  Am.  Dec.  799. 

8.  N.  r.— Smith  v.  Reid,  134  N.  Y. 
568,  31  N.  E.  1082;  Lawrence  Bros.  v. 
Heylman,  98  N.  Y.  Supp.  121;  Cole 
T.  l^ler,  65  N.  Y.  78;  Dunlap  v.  Haw- 
kins, 59  N.  Y.  346;  Erickson  y.  Quinn, 
47  K.  Y.  410;  Seward  t.  Jackson,  S 


264 


FbAUDULBNT   CoirVEYANOBS. 


the  part  of  thJe  grantor  at  the  time  of  the  convejanoe  is  evidenod 
of  fraud.'  But  mere  indebtedness  of  the  grantor  at  ibe  time 
of  Tnakiug  a  voluntary  conveyance  "will  not  render  it  fraudulent 
as  to  creditors.^^    The  question  of  fraud  is  to  be  ascertained  from 


Cow.  406.  In  Cole  ▼.  Tjrler,  66  N.  Y. 
73,  78,  the  court  say:  "  It  was  at  one 
time  the  role  that  a  voluntary  conv^- 
anoe  bj  one  indebted  at  the  time  waa 
fraudulent  as  a  matter  of  law  towards 
his  creditors.  No  evidence  was  al- 
lowed to  rebut  the  presumption  of 
fraud.  Beade  v.  Livingston,  3  Johns. 
Ch.  481,  8  Am.  Deo.  520.  This  rule 
was  subsequently  deemed  to  be  too 
severe  by  the  courts,  and  the  less 
stringent  rule  was  adopted  that  while 
a  conveyance  by  a  person  indebted 
was  presumptively  or  prima  facie 
fraudulent,  the  presumption  might  be 
rebutted  by  proof  to  the  contrary. 
Seward  v.  Jackson,  8  Cow.  406.  This 
presumption,  however,  is  not  to  be 
overthrown  by  mere  evidence  of  good 
intent  or  generous  impulses  or  feel- 
ings. It  must  be  overcome  by  circum- 
stances showing  on  their  face  that 
there  could  have  been  no  bad  intent, 
such  as  that  the  gift  was  a  reason- 
able provision  and  that  the  debtor 
still  retained  sufficient  means  to  pay 
his  debts.  He  can  no  more  delay  his 
creditors  by  such  voluntary  convey- 
ance than  he  can  actually  defraud 
them.  Carpenter  v.  Roe,  10  N.  T. 
230;  Babcock  v.  Eckler,  24  N.  Y.  623; 
Pygert  V.  Bemerschnider,  32  N.  T. 
648;  Curtis  v.  Fox,  47  N.  Y.  300." 

V,  8, — Gilmore  v.  North  America 
Land  Co.,  10  Fed.  Cas.  No.  6,448,  Pet. 
C.  C.  460. 

Ala.— Hubbard  v.  Allen,  60  Ala. 
283. 

Md, — Goodman  v.  Wineland,  61  Md. 
449. 

Ifo.— Patten  v.  Caaey^  67  Mo.  118. 


Fa.— Wilson  v.  Bnchanao,  7  Qratt. 
(Va.)  334. 

il7np.^8carf  v.  Soulby,  19  L,  J.  Ch. 
30,  13  Jur.  1109,  1  HaU  ft  T.  426,  1 
Macn.  ft  G.  364,  47  Eng.  Ch.  293,  41 
Eng.  Reprint,  1306. 

9.  U.  £r.— Hudgins  y%  Kemp,  61  U. 
S.  46,  15  L.  Ed.  863. 

Ala.— Harkina  v.  Bailey,  48  Ala. 
376. 

Ind. — Geisendorff  v.  Eagles,  106 
Ind.  38,  5  N.  E.  743;  Hubbs  v.  Ban- 
croft, 4  Ind.  388. 

if  e.— French  v.  Holmes,  67  Me.  186. 

if d.— Worthington  v.  Bullitt,  6  Md. 
172. 

Misa. — ^Edmonson  v.  Meaefaam,  50 
Miss.  34. 

Mo. — ^Woodson  v.  Pool,  19  Mo.  340; 
Hastings  v.  Crossland,  13  Mo.  App. 
592. 

8.  (7.— Gruber  v.  Bqyies,  1  Brew. 
266,  2  Am.  Dec.  665. 

Tev.— Reynolds  v.  Lansford,  16  Tex. 
286. 

W.  Fa.— Hume  ft  W.  Co.  v.  Condon, 
44  W.  Va.  553,  30  6.  E.  56. 

10.  N.  r.— Wadleigh  v.  Wadleigh, 
111  App.  Div.  367,  97  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1063;  Spicer  v.  Ayers,  53  How.  Pr. 
405;  Van  Wyck  v.  Seward,  6  Paige, 
62. 

G^.— Clayton  v.  Brown,  17  Ga.  217. 
/K.— Bittinger  v.  Kasten,  111  lU. 
260. 

/nd.— Hubbs  v.  Bancroft,  4  Ind. 
388;  Ritchey  v.  McKay  (App.  1905), 
75  N.  E.  161,  an  intent  to  defraud 
creditors  is  no  ground  for  setting 
aside  a  conveyance  where  the  grantor 
was  solvent. 


Ikdebtednsss  OB  Inbolvengt  07  Obantob. 


265 


all  the  circTunstfoices  of  the  case,  and  not  alone  from  the  mere 
fact  of  indebtment  at  the  time.^  The  existence  of  indebted- 
ness at  the  time  is  only  prima  facie  evidence  of  f raud.^  A  volun- 
tary conveyance,  executed  by  a  person  largely  indebted  at  the 
time,  is  void  as  against  creditors.^  A  trifling  indebtedness  will 
not  avoid  a  conveyance  for  fraud.^^  Where  a  debtor  makes  a 
gift  of  such  an  amount  of  his  property  as  leaves  him  without 
sufiSci^it  property  to  pay  his  debts  or  as  must  necessarily  hinder, 
delay  or  defraud  his  creditors,  in  legal  contemplation,  he  intends 
to  defraud,  as  he  deliberately  does  an  act  which  hinders  his 
creditors.^  But  intentional  fraud  must  appear  and  the  prior 
indebtedness  is  but  evidence  of  fraud,  and  may  be  rebutted  by 
proof.^*  Fraudulent  intent  is  not  sufficiently  proved  by  showing 
large  indebtedness,  without  also  showing  inability  to  discharge 
it."    A  voluntary  conveyance  by  a  debtor,  who,  although  not  in- 


Ifd.— Atkinson  t.  Phillips,  1  Md. 
Cb.  507. 

JfoM.— Thacher  ▼.  Phinnej,  80 
Mass.  146;  Oreen  v.  Tanner,  49^  Mass. 
411. 

ififtft.— Filley  v.  Begister,  4  Minn. 
391. 

Ifiss.— Cowen  v.  Alsop,  61  Miss. 
168. 

Ifo.— Welch  ▼.  Mann,  193  Mo.  304, 
92  S.  W.  98,  if  after  the  oonTeyanoe 
he  still  has  ample  means  to  pay  his 
debts;  Buckner  t.  Stine,  48  Mo.  407; 
Hickey  ▼.  Ryan,  16  Mo.  63. 

Pa.-^Mateer  v.  Hissim,  3  Pen.  ft  W. 
160. 

11.  Atkinson  ▼.  Phillips,  1  Md.  Ch. 

607. 

12.  Neal  y.  Foster,  36  Fed.  29; 
Driggs  ft  Co.'s  Bank  ▼.  Norwood.  60 
Ark.  42,  7  Am.  St.  Kep.  78,  6  S.  W. 
323;  Williams  v.  Banks,  11  Md.  198; 
Baxter  v.  Sewell,  3  Md.  334;  Sewell 
V.  Baxter,  2  Md.  Ch.  447 ;  Worthing- 
ton  V.  Shipley,  6  Gill.  (Md.)  449; 
Walsh  V. Byrnes  (MinD.), 40  N. W.  831. 


18.  £y.— -Mareum  ▼.  Powers,  10 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  380,  9  S.  W.  266;  Hall  v. 
Edrington,  47  Ky.  47. 

if  <!.— Worthingtcm  ▼.  Bullitt,  6  Md. 
172. 

Jfo. — ^Bohamion  v.  Combs,  79  Mo. 
306. 

8,  O.— Hndnal  ▼.  Wilder,  4  MoCord, 
294,  17  Am.  Dec.  744;  Iley  v.  Nis- 
wanger,  1  MeCord  Eq.  618. 

14.  N.  T. — Jackson  ▼.  Peek,  4 
Wend.  300. 

Mioh. — ^Page  t.  Eendrick,  10  Mich. 
300. 

8.  C, — ^Richardson  v.  Rhodus,  14 
Rich.  L.  96;  Hudnal  ▼.  Teasdall,  1 
McCord,  227,  10  Am.  Dee.  671. 

Va. — Irvine  ▼.  Greever,  32  Gratt. 
411. 

15.  Whitehouse  ▼.  Bolster,  96  Me. 
468,  60  Atl.  240;  Gardiner  Sav.  Inst. 
V.  Emerson,  91  Me.  636,  40  Atl.  461. 

16.  Wicks  ▼.  Clarke,  3  Edw.  Ch. 
(N.  Y.)  .68. 

17.  Loeschigk  ▼.  Hatfield,  28  N.  Y. 
Snper.  Ct.  26,  atfd  61  N.  Y.  660. 


266 


Fraubulbnt  Convbyavoes. 


golveiii't  or  80  much  involved  as  to  reader  the  residue  of  his 
estate  insufficient  to  pay  his  debts,  is  involved  to  an  extent  whidi 
might  in  view  of  ordinary  contingencies  endanger  the  rij^ts  of 
his  creditors,  is  constructively  fraudulent  both  a6  to  pre-existing 
and  subsequent  creditors.  ^^  To  render  a  voluntary  conveyance 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors  because  of  indebtedness,  it 
must  be  shown  that  the  grantor  was  heavily  indebted  at  the 
time,^  or  to  such  an  extent  that  the  conveyance  had  a  direct 
tendency  to  impair  the  rights  of  creditors.*^  Only  dear  solvency 
in  the  sense  of  adequacy  of  assets,  if  sold  under  execntioa  to 
satisfy  debts,  will  uphold  a  voluntary  conveyance,  as  against  pre- 
existing debts.^ 

§  3.  What  constitutes  indebtedness. — ^A  party  bound  by  a 
contract  up<ML  which  he  may  become  liable  for  the  payment  of 
money,  is  a  debtor  within  the  meaning  of  the  statute  avoiding 
all  grants  made  to  hinder  or  delay  creditors,  althou^  his  liability 
be  contingent.^     The  undertaking  of  an  endorser  of  a  note  is 


18.  Crary  ▼.  Kurts  (Iowa,  1905), 
105  N.  W.  690;  Lowry  ▼.  Fisher,  2 
Bush.  (Ey.)  70,  92  Am.  Dee.  475; 
Parkman  y.  Welch,  36  Mass.  231; 
Nelson  ▼.  Buchanan,  7  Gratt.  (Va.) 
334. 

19.  Eehr  v.  Smith,  87  U.  S.  31, 

22  L.  Ed.  313. 

20.  Lloyd  ▼.  Fulton,  91  U.  S.  479, 

23  L.  Ed.  363;  Patrick  ▼.  Patrick,  77 
111.  656;  Brioe  ▼.  Myers,  6  Ohio,  121. 

As  to  svlisettmeat  cveditov- — 
Defendant's  conveyance  of  property 
to  a  relative,  made  before  he  became 
indebted  to  plaintiff,  and  with  plain- 
tiff's knowledge,  at  a  time  when  there 
is  no  proof  showing  defendant  was 
insolvent,  could  not  be  fraudulent  as 
to  plaintiff.  Lowther  v.  Rader,  102 
N.  Y.  Supp.  929. 

21.  Vandeventer  v.  Goes,  116  Mo. 
App.  316,  91  S.  W.  958. 


22.  2^.  7. — ^Toung  ▼.  Heermans, 
N.  Y.  374;  Van  Wyck  ▼.  Seward,  IS 
Wend.  376. 

17.  8. — ^Thompson  v.  Crane,  73  Fed. 
327. 

Afo.— Wooten  ▼.  Steele,  109  Ala. 
663,  19  So.  972;  Yeeod  t.  Weeks,  104 
AU.  331,  16  So.  166. 

Mi89. — ^Ames  ▼.  Dorroh,  76  Ifiss. 
187,  23  So.  768. 

JTo.^Welch  ▼.  Mann,  193  Mo.  304, 
92  6.  W.  98,  the  indebtedness  acemes 
when  the  contingent  liability  is  in- 
curred. 

N.  J.— Schmidt  v.  Opie,  38  N.  J. 
Eq.  138 ;  Post  ▼.  Stiger,  29  N.  J.  Eq. 
654. 

OAto.— Jones  ▼.  Leeds,  7  Ohio  N.  P. 
480,  10  Ohio  S.  ft  P.  Dec.  173. 

Ptt.— Shonts  V.  Brown,  27  Pa.  183. 
But  see  Henderson  ▼.  Dodd,  1  Bailey 
Eq.  (S.  C.)  138. 


l9D£BTEDirE88  OB  InBOLVBNCY  OF  ObAHTOB. 


267 


Aifficient  to  establish  the  relation  of  debtor  and  creditor  within 
the  meaning  of  the  statute  against  fraudulent  oonveyanoes,  and 
the  endorser  is  as  much  prohibited  from  making  a  voluntarj 
conrejance  as  if  he  were  the  principal"  The  rule  is  the  same 
as  to  an  accommodation  endorser.^  Where  one  is  surety  on  an 
official  bond  the  condition  of  which  is  broken,  he  is  indebted, 
so  as  to  render  a  voluntary  conveyance  void  for  fraud.*^  The 
execution  of  a  bond  as  surety  creates  a  present  indebtedness,  so 
as  to  render  the  surety's  voluntary  conveyance,  without  considera- 
tion, of  his  estate,  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  obligee,  even 
thou^  the  condition  of  the  bond  was  not  broken  nor  judgment 
rendered  thereon  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance."    One  whose 


28.  JNLTmtn^  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Th<mi- 
flon,  74  Vt.  442,  62  Atl.  061,  and  the 
fact  that  the  maker  of  the  note  was 
coneidered  responsible  when  the  en- 
dorser made  the  eonveyanoe  does  ifbt 
aflTeet  the  character  of  the  transac- 
tion. See  alao  Pulsifer  ▼.  Waterman, 
73  Me.  233 ;  Thacher  t.  Jones,  31  Me. 
528. 

S4.  Primrose  ▼.  Browning,  56  Ga. 
369;  Williams  ▼.  Banks,  11  Md.  198; 
Post  ▼.  Stiger,  29  N.  J.  Eq.  554;  Gook 
T.  Johnson,  12  N.  J.  Eq.  51,  72  Am. 
Dee.  381. 

25.  Baj  ▼.  Ckwk,  31  111.  336.  But  a 
suitable  settlement  of  real  estate  upon 
a  wife  will  not  be  set  aside  where  the 
grantor  subsequently  contracted  a 
liability  as  surety,  the  grantor  being 
solvent  when  it  was  made,  and  there 
being  no  evidence  tending  to  show 
fraud.  Crawford  v.  Logan,  97  111. 
396. 

Bvidoaoo  la  adadsalblo  that  at 
the  time  of  the  conveyance  the 
grantor  was  liable  in  a  large  amount 
as  surety  on  another's  bond.  Sharp 
V.  Hicks,  94  Ga.  624,  21  S.  E.  208. 

26.  Bowen  v.  State,  121  Ind.  235, 
23  N.  E.  75,  conveyance  by  a  surety 
on   a  guardian's   bond;    Carlisle   t. 


Bich,  8  N.  H.  44;  In  re  Appeal 
Surety,  5  Ohio  8.  ft  C.  P.  Dec.  571,  7 
Ohio  N.  P.  688;  Eerber  v.  Ruff,  4 
Ohio  S.  ft  C.  P.  Dec.  406,  3  Ohio  N.  P. 
165,  a  surety  on  an  appeal  bond  is  a 
debtor,  within  the  meaning  of  a 
statute  prohibiting  the  conveyance  of 
property  in  fraud  of  creditors;  Bus* 
sell  V.  Stinson,  4  Tenn.  1.  But  see 
Fales  V.  Thompson,  1  Mass.  134,  hold- 
ing that  where  one,  as  surety,  entered 
into  a  rule  of  reference,  he  did  not 
become  indebted,  so  as  to  render  a 
conveyance  fraudulent  as  to  creditors, 
until  after  judgment  on  the  rule. 

WbMw  Bi«rtcac«A  Immd  ooaati* 
tmtoa  a  prkmmrf  f«md«r— Where  a 
bond  executed  by  father  and  son  for 
the  purpose  of  raising  money  to  start 
the  son  in  business  was  secured  by  a 
mortgage  on  the  father's  real  estate, 
and  the  money  so  received  was  a  gift 
by  the  father  to  the  son,  as  the  son 
was  merely  surety,  and  the  primary 
charge  was  <m  the  land,  the  liability 
of  the  son  did  not  go  to  increase  his 
indebtedness  in  determining  the  ques- 
tion of  his  insolvency,  in  an  action  by 
creditors  to  set  aside  as  fraudulent  a 
gift  by  him  to  his  mother.  In  re  Bab- 
ooek,  12  St.  Bep.  (K.  Y.)  841. 


268 


Fbavdulent  CoKYEYAirOSS. 


liability  as  a  guarantor  is  contingent  merely  until  after  the  con- 
veyanoe  is  indebted,  within  the  statute  for  the  protection  of  credi- 
tors from  fraudulent  conveyances.*^  But  where  the  debt  for 
which  one  was  liable  as  surety  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance 
was  subsequently  paid  by  the  principal,  the  surety's  liability 
therefor  should  not  be  considered  as  a  debt  in  determining  the 
question  of  his  insolvenqy.^  An  individual  indebtedness  subse- 
quently incurred  in  substitution  of  a  partnership  indebtedness 
is  not  such  an  indebtedness  as  will  vitiate  a  previous  marriage 
settlement.^  A  voluntary  conveyance  by  a  husband  to  his  wife, 
subject  to  a  lien  for  purchase  money  due  his  grantor,  is  not 
void  as  to  his  subsequent  creditors,  where  such  lien  was  the  only 
debt  owing  by  the  grantor.'^  A  grantor  will  not  be  considered  to 
have  been  a  debtor  to  a  person  who  at  the  time  of  the  convey- 
ance was  his  judgment  debtor  but  who  subsequently  sued  him 
and  recovered  judgment  for  money  paid  under  false  repres^ita- 
tions.*^  A  voluntary  conveyance  may  be  valid,  thougjh  the 
grantor  is  indebted,  if  the  precedent  debts  are  provided  for  in 
the  conveyance,'*  or  sufficiently  secured  at  the  time.** 

§  4.  Pasnnent  or  provision  for  payment  of  debts  by  grantor. 
—Where  the  conveyance  itself  provides  for  the  payment  of  all 
existing  debts,  and  such  debts  are  actually  paid  in  pursuance  of 
it,  or  where  the  debtor  subsequently  i>ays  and  discharges  all 
his  debts  existing  at  the  time  he  made  the  conveyance^  the  con- 


27.  Jackson  ▼.  Seward,  5  Cow.  (K. 
Y.)  67.  See  also  In  re  Ridler,  22  Ch. 
Div.  74,  62  L.  J.  Ch.  343,  48  L.  T. 
Bep.  N.  S.  396,  31  Wkly.  Rep.  93. 
But  the  guarantor  of  a  debt  secured 
upon  land  sufficient  to  satisfy  it  is 
not  so  indebted  as  to  render  a  volun- 
tary conveyance  void  as  against  cred- 
itors. Van  Wyck  ▼.  Seward,  6  Paige 
(N.  Y.),  62. 

28.  Ayers  v.  HarreU,  111  Qa.  864, 
36  S..E.  946.  But  see  Powell  v.  West^ 
moreland,  60  Ga.  672. 


29.  Bank  ▼.  Marchand,  T.  U.  P. 
Charlt.  (Ga.)  247. 

30.  Appeal  of  Nippes,  75  Pa.  St. 
472 ;  Williams  v.  Davis,  69  Pa.  St.  21. 

91.  Sanders  v.  Logue,  88  Tenn.  355, 
12  S.  W.  722. 

32.  Reade  v.  Livingston,  3  Johns. 
Ch.  <N.  Y.)  481,  8  Am.  Dec. 
620. 

33.  Polk  County  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Scott,  132  Fed.  897,  66  C.  C.  A.  51; 
Lockhard  v.  Beckley,  10  W.  Va. 
87. 


Indebtedness  ob  Insolvenot  of  Gbantob. 


269 


veyance  is  not  fraudulent  in  law  and  will  not  be  avoided  bj  the 
fact  that  the  grantor  was  indebted  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance.^ 
Such  provision  for  the  payment  by  a  grantor  of  all  his  debts 
existing  at  the  time  he  makes  a  voluntary  oonveyance  or  such 
subsequent  payment  repels  the  idea  that  he  thereby  intended  to 
defraud  his  creditors."  On  the  question  of  the  debtor's  intent^ 
evidence  that  at  the  time  the  money  was  paid  him  for  the  prop- 
erty sold  he  said  he  intended  to  use  all  of  it  to  pay  his  debts 
is  admissible^  especially  in  connection  vnih  the  fact  that  soon 
thereafter  he  did  so  pay  it  out"  Evidence  that  a  grantor,  after 
making  a  conveyance,  paid  the  debts  which  he  owed  when  making 
it,  is  competent  as  a  circumstance  for  the  jury  to  consider  in 


34.  N.  7.— Ooean  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Hodges,  9  Hun,  161;  Dygsrt  ▼.  Rem- 
enchnider,  39  Barb.  417,  a^d  32  K. 
Y.  629. 

Ill — Songer  v.  Partridge,  107  111. 
529;  Parker  ▼.  Tiffany,  62  111.  2S6,  the 
fraud  in  the  transaction  having  been 
purged  the  transfer  would  cease  to 
be  a  fraud  on  his  creditors. 

Ind.  r.— Purcell  Wholesale  Qrooery 
Co.  ▼.  Bryant  (1906),  89  S.  W.  662. 

La. — Copelly  ▼.  Beverges,  11  Mart. 
(La.)  641. 

21^.  /.—Claflin  ▼.  Mess,  30  N.  J.  Eq. 
211. 

N.  O.— Smith  ▼.  Beavis,  29  N.  C. 
841. 

8.  0.— Ingrem  ▼.  Phillips,  8  Strobh. 
666;  Hudnal  v.  Wilder,  4  McGord, 
294,  17  Am.  Dec.  744,  but  the  pay- 
ment of  such  debts  will  not  effect  the 
rights  of  a  subsequent  purchaser, 
where  the  circumstances  show  that  no 
change  of  property  was  actually  in- 
tended ta  take  place,  but  that  it 
should  revert  to  the  donor  as  soon  as 
his  debts  were  paid;  Brown  ▼.  Mc- 
Donald, 1  Hill  Eq.  297,  payment  of 
debts  will  not  confirm  the  deed,  if  the 
grantor  has  been  ccmstantly  indebted 
in  the  meantime. 


T«n«.— Spenoe  v.  Dunlap,  74  Tenn. 
467;  Vance  ▼.  Smith,  49  Tenn.  343; 
Levering  ▼.  Nonrell,  68  Tenn.  178,  but 
payment  of  a  large  part  of  the  debts 
does  not  rebut  the  evidence  of  fraud. 

T«».— Sanger  v.  Colbert,  84  Tex. 
668,  19  S.  W.  863. 

Wt*.— Wheeler  v.  Single,  62  Wis. 
380,  22  N.  W.  669. 

35.  Dygert  v.  Remersehnider,  89 
Barb.  (N.  Y.)  417;  Reade  v.  Livings- 
ton,  8  Johns.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)  481,  8  Am. 
Dec.  620;  aaflin  v.  Mess,  39  N.  J. 
Eq.  211;  Hester  v.  Wilkinson,  25 
Tenn.  215,  44  Am.  Dec.  803. 

36.  Sanger  v.  Colbert,  84  Tex.  668, 
19  S.  W.  863.  But  where  one  pur- 
chases the  whole  of  a  debtor's  prop- 
erty subject  to  sale  under  execution, 
knowing  that  the  vendor  is  justly  in- 
debted and  has  recently  declared  his 
intention  not  to  pay,  the  mere  fact 
that  the  vendor  assures  the  pur- 
chaser at  the  time  of  the  sale  that  one 
purpose  of  it  is  to  enable  him  to 
pay  his  debts  will  not  purge  the  trans- 
action of  bad  faith  as  to  such  pur- 
chaser; but  he  must  see  to  it  that  the 
amount  is  actually  applied,  so  far  as 
necessary,  to  this  discharge  of  the 
debt.    Avery  v.  Johann,  27  Wis.  240. 


270 


FSAUDUIJ£27T   CoNVSYAHC£S* 


determiniog  whether  it  web  made  with  a  fraudulent  intent  as 
to  creditors.*^  Where  a  conveiyance  made  by  one  indebted  is 
fraudulent  as  to  existing  creditors,  it  will  be  fraudulent  also  as 
to  subsequent  creditors,  notwithstanding  the  payment  of  the  par- 
ticular debts  existing,  if  the  indebtedness  continues  without  ma- 
terial interruption.''  Where  a  grantor  makes  a  voluntary  con- 
veyance while  indebted,  and  the  stream  of  his  debts  continues  in 
equal  volume  and  unbrdi:en  current  from  the  time  of  his  gift  to 
his  failure,  the  presumption  of  fraudulent  intent  arising  from 
the  indebtedness  is  not  rebutted  by  the  fact  that  the  particular 
debts  existing  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance  had  been  paid." 

(§  5.  A88umpti<Mi  and  pa]rment  of  debts  by  grantee. — Where 
a  conveyance  was  made  in  fraud  of  a  particular  creditor,  the 
fact  that  the  grantee  agreed  to  pay  the  debt  will  not  save  the 
deed  from  attack  by  other  creditors.^  But  it  has  been  held  that 
a  fraudulent  grantee  cannot  be  held  as  trustee  of  the  grantor, 
after  having  paid  hana  fide  debts  of  the  grantor  to  the  full  amount 
of  the  property  received.^  Although  a  provision  in  the  con- 
veyance that  all  the  creditors  of  the  grantor  should  be  paid  tends 


87.  Winchester  ▼.  Charter,  97  Man. 
140. 

88.  V.  T. — SaTage  v.  Murphy,  84 
K.  Y.  SOS,  90  Am.  Dee.  733,  alTff  81 
N.  T.  Super.  Ct.  76. 

Cofin. — ^Paulk  t.  Cooke,  39  Conn. 
666. 

(7a.— first  Kat.  Bank  ▼.  Bayliss, 
96  Oa.  684,  23  S.  £.  861. 

Itnoa, — ^Barhydt  ▼.  Perry,  67  Iowa, 
416,  10  K  W.  820. 

y.  /.— Clailin  ▼.  Mess,  37  N.  J.  Eq. 
211. 

8.  C— McElwee  ▼.  Sutton,  2  Bailey, 
128. 

Va.— Wilson  ▼.  Buchanan,  7  Gratt. 
334. 

TToAfc.— Mayer  t.  Frasch,  7  Wash. 
604,  35  Pae.  409. 


89.  Loeschigk  ▼.  Addison,  19  Abb. 
Pr.  (N.  Y.)  169;  Mills  v.  Morris,  1 
Hoff.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)  419. 

40.  Bassett  ▼.  McKenna,  52  Coiui. 
487;  Jaoobi  ▼.  Schloss,  7  Coldw. 
(Tenn.)  885.  But  see  York  County 
Bank  ▼.  Carter,  38  Pa.  St.  446,  80 
Am.  Dec.  494,  a  debtor  may  lawfully 
sell  his  property,  in  consideration 
that  the  purchase  money  be  paid  to 
some  of  his  creditors,  to  the  exclusion 
or  postponement  of  others,  if  it  be 
done  witliout  any  fraudulent  design, 
and  is  a  present  application  of  his 
property  to  the  payment  of  bin 
debts. 

41.  Thomas  ▼.  Goodwin,  12  Mass. 
140. 


InDSBTSDNESS  OS  InSOLVENGY  07  OSAHTOB. 


271 


strongly  to  negative  fraud  on  creditors,  yet  it  is  not  conclusive, 
and  evidence  offered  to  prove  sudi  fraud  should  not  be  rejected.^ 
An  insolvent  debtor  may  sell  his  property  for  a  reasonable  price, 
where  the  grantee  is  responsible,  and  agrees  to  apply  the  proceeds 
to  tlie  paym^it  of  the  vendor's  creditors.^  A  conveyance  of  real 
estate,  in  oonsideration  of  the  vendee's  agreement  to  pay  the 
debts  of  the  vendor,  is  valid  against  subsequent  creditors.^^ 

§  6.  Effect  of  insolvency  of  grantor  upon  conveyance  for 
valuable  consideration. — A  debtor  is  not  deprived  of  his  right 
to  sell  or  dispose  of  his  property  by  reason  of  inaolvency  or 
embarrassed  financial  condition,  even  though  a  sale  or  disposition 
thereof  may  hinder  or  delay  creditors.  The  mere  fact  of  a  sale 
by  a  party,  who  is  insolvent  or  in  failing  circumstances,  of  his 
property  to  a  purchaser  who  has  knowledge  of  his  circumstances, 
does  not  establish  fraud.  On  the  contrary,  in  many  cases, '  it 
may  be  evidence  of  good  faith  and  an  honest  desire  to  appropriate 
his  means  to  the  discharge  of  his  debts.  Such  would  be  a  fair 
inference  resulting  from  the  transaction,  if  the  price  agreed  to 
be  paid  is  the  fair  and  full  value  thereof,  and  there  were  no 
other  circumstances  tending  to  impeach  it  The  rule  is  generally 
maintained  that  a  conveyance  will  not  be  set  aside  as  fraudulent 
merely  on  the  ground  of  tlie  insolvency  of  the  grantor  at  the 
time  of  its  execution.^     An  insolvent  may  likewise  lease  his 


4S.  Dmm  v.  Painter,  27  Pa.  St 
148. 

48.  Yomig  V.  Keller,  16  Mo.  App. 
560. 

44.  Preston  ▼.  Jones,  50  Pa.  St.  54. 
See  Assumption  of  liability  as  con- 
sideration for  conveyance,  chap.  VIII, 
infra, 

45.  2^.  7.— FuUer  Electrical  Go.  ▼. 
T^wis,  101  N.  Y.  674,  5  N.  B.  437; 
Txiescbiglc  ▼.  Bridge,  42  N.  Y.  421,  42 
Barb.  471;  Pritz  ▼.  Jones,  117  App. 
Div.  643,  102  N.  Y.  Supp.  549. 

Ala, — ^Ettfaula     Qrooery     Oo.     v. 


Petty,  116  Ala.  260,  22  So.  605;  Lien- 
kauf  V.  Morris,  66  Ala.  406;  Harlcins 
y.  Bailey,  48  Ala.  376. 

Ark. — Dardenne  v.  Hardnriclc,  9 
Ark.  482. 

Flo. — ^Ballard  v.  Eckman,  20  Fla. 
661. 

Oa, — ^Thornton  ▼.  Lane,  11  Ga.  459. 

/».— Wrightman  v.  Hart,  37  111. 
123;  Holbrook  ▼.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
10  111.  App.  140. 

Ind. — ^Evans  ▼.  Pence,  78  Ind.  439; 
Wooters  ▼.  Osbom,  77  Ind.  513;  Frank 
T.  Peters,  9  Ind.  343. 


272 


Fb^udxtleitt  Conveyakoeb. 


property  on  aa  adequate  consideration,  as  against  his  general 
creditors,  when  done  in  good  faith.^  A  conveyance  by  an  in- 
solvent person  at  a  fair  valuation  to  a  responsible  purchaser, 
although  made  by  the  vendor  with  intent  to  hinder,  delay  and 
defraud  creditors,  and  although  the  purchaser  knew  of  the  in- 
solvency, is  not  voidable  unless  the  purchaser  knew  of  the  fraudu- 
lent intent.  There  must  be  a  fraudulent  intent  common  to  both 
seller  and  purchaser/^  But  insolvency  is  a  badge  or  evidence 
of  fraud.  It  is  evidence  bearing  upon  the  question  of  good 
faith  or  fraudulent  intent  in  the  transaction.^  And  where  there 
is  a  sale  by  an  insolvent  debtor  of  all  his  property  there  is  a 
presumption  of  law  that  it  is  fraudulent,  as  the  necessary  effect 
of  such  sale  would  be  to  hinder  and  delay  creditors.    Such  pre- 


Jotoa.^-Coniioll7  v.  Dillrance,  50 
Iowa,  02. 

ITy.— Ward  v.  Totter,  3  T.  B. 
Hon.  1. 

La. — ^Pecot  t.  Armelin,  21  La.  Ann. 
667;  Whiting  v.  Prentice,  12  Rob. 
141;  Dwight  v.  Bemiss,  16  La.  145; 
Wright  ▼.  His  Gieditors,  12  La.  308; 
Barrett  v.  His  Creditors,  4  Rob.  508; 
Bauduc  V.  His  Creditors,  4  La.  247. 

Me. — Stevens  ▼.  Robinson,  72  Me. 
381. 

Minn. — ^Wolford  v.  Famham,  47 
Minn.  05,  40  N.  W.  528,  solvency  or 
insolvency  of  the  person  paying  the 
consideration  upon  a  conveyance  to 
another  is  a  mere  item  of  evidence 
upon  the  intent  with  which  the  con- 
sideration was  paid  and  the  convey- 
ance taken. 

ifo. — ^Mears  v.  Gage  (Mo.  App.), 
80  S.  W.  712;  State  ex  rel.  Pierce  v. 
Merritt,  70  Mo.  275. 

ye6.— Crites  v.  Hart,  40  Neb.  53, 
68  N.  W.  362;  Rothell  v.  Grimes,  22 
Neb.  626,  35  N.  W.  302;  Joyner  v. 
Van  Alstyne,  22  Neb.  172,  34  N.  W. 
366;  Leffel  v.  Schemerhom,  13  Neb. 
842,  14  N.  W.  418. 


N.  O. — ^National  Bank  of  Greens- 
boro V.  Gilmer,  116  N.  G.  684,  22  S. 
E.  2,  where  the  sale  was  on  long 
credit  to  one  irresponsible  and  with- 
out security. 

Ohio. — Sigler  v.  Enoz  •  County 
Bank,  8  Ohio  St.  511. 

TFi^.— Hage  v.  Campbell,  78  Wis. 
572,  23  Am.  St.  Rep.  422,  47  N.  W. 
170. 

46.  Stanley  v.  Bobbins,  36  Vt. 
422. 

47.  Ruhl  V.  Phillips,  48  N.  Y.  125, 
8  Am.  Rep.  522.  See  Fraudulent  in- 
tent and  knowledge,  chap.  XIII» 
infra. 

48.  N.  r.— St  John  Woodworking 
Co.  V.  Smith,  178  N.  Y.  620,  71  N.  E. 
1130,  affd  82  App.  Div.  348,  82  N.  Y. 
Supp.  1025. 

Ala. — ^Harkins  v.  Bailey,  48  Ala. 
376 ;  Beeson  v.  Wiley,  28  Ala.  575. 

Colo.— Sutton  y.  Dana,  15  Colo.  08, 
25  Pac.  00. 

/ZZ.— Beach  v.  Miller,  130  111.  162, 
22  N.  £.  464,  17  Am.  St.  Rep.  201. 

Iowa. — Crary  v.  Kurtz  (1006),  105 
N.  W.  500 ;  Henny  Buggy  Co.  v.  Patt. 
73  Iowa,  485,  35  N.  W.  587. 


Indbbtbdnbss  OB  Inbolveitot  of  Gbantob. 


373 


sumpftion,  howei^er,  maj  be  rebutted.^  The  relations  of  the 
parties  to  each  other,  the  price  agreed  to  be  paid,  the  credit  givea, 
and  other  circumstances  of  a  suspicious  character,  are  proper  to 
be  considered  in  determining  the  question  of  actual  f  raud.^  In 
the  absence  of  evidence  that  the  vendor  was  insolveat  or  in  fail- 
ing circumstances  at  the  time  of  the  sale^  it  will  not  be  presumed 
that  the  sale  was  fraudulent,  in  an  action  by  creditors  to  subject 
the  property  to  the  payment  of  their  daims.^^  A  sale  of  prop- 
erty, however,  made  with  intent  to  hinder,  delay  or  defraud 
creditors,  is  fraudulent  as  to  them,  whether  the  debtor  be  solvent 
at  the  time  thereof  or  not"* 


§  7.  Effect  of  insolvency  of  grantor  upon  voluntary  convey- 
ances.— A  debtor  in  embarrassed  circumstances  may  not  give  away 
his  property  to  the  injury  and  detriment  of  his  bona  fide  credi- 
tors. A  voluntary  conveyance  or  a  conveyance  not  based  on  a 
valuable  consideration  by  a  grantor,  who  is,  at  the  time  of 
making  it,  insolvent,  is  generally  held  to  be  fraudulent  and 
void  as  to  existing  creditors."  The  true  inquiry  to  determine 
whether  or  not  the  grantor  was  insolvent  is:  Had  he  at  the 
time  the  alleged  fraudulent  conveyance  was  made^  or  did  he  re- 


IfA— Worthington  v.  Shipley,  6 
Om  (Md.),449. 

Minn. — Wolford  v.  Famham,  47 
Minn.  95,  49  N.  W.  62S;  Mower  v. 
Hanford,  6  Minn.  535. 

N.  (7.— Holmes  v.  Marshall,  78  N. 
C.  ^62.  See  also  Badges  of  fraud; 
insolvency  or  indebtedness  of  grantor, 
chap.  VI,  8  14,  9upra. 

40.  Clark  v.  Wise,  57  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  416,  39  How.  Pr.  (N.  Y.)  97; 
Dodson  V.  Cooper,  60  Kan.  680,  32 
Pac.  870.  See  also  Badges  of  fraud; 
transfer  of  all  of  debtor's  property, 
chap.  VI,  8  8,  9upra. 

60.  Loeschigk  ▼.  Bridge,  42  N.  Y. 
421 ;  National  Bank  of  Oreenboro  v. 
Gilmer,  116  N.  C.  684,  22  S.  £.  2. 

18 


51.  Brower  v.  Ftos,  60  Ndb.  590, 
83  N.  W.  832. 

52.  Klauber  t.  Schloss  (Mo.),  95 
S.  W.  930. 

63.  N,  r.— Multz  V.  Price,  91  App. 
Div.  116,  86  N.  Y.  Supp.  480;  Royer 
Wheel  Co.  v.  Fielding,  31  Hun,  274; 
Manhattan  Co.  ▼.  Osgood,  16  Johns. 
162,  rev'd  3  Cow.  612. 

Ark, — James  ▼.  Mallory  (1905),  89 
S.  W.  472 ;  Sumpter  v.  Arkansas  Nat. 
Bank,  69  Ark.  224,  62  S.  W.  577. 
-    Cal.— Swartz  ▼.  Hazlett,  8  Cal.  118. 

Del. — ^Dulany  v.  Greene,  4  Uarr. 
285. 

Oa. — Cothran  ▼.  Forsyth,  68  Qa. 
660. 

/U.— Houston  T.  Maddoz,  179  HL 


274 


FrAUDUUBNT   CoirVBYAlfCXQ, 


tain,  sufficient  means  to  paj  his  debts  f*  WUether  a  gift  is  in 
fraud  of  creditors  is  determined  by  the  fact  of  the  donor's  in- 
solvency,  and  not  by  his  knowledge  of  the  f act,  or  by  his  in- 
tention to  defraud."  A  voluntary  transfer  or  conveyance  of 
property  will  be  deemed  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors 
unless  property  sufficient  to  pay  debts  is  retained."  So,  a  volun- 
tary conveyance,  the  effect  of  which  is  to  render  the  grantor 


377,  53  N.  E.  599;  Koeter  t.  HiUer,  4 
III.  App.  21. 

JTy. — ^Lowry  v.  Fisher,  65  Ky.  70, 
92  Am.  Dec.  475;  Sievers  ▼.  Martin, 
26  Kj.  L.  Rep.  904,  82  S.  W.  631. 

Ifd.— Baxter  ▼.  SewaU,  3  Md.  334. 

Ma9s. — ^Biatihews  ▼.  Thompson,  186 
Mass.  14,  71  N.  E.  93,  104  Am.  St. 
Rep.  550,  66  L.  R.  A.  421,  where  an 
insolvent  husband  conveys  practically 
all  of  his  property  to  his  wife  in  trust 
with  power  to  sell  and  apply  the  pro* 
ceeds  to  the  payment  of  such  debts  of 
the  husband  as  it  might  seem  judi- 
cious to  her  to  pay,  the  conveyance  is 
fraudulent  as  to  the  grantor's  credit- 
ors, though  his  motive  in  making  the 
same  was  innocent  in  itself. 

Jfo.-^Welch  V.  Mann,  193  Mo.  304, 
92  8.  W.  98;  Pullis  v.  Robison,  5  Mo. 
App.  548,  rev's  73  Mo.  201. 

N.  /.—Young  V.  Public  School  Trus- 
tees, 31  N.  J.  Eq.  290. 

OAfO.— Qodell  V.  Taylor,  Wright, 
82. 

8.  C— DuRant  v.  DuRant,  36  S.  C. 
49,  14  S.  £.  929;  Ingram  v.  Phillips, 
5  Strobh.  200;  Wade  v.  Col  vert,  2 
Mill,  26,  12  Am.  Dec.  652. 

Vf.— Farmers'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Thom- 
son, 74  Vt.  442,  52  Atl.  961. 

Va. — ^Wilson  v.  Buchanan,  7  Qratt. 
334. 

54.  Cole  V.  Tyler,  65  N.  Y.  73.  See 
What  constitutes  insolvency,  }  8, 
infra, 

56.  Pullis  V.  Robison,  5  Mo.  App. 


548,  rev's  73  Mo.  201.  See  Intent  of 
grantee  immaterial  where  transfer  is 
voluntary,  chap.  XIII,  8  5,  infra, 

56.  N.  r.— Mults  ▼.  Price,  91  App. 
Div.  116,  86  N.  Y.  Supp.  480;  Cole  v. 
Tyler,  65  N.  Y.  73;  Spotten  v.  Keeler, 
12  St.  Rep.  385. 

-Ariaf.— Lewis  v.  Herrera  (1906),  85 
Pac.  245,  debtor  must  possess  suffi- 
cient property  within  the  State. 

Oal. — ^Burpee  v.  Bunn,  22  Cal.  194; 
SwartE  V.  Haclett,  8  Cal.  118. 

Ill, — Wisconsin  Granite  Co.  v.  Qer- 
rity,  144  lU.  77,  33  N.  E.  31 ;  Sander- 
son V.  Snow,  68  m.  App.  384;  Lytle 
V.  Scott,  2  m.  App.  646. 

/oioo.— Clearfield  Bank  v.  Olin,  112 
Iowa,  476,  84  N.  W.  508;  Ware  v. 
Purdy,  60  N.  W.  526, 

La. — Queyrouse  v.  Thibodeaux,  30 
La.  Ann.  1114. 

Jfe.— ^ose  V.  Hewitt,  50  Me.  248; 
Welcome  v.  Batobelder,  23  Me.  85. 

Ifcf.— Swan  V.  Dent,  2  Md.  Ch.  111. 

Minn, — Filley  v.  Register,  4  Minn. 
391,  77  Am.  Dec.  522. 

Miaa. — ^Edmonson  v.  Meachan,  50 
Biiss.  34;  Vertner  v.  Humphreys,  14 
S.  ft  M.  130. 

Ifo.— Needles  v.  Ford,  167  Mo.  495, 
67  8.  W.  240. 

N,  ff.— Abbott  V.  Tenney,  18  N.  H. 
109;  Smith  v.  Smith,  11  N.  H.  459. 

N,  C. — ^Houston  v.  Bogle,  32  N.  C. 
496.  But  see  Worthy  v.  Brady,  91  K. 
C.  265,  a  deed  is  fraudulent  or  not  ac- 
cording to  the  intent  with  which  it 


Il7D£BT£DN£SS  OB  INSOLVENCY  OF  GbANTOB. 


275 


insolvent  as  being  without  sufficiezit  property  to  pay  his  debts, 
is  fraudulent  and  void." 


§  8.  What  constitutes  insolvency. — A  person  is  insolvent 
when  his  property^  subject  to  execution,  at  its  fair  valuation  at 
the  time,  is  not  sufficient  to  satisfy  all  his  debts,"  when  all  his 
property  is  not  sufficient  to  pay  all  his  debts;"  and  insolven<7 
cannot  be  imputed  to  a  debtor  who  has  property,  subject  to  legal 
process,  sufficient  to  meet  all  his  liabilities."    It  has  been  held 


was  made,  not  according  to  the  value 
of  the  property  still  retained  bj  the 
grantor. 

OAio.— Farmers'  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Mil- 
ler, 9  Ohio  Gir  Ct.  Ill,  6  Ohio  Cir. 
Dee.  1. 

8.  O. — ^Richardson  ▼.  Rhodus,  14 
Rich.  L.  96;  Ingram  v.  Phillips,  6 
Strobh.  200;  McElwee  v.  Sutton,  2 
Bailey,  128;  Kirkley  t.  Blakeney,  2 
Nott.  ft  M.  544. 

Vi. — ^Durkee  ▼.  Kahoney,  1  Aik. 
116. 

Wn$h, — ^Klosterman  ▼.  Harrington, 
11  Wash.  138,  39  Pac.  376;  Frederick 
▼.  Shorey,  4  Wash.  75,  29  Pac.  766. 

W.  Va. — Reynolds  v.  Qawthorp's 
Heirs,  37  W.  Va.  3,  16  8.  E.  364; 
Rogers  ▼.  Verlander,  30  W.  Va.  619, 
5  8.  £.  847. 

U.  flf.--8cott  ▼.  Mead  (D.  C),  37 
Fed.  865;  Newlin  ▼.  Garwood,  18  Fed. 
Gas.  No.  10,172. 

57.  Colo, — Gwynn  ▼.  Butler,  IT 
Golo.  114,  28  Pac.  466. 

Conn, — Freeman  ▼.  Burnham,  36 
Conn.  469. 

CTo. — Studebaker  Bros.  Mfg.  Co  ▼. 
Key,  99  6a.  144,  25  8.  E.  14;  Booher 
T.  Worrill,  57  6a.  235. 

/U.->Bittenger  v.  Kasten,  111  111. 
260;  Emerson  ▼.  Bemis,  69  111.  687. 

/fidw— Personette  v.  Cronkhite,  140 
Ind.  586,  4  N.  E.  59,  although  the 


debtor  claims  that  it  was  made  with 
intent  to  defraud  another  creditor, 
and  not  to  defraud  the  complaining 
creditors. 

ifo.— Snyder  v.  Free,  114  Mo.  360, 
21  8.  W.  847;  Obemeir  v.  Treeeler, 

19  Mo.  App.  519. 

N.  F.—Cove  V.  Campbell,  62  N.  H. 
401. 

8.  O, — Jackson  v.  Lewis,  34  8.  C. 
1,  12  8.  E.  660. 

IZtoik.— Ogden  8tate  Bank  ▼.  Bar* 
ker,  12  Utah,  13,  40  Pac.  765. 

68.  Dinius  t.  Lahr  (Ind.  App.),  74 
N.  E.  1033;  David  Adler,  etc.,  Cloth- 
ing Co.  V.  Hellman,  55  Neb.  266,  76 
N.  W.  877.  See  also  cases  cited  supra, 
notes  56  and  57,  8  7. 

59.  Carr  v.  8ummerfield,  47  W. 
Va.  166,  34  8.  E.  804;  Wolfe  ▼.  Mc- 
Cugin,  37  W.  Va.  552,  16  8.  E.  797. 
8ee  Ernest  ▼.  Merritt,  107  6a.  61; 
Cerman-Amerian  Bank  ▼.  Schurer,  102 
Wis.  582. 

60.  Hendon  ▼.  Morris,  110  Ala.  106, 

20  8o.  27;  Jennings  v.  Howard,  80 
Ind.  214;  McCole  ▼.  Loehr,  79  Ind. 
430;  Sherman  v.  Hogland,  54  Ind. 
578.  The  mere  fact  that  a  judgment 
has  been  recovered  against  a  debtor 
is  not  sufficient  to  show  him  insolvent. 
Davis  V.  Yonge  (Ark.),  85  8.  W.  90. 
See  also  Treacey  v»  Liggett,  9  Can. 
Sup.  Ct.  441. 


276 


FsAXTDULElfT  CoNVSYAlfGSS. 


that  a  debtor  is  insolveat  wbesa  the  condition  of  his  affairs  is 
such  that  he  cannot  pay  his  debts  as  they  mature  in  the  ordinazy 
or  regular  course  of  business,*^  that  insolvency  is  the  inability  to 
pay  debts  as  they  become  dua**  On  the  other  hand  it  has  beoi 
held  that  a  debtor  cannot  be  said  to  be  insolvent  merely  because 
he  has  not  money  ^lou^  on  hand  to  meet  his  liabilities  as  they 
fall  due  in  the  course  of  trade;**  or  to  meet  the  demands  of  his 
creditors  without  borrowing  money.*^  A  debtor  does  not  oease 
to  be  insolvent  because,  being  unable  to  pay  his  debts  in  the 
regular  course  of  business,  his  creditors  have  entered  into  an 
agreement  to  extend  the  time  of  payment  of  their  debts.**  The 
test  of  insolvency  is  not  whether,  on  a  postponement  of  payment 
of  the  trader^s  affairs,  there  is  property  sufftcient  to  pay  all  his 
debts,  but  whether  he  is  able  as  the  debts  mature,  to  pay  them 
as  traders  usually  do.**  The  mere  fact  that  at  the  time  of  the 
conveyance  the  debtor  had  not  enough  unincumbered  property 
to  pay  his  debts  is  not  conclusive  evidence  of  fraud.*'    But  a 


A  debtor  is  not  insolvent  when  be 
owns  property  together  with  cash  in 
hand  at  the  time  of  the  transfer  suf- 
ficient to  pay  his  debts  in  full,  al- 
though he  subsequently  places  it  be- 
yond the  reach  of  legal  process,  but 
the  transfer  is  prima  facie  fraudu- 
lent as  to  creditors.  Cohen  v.  Parish, 
100  Ga.  335,  28  S.  E.  122. 

61.  U,  £f.-*Merchants'  Nat.  Bank 
T.  Cook,  96  U.  S.  342,  24  L.  Ed.  412; 
Buchanan  v.  Smith,  16  ViTaU.  277,  21 
L.  Ed.  280. 

Mo, — ^Moore  v.  Carr,  66  Mo.  App. 
64. 

Wi8, — ^Marvin  v.  Anderson,  111 
Wis.  387,  87  N.  W.  226,  such  is  the 
definition  as  understood  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  bankruptcy  and  in- 
nolvent  laws,  but  as  understood  in 
dealing  with  contracts  challenged  on 
the  ground  of  fraud,  actual  or  con- 
structive, it  has  reference  to  insuffi- 


ciency of  assets  on  a  cash  basis  to 
cover  Uabilities. 

62.  Go.— Brown  ▼.  Spivey,  63  Oa. 
166. 

!«.— Lafleur  v.  Hardey,  11  Rob. 
403;  Brandt  v.  Shamburgfa,  2  Mart. 
(N.  S.)  320,  a  debtor  who  has  been 
obliged  to  secure  extensions  from  his 
creditors  is  insolvent. 

"M,  J, — ^National  Bank  of  Metropo- 
lis V.  Sprague,  21  N.  J.  Eq.  630. 

63.  Smith  v.  Collins,  04  Ala.  304, 
10  So.  334. 

64.  Silver  Valley  Min.  Co.  ▼. 
North  Carolina  Smelting  Co.,  110  K. 
C.  417,  26  S.  £.  054. 

65.  Vennard  v.  MoCTonndl,  03 
Mass.  666;  Brandt  v.  Shamburgh,  2 
Mart.  N.  S.  (La.)  820. 

66.  Chipman  v.  McClellan,  160 
Mass.  363,  34  N.  E.  370;  Traders' 
Nat.  Bank  v.  Chipman,  id. 

67.  ViTooters  v.  Osbom,  77  Ind.  613. 


Il7D£BT£Dl?B88  OB  Il^BOLVSNGT  OF  GbANTOB.  277 

debtor  who  has  concealed  his  property  in  order  to  defraud  his. 
creditors  is  to  be  regarded  as  insolvent,  although  he  has  sufficient 
assets  to  pay  his  debts.^  If  the  value  of  a  debtor's  property  so 
closely  approximate  the  amount  of  his  liabilities  that  a  con* 
veyance  without  equivalent  coneideration  wauld  have  a  direct 
tendency  to  impair  the  rights  of  creditors,  if  they  should  attempt 
to  force  collection  by  judicial  process,  it  will  be  held  fraudulent 
as  to  creditors.**  A  debtor's  voluntary  conveyance  may  be  set 
aside  at  the  suit  of  creditors,  whether  or  not  the  debtor  was  in- 
solvent, or  believed  himself  to  be  so,  at  the  time  of  the  con- 
veyance, if  his  solvency  at  the  time  was  contingent  on  the  stabil- 
ity of  the  market  in  ^e  business  in  which  he  was  engaged^^^  or 
insolvency  would  be  the  inevitable  or  probable  result  of  want  of 
success  in  the  business  in  which  he  was  engaged.^  Cash  in 
hand,'^  notes  and  accounts  and  other  evidences  of  debt,''  should 
be  counted  as  property  on  the  question  of  the  solvency  or  insol- 
vency of  the  donor  or  grantor.  The  mere  return  of  an  execu- 
tion partly  unsatisfied  a  year  after  a  conveyance  by  the  judg- 
ment debtor  does  not  tend  to  establish  insolvency  at  the  time 
of  the  conveyance,  in  the  absence  of  any  other  f acts.'^  The  fact 
that  at  the  time  of  a  voluntary  conveyance  a  corporation  which 
the  grantor  had  formed  to  conduct  the  business  previously  owned 
and  carried  on  by  him,  and  in  which  he  held  nearly  all  the  stock, 
was  insolvent,  does  not  show  that  the  grantor  is  unable  to  pay  his 
personal  debts.'^ 

^  9.  Retention  of  property  su£Bcient  to  pay  debts. — Courts 
will  not  interfere  to  set  aside  a  conveyance  or  transfer  of  prop- 

68.    Blake    v.    Sawin,    10    AUen  72.  Cohen  ▼.  Parish,  100  6a.  335, 

(Mass.),  340.  28  S.  E.  122. 

60.  Rose  v.  Dimklee,  12  Colo.  App.  7S.   Powell   ▼.   Westmoreland,    60 

403,  66  Pac.  342.  Oa.  572. 

70.  Brown  v.  Case,  41  Oreg.  221,  74.    Wadleigh    v.    Wadleigh,    111 
69  Pac.  43.  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  367,  97  N.  Y.  Supp. 

71.  Carpenter  v.  Roe,  10  N.  Y.  227.  1063. 

See  Carr  v.  Breese,  81  N.  Y.  584;  Ber-         75.  Welch  v.  Mann,  193  Mo,  804, 
trand  v.  Elder,  23  Ark.  494.  92  S.  W.  98. 


278 


Fbaudulsnt  Cokwtanceb. 


erty,  as  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  creditors,  if  it  appear 
that  there  is  retained  by  the  debtor  property  other  than  that 
conveyed  out  of  which  their  claims  can  be  satisfied,  or  sufficient 
to  pay  all  the  just  debts  of  the  debtor,"  except  in  those  states 


76.  N.  T.— Kain  v.  lArkin,  131  N. 
T.  300,  30  N.  E.  105;  Dunlap  ▼.  Haw- 
kins, 59  N.  Y.  342 ;  Cushman  ▼.  Addi- 
son, 52  N.  Y.  S28;  Loeschigk  ▼.  Ha^ 
field,  61  N.  Y.  660;  Guy  v.  Craig- 
head, 46  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  614,  61 
N.  Y.  Supp.  988,  21  App.  Div.  (N. 
Y.)  460,  47  N.  Y.  Supp.  676;  McCor- 
mick  ▼.  Wilder,  61  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.) 
619,  70  N.  Y.  Supp.  627;  Aultman, 
etc.,  Co.  V.  Syme,  23  App.  Div.  (N. 
Y.)  344,  48  N.  Y.  Supp.  231;  Car- 
penter V.  Roe,  10  N.  Y.  237;  Wilbur 
V.  Fradenburgh,  62  Barb.  (N.  Y.) 
474;  Holmes  v.  Clark,  48  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  237;  Spioer  v.  Ayers,  53  How. 
Pr.  (N.  Y.)  406;  Jackson  v.  Peek,  4 
Wend.  (N.  Y.)  300;  Van  Wyck  v. 
Seward,  6  Paige  (N.  Y.).  62;  Starr 
v.  Strong,  2  Sandf.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)   139. 

U.  fif.— Bean  v.  Patterson,  122  U.  S. 
496,  7  Sup.  Ct.  1298,  30  L.  Ed.  1126; 
Providence  Sav.  Bank  v.  Huntington, 
10  Fed.  871;  Hinde  v.  Longworth,  11 
Wheat.  (U.  S.)  199,  6  L.  Ed.  464; 
Dick  V.  Hamilton,  7  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
3,890,  Deady  (U.  S.)  322;  Hopkirk 
V.  Randolph,  12  Fed.  Cas.  No.  6,698, 
2  Brock.  (U.  S.)   132. 

Ala, — Johnson  v.  West,  43  Ala. 
689.  But  see  Miller  v.  Thompson,  3 
Port.  (Ala.)   198. 

2irJk.— Chambers  v.  Sallic,  29  Ark. 
407 ;  Smith  v.  Yell,  8  Ark.  470. 

C7al.— Windhaus  v.  Bootz  (Cal.),25 
Pac.  404;  Morgan  v.  Hecker,  74  Cal. 
540,  16  Pac.  317;  Swartz  v.  Hazlett, 
8  Cal.  118. 

Conn.— SUte  v.  Martin,  77  Conn. 
142,  58  Atl.  745;  Graves  v.  Atwood, 
52  Conn.  512,  52  Am.  Rep.  610;  Sal- 


mon V.  Bennett^  1  Conn.  525,  7  Am 
Dec.  237. 

Flo. — ^Howse  V.  Judson,  1  Pla.  133. 

€fa, — ^Wellmaker  v.  Wellmaker,  113 
6a.  1155,  39  S.  E.  475;  Brown  ▼. 
Spivey,  53  Oa.  156;  Weed  ▼.  Davis,. 
25  Ga.  684. 

/n.— Eames  v.  Dorsett,  147  HI.  540^ 
35  N.  E.  735;  Bittenger  v.  Kasten, 
HI  ni.  260;  Merrell  v.  Johnson,  96 
HI.  224;  Fanning  v.  Russell,  94  111. 
386;  Bridgford  v.  RiddeU,  55  HI.  261; 
Gridley  v.  Watson,  53  HI.  186; 
Moritz  V.  Hoffman,  35  HI.  563;  Hitt 
V.  Ormsbee,  12  HI.  166;  Koster  ▼. 
Hiller,  4  111.  App.  21 ;  Lytle  v.  Scott, 
2  111.  App.  646;  Russell  v.  Fanning, 
2  III.  App.  632. 

/nd.— Ritchie  v.  McKay  (Ind. 
App.),  75  N.  E.  161;  Emerson  v.  Opp, 
139  Ind.  27,  38  N.  E.  330;  Sell  v. 
Bailey,  119  Ind.  61,  21  N.  E.  338; 
Phelps  V.  Smith,  116  Ind.  387,  17 
N.  E.  602,  19  N.  E.  166;  Eiler  ▼. 
CruU,  112  Ind.  318,  14  N.  E.  79; 
Bishop  V.  State,  83  Ind.  67;  Noble  v. 
Hines,  72  Ind.  12;  Holman  v.  Elliott. 
65  Ind.  78;  Bentley  v.  Dunkle,  57 
Ind.  374;  Eagan  v.  Downing,  55  Ind. 
65;  McConnell  v.  Martin,  52  Ind. 
434;  Brookbank  v.  Kennard,  41  Ind. 
339;  Ewing  V.  Patterson,  35  Ind.  326. 

lotDa. — ^Robinson  v.  Frankville  First 
M.  E.  Church,  59  Iowa,  717,  12  N. 
W.  772;  Peerson  v.  Maxfield,  51  Iowa, 
76,  50  N.  W.  77;  Shepard  v.  Pratt» 
32  Iowa,  296;  Stewart  v.  Rogers,  25 
Iowa,  395,  95  Am.  Dec.  794. 

Kan, — Hunt  ▼.  Spencer,  20  Kan. 
126. 

Ky, — ^Harris  v.  Harris,  10  E^.  L. 


Indebtednkss  OB  Insolvbkcy  of  Gbawtob. 


279 


yolucAajj 


Hep.  819;  Enders  ▼.  Williams,  1  Mete. 
(Ky.)  346. 

Md. — Ghriatopher  v.  ChriBtopher, 
64  Md.  683,  3  Atl.  296;  Goodman  ▼. 
Wineland,  61  Md.  449;  Warner  ▼. 
Dove,  33  Md.  679;  Ellinger  v.  Crowl, 
17  Md.  361;  Williams  v.  Banks,  11 
Md.  198;  Baxter  v.  Sewell,  3  Md. 
334. 

IfMtf.— Bennett  v.  Bedford  Bank,  11 

Mass.  421. 

irio^.--Beach  v.  White,  Walk. 
(Mich.)  495. 

lf»nn.--W€therill  v.  Ganney,  62 
Minn.  341,  64  N.  W.  818;  Reich  v. 
Beich,  26  Minn.  97,  1  N.  W.  804; 
Johnston  ▼.  Piper,  4  Minn.  192. 

Miss, — ^Edmunds  v.  Mister,  68  Miss. 
765;  Cowen  ▼.  Alsop,  51  Miss.  158; 
Cock  V.  Oakley,  50  Miss.  628. 

Mo, — Johnson  v.  Murphy,  180  Mo. 
597,  79  8.  W.  909;  Fehlig  v.  Busch, 
165  Mo.  144,  65  S.  W.  542;  Walsh  v. 
Ketchum,  84  Mo.  427;  Bohannan  v. 
Combs,  79  Mo.  806;  Vandeventer  t. 
Goes,  116  Mo.  App.  316,  91  S.  W. 
958;  Updegraflf  ▼.  Theaker,  57  Mo. 
App.  45. 

jifont.— Story  v.  Black,  5  Mont.  26, 
51  Am.  Rep.  37,  1  Pac.  1. 

^eft.— Schreck  ▼.  Hanlon,  66  Neb. 
451,  92  N.  W.  626;  David  Adler,  etc.. 
Clothing  Co.  v.  Hellman,  55  Neb.  266, 
75  N.  W.  877;  Treeter  v.  Pike,  43 
Neb.  779,  62  N.  W.  211. 

A\  H.— Leavitt  v.  Leavitt,  47  N.  H. 

329. 

y.   J.— Cort  V.    Skillin,   29  N.   J. 

Eq.  70. 

N.  C— Taylor  v.  Eatman,  92  N.  C. 
001 ;  Hodges  v.  Spicer,  79  N.  C.  223 ; 
Thacker  v.  Saunders,  45  N.  C.  145; 
Smith  V.  Reavis,  29  N.  C.  341;  Amett 
V.  Wanett,  28  N.  C.  41;  Jones  v. 
Youngs,  18  N.  C.  352,  28  Am.  Dec. 


569.  But  see  Hodson  v.  Jordan,  108 
N.  C.  10,  12  S.  E.  1029,  though  the 
grantor  reserved  ample  property  to 
pay  all  his  then  existing  debts,  a  deed 
made  with  intent  by  the  grantor  to 
defraud  his  creditors,  with  knowledge 
thereof  by  the  grantee,  is  void  as  to 
the  creditors. 

Ohio, — ^Boies  v.  Johnson,  25  Ohio 
Cir.  Ct.  331 ;  Bowlus  v.  Shanabarger, 
19  Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  137,  10  Ohio  Cir. 
Dec.  167;  Miller  v.  Wilson,  15  Ohio, 
108;  Brice  v.  Myers,  5  Ohio.  121. 

Or.— Taylor  v.  Miles,  19  Or.  550, 
25  Pac.  143. 

Pa, — Conley  v.  Bentley,  87  Pa.  St. 
40;  McNair  v.  Riesher,  8  Pa.  Co.  Ct 
494. 

S.  C— Harrell  v.  Kea,  37  S.  C.  369, 
16  S.  E.  42;  Richardson  v.  Rhodus, 
14  Rich.  (S.  C.)  95;  Buchanan  v. 
McNinch,  3  S.  C.  498;  Hudnal  v. 
Widner,  4  McCord  (S.  C.)  294,  17 
Am.  Dec.  744. 

Tenn. — ^Burkey  v.  Self,  4  Sneed. 
(Tenn.)  121. 

Tear.— Dosch  v.  Nette  (Tex.),  16  S. 
W.  1013;  Dixon  v.  Sanderson,  72  Tex. 
359,  13  Am.  St  Rep.  801,  10  S.  W. 
535;  Walker  v.  Loring  (Tex.  Civ. 
App.),  34  S.  W.  405;  Morriscm  ▼. 
Clark,  55  Tex.  437. 

Utah, — Ogden  State  Bank  v.  Bar- 
ker, 12  Utah,  13,  40  Pac.  765. 

y«.— Brackett  v.  Waite,  4  Vt.  389; 
Durkee  v.  Mahoney,  1  Aik.  (Vt)  116. 
Fa. — Wilson  v.  Buchanan,  7  Gratt 
(Va.)   334. 

Wash, — Deering  v.  Holcomb,  26 
Wash.  588,  67  Pac.  240. 

W,  Va. — ^Hume,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Condon, 
44  W.  Va.  553,  30  S.  E.  56. 

Wis, — ^Marvin  v.  Anderson,  111 
Wis.  387,  87  N.  W.  226;  Pike  v.  Miles, 
23  Wis.  164,  99  Am.  Dec.  148. 


280 


Fbaubulent  Convbtancbs. 


creditors.^  Sut  a  voluntaiy  oonvejance  will  be  declared  void  as 
against  creditors  where  the  grantor  could  not  at  the  time  have 
withdrawn  the  amount  from  his  estate  without  hazard  to  his 
creditors,  or  materially  lessening  their  prospects  of  payment,  or 
leaving  it  doubtful  if  anything  could  be  reached  by  his  credi- 
tors.'^ The  property  left  or  retained  by  the  debtor  must  be  amply 
sufficient  to  pay  his  existing  debts  and  liabilities  and  to  satisfy 
all  the  just  claims  of  his  creditors;^  and  a  claim  that  there 


Wyo, — ^Metz  v.  Blackburn,  9  Wyo. 
481,  66  Pac.  857. 

Bng. — Jackson  ▼.  Bowley,  C.  k  M. 
97,  41  E.  C.  L.  59.  But  see  Spirett 
V.  Willows,  11  Jur.  N.  S.  70,  34  L. 
J.  Ch.  365,  3  DeG.  J.  k  S.  293,  12 
L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  614,  13  Wkly.  Rep. 
329,  if  it  is  shown  that  the  remedy 
of  an  existing  creditor  is  defeated  or 
delayed  by  the  transfer,  it  is  immate- 
rial whether  the  debtor  was  or  was 
not  solvent  at  the  time  of  the  trans- 
fer, but  the  contrary  rule  prevails  as 
to  subsequent  creditors. 

Where  m  Imubmakd  pnrcharing 
land  and  takias  title  ia  tlie 
name  of  his  wife  has  property  re- 
maining, subject  to  execution,  suffi- 
cient to  pay  all  his  debts,  the  trans- 
action is  not  fraudulent  as  to  his  cred- 
itors. Lang  ▼.  Williams,  166  Mo.  1, 
66  S.  W.  1012. 

A  maa  may  create  a  tmat  for 
wife  or  eliildreii,  by  voluntary  con- 
veyance, if  at  the  time  of  conveying 
he  retain  in  his  possession  property 
sufficient  to  discharge  all  his  debts 
then  existing.  Nichols  v.  Wallace,  41 
111.  App.  627;  Nichols  v.  H.  Seiter  ft 
Co.,  id.  But  claims  of  creditors  can- 
not be  defeated  by  a  subsequent  as- 
signment of  all  the  debtor's  property 
in  trust  for  his  wife  and  children. 
Barnes  v.  Vetterlein  (D.  C),  16  Fed. 
218;  Greer  v.  Baughman,  18  Md.  257. 


77.  Townsend  v.  Wilson,  114  Ky» 
504,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1276,  71  S.  W. 
440;  Davis  v.  Anderson,  99  Va.  620, 
39  S.  E.  588;  Wick  v.  Dawson,  42  W. 
Va.  43,  24  S.  E.  687.  See  also  cases 
cited  under  Statutory  provisions  as 
to  effect  of  want  of  consideration, 
chap.  Vm,  S  85,  infra.  But  see 
Hume  V.  Condon,  44  W.  Va.  663,  30 
S.  E.  56;  Adams  v.  Irwin,  44  W.  Va. 
740,  30  6.  E.  59,  notwithstanding  the 
statute,  a  husband  may  make  a  do* 
nation  to  his  wife,  or  return  her  a 
loan  of  money,  augmented  by  a  por- 
tion of  the  profits  of  a  business  con- 
ducted by  him,  if  he  retains  an 
amount  of  tangible  property  largely 
in  excess  of  his  just  indebtedness. 

78.  Kipp  V.  Hanna,  2  Bland.  (Md.),. 
26;  Emerson  v.  Bemis,  69  111.  537; 
Lowry  v.  Fisher,  65  Ky.  70,  92  Am. 
Dec.  476 ;  Black  v.  Sanders,  46  N.  C.  67. 

79.  N,  r.— Kain  v.  Larkin,  131  N. 
Y.  300,  30  N.  E.  105;  Dunlap  v.  Haw- 
kins, 69  N.  T.  342. 

U.  fif.— Lloyd  V.  Fulton,  91  U.  S. 
479,  23  L.  Ed.  363. 

Ill — ^Patterson  v.  McKimiey,  97 
111.  41. 

N.  F.— Bailey  v.  Ballou,  69  N.  H. 
414,  44  Atl.  124;  Gove  v.  Campbell 
62  N.  H.  401;  Smith  v.  Smith,  11  N. 
H.  459. 

Pa.— Wilson  V.  Howser,  12  P&.  St- 
109. 


Indebtbdnicss  OB  Insolvenot  07  Gbantos. 


281 


remains  in  ihe  debtor's  bands  sufficient  assets  to  paj  bis  debts 
will  not  be  sustained  if  tbere  is  reasonable  doubt  as  to  their 
sufSxdencj.^  A  conyejance  will  not  be  upheld  because  the 
grantor  retains  property  nominallj  enough  to  discharge  his  ex- 
isting indebtedness,  if  in  fact  the  value  of  the  property  so 
retained  is  insufficient  for  that  purpose."^    The  question  whether 


80.  Ark. — ^Bertrand  ▼.  Elder,  23 
Ark.  494. 

/{I.— Ketcham  ▼.  HaUoek,  66  111. 
App.  632. 

Jfd.— Williams  ▼.  Banks,  11  Md.  198. 

Ohio, — Cnimbaugb  v.  Kugler,  2 
Ohio  St.  373. 

Retentlom  of  proportj  of  • 
spoenlatiTO  aad  vaoertaia  taIvo 
by  a  debtor,  which  events  soon  after 
the  conveyance  demonstrated  to  be 
insufficient  to  pay  his  debts,  will  not 
relieve  the  conveyance  of  its  fraudu- 
lent character  as  to  creditors.  Dill- 
man  V.  Nedelhoffer,  162  111.  625,  45  N. 
E.  680. 

Wliere  <&e  only  roaudalBC 
TiemakM  of  pajias  oonalats  of  tlie 
delitoi^a  Inuiaesa  prospeeta,  the 
conveyance  is  fraudulent  as  to  exist- 
ing creditors.  Wooster  v.  Devote,  6 
Mackey  (D.  C),  362.  But  see  In  re 
Gross  Estate,  6  Pa.  Go.  Ct.  113. 

Wliere  <&e  property  retained 
iaolvdea  Appareatlj  s<>od  seo«- 
ritiesy  a  transfer  is  not  fraudulent 
although  the  makers  of  such  securi- 
ties afterwards  become  insolvent^ 
there  being  no  evidence  that  when  it 
occurred  the  makers  were  insolvent. 
Harting  v.  Jockers,  136  111.  627,  27  N. 
E.  188. 

S«1iseq«ent  reaulta  are  only 
eompetent  as  tending  to  determine 
the  state  and  condition  of  the  debtor's 
estate  at  the  time  of  the  alleged 
fraudulent  conveyance.  Rose  v.  Dunk- 
lee,  12  Colo.  App.  403,  56  Pac.  342. 


flvfleiemt     aasets     retalaeilr- 

Babcock  v.  Eckler,  24  N.  Y.  623,  where 
the  debtor  owed  but  $900  and  retained 
property  to  the  amount  of  $10,000; 
Jackson  v.  Peck,  4  Wend.  (N.  Y.) 
300,  indebtedness  trifling,  property  re- 
tained sufficient  to  meet  all  demands; 
Rickette  v.  HcCuUy,  54  Tenn.  712, 
indebtedness  $1,360,  real  estate  re- 
tained worth  $2,000  and  personalty 
worth  $1,000;  Page  v.  Kendrick,  10 
Mich.  300,  indebtedness  a  small 
amount  which  debtor  was  abundantly 
able  to  pay. 

XmsnlBeient  aaeeta  retained, — 
Black  V.  Sanders,  46  N.  C.  67,  22  ne- 
groes and  two  small  tracte  of  land 
worth  $7,250  are  not  sufficient  as 
available  to  pay  debto  amounting  to 
$6,848;  Williams  v.  Banks,  11  Md. 
198,  where  the  debte  due  amounted 
to  the  full  income  of  the  estate,  the 
retention  of  a  life  estate  was  insuffi- 
cient where  the  grantor  was  over  90 
years  old;  Edmunds  ▼.  Mister,  58 
Miss.  765,  reversion  of  land  retained 
but  all  tangible  property  conveyed  for 
the  life  of  the  grantor;  Bohn  v. 
Weeks,  50  111.  App.  236,  gift  $6,500, 
assete  $7,200,  debts  $400;  Williams 
V.  Hughes,  136  N.  C.  58,  48  S.  E.  518, 
assets  reteined  $11,625,  indebtedness 
$11,500,  debtor  entitled  to  $1,000  of 
real  estate  as  a  homestead  exemption, 
and  $500  worth  of  personal  property, 
at  his  election. 

81.  Patterson  v.  McEinney,  97  IlL 
44. 


282 


Fbauduubitt  CovyETAircE& 


a  debtor  reserves  sufficient  property  for  the  paymeat  of  eodstiiig 
debts  depends  On  the  amount  and  nature  of  the  property,  in 
cosnection  with  its  character  and  situation,  in  reference  to  the 
facilities  it  affords  creditors  for  collecting  their  daims.**  A  con- 
veyance of  lands  at  a  time  when  the  grantor,  if  he  could  have 
realized  a  fair  market  value  on  his  other  properties,  could  have 
paid  his  debts  in  full  without  touching  the  land,  is  not  in  fraud 
of  creditors,"  The  property  retained  by  the  debtor,  besides  be- 
ing amply  sufficient,  must  be  accessible  or  available  to  creditors,*^ 
subject  to  levy  upon  by  execution,"^  axui  not  incumbered  so  that 


82.  Church  v.  Chapin,  35  Vt.  223. 

83.  Stratton  ▼.  Edwards,  174  Mass. 
374,  54  N.  E.  886.  But  see  Walker  t. 
Loring,  89  Tex.  668,  36  S.  W.  246, 
retention  bj  donor  of  sulBeient  prop- 
erty to  bring  enough  on  forced  sale 
to  pay  existing  debts  and  taxable  costs 
of  collection  is  necessary  to  prevent 
the  gifts  from  being  fraudulent. 

84.  Fla, — Howse  v.  Judson,  1  Fla. 
133. 

Mi98, — ^Edmunds  ▼.  Mister,  58  Miss. 
765 ;  Oock  ▼.  Oakley,  50  Miss.  628. 

Mo, — State  ex  rel.  O'Bryan  ▼. 
Koontz,  83  Mo.  323. 

2V.  H.— Pomeroy  v.  Bailey,  43  N.  H. 
118. 

reoj.— Walker  v.  Loring,  89  Tex. 
668,  36  S.  W.  246. 

Eng. — French  ▼.  French,  6  DeG. 
M.  ft  G.  95,  65  Eng.  Ch.  74,  25  L.  J. 
Ch.  612,  4  Wkly.  Rep.  139,  2  Jur.  N. 
S.  169,  43  Eng.  Reprint,  1166. 

85.  Eiler  v.  Crull,  112  Ind.  318, 
14  N.  E.  79,  it  is  no  defense  for  the 
debtor  to  show  that  he  had  property 
not  subject  to  execution,  out  of  which 
he  might  have  paid  the  debt,  if  he  had 
chosen  to  do  so;  Camp  v.  Thompson, 
25  Minn.  175;  Hastings  v.  Crossland, 
13  Mo.  App.  592;  Terry  v.  O'Neal,  71 
Tex.  592,  9  S.  W.  673,  where  the 
statute  expressly  so  provided.  ; 


Fjoprlj  Im  amotker  State  suffi- 
cient to  diseharge  all  indebtedneas 
will  not  relieve  from  the  charge  of 
fraud.  Harding  v.  Elliott,  91  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  502,  36  N.  Y.  Supp.  648,  25 
Civ.  Proc.  R.  294;  Baker  v.  Lyman, 
63  Ga.  339;  Heath  v.  Page,  63  Pa.  St. 
108,  3  Am.  Rep.  533,  where  the  debtor 
absconded,  removing  the  property 
with  him. 

Debts  dme  from  e«t  tk^  State 
wlUeb  oamaot  1m  attaehed  by 
trustee  proeess  will  render  a  con- 
veyance valid.  Church  v.  Chapin,  35 
Vt.  223. 

Ualaevaabered  iauaovable 

yropertj  must  be  retained.     Chase 

V.  McCay,  21  La.  Ann.  195. 

Ezeatpt  prepertj  Is  not  to  be  in- 
cluded. Williams  v.  Hughes,  136  K. 
C.  58,  48  8.  E.  518.  But  see  West- 
moreland V.  Powell,  59  6a.  256,  prop- 
erty which  the  debtor  might  have  had 
exempted  should  be  considered,  where 
there  is  no  evidence  of  intention  to 
take  such  exemption. 

Gonoealment  of  preperty  from 
creditors  is  prima  fade  fraudulent. 
Cohen  v.  Parish,  100  Oa.  835,  28  S. 
E.  122.  Such  property  should  not  be 
included.  Walker  v.  Loring,  89  Tex. 
668,  36  S.  W.  246. 


iNDBBTSDirSSS  OB  IkSOLVBNOT  OF  GbANTOB. 


283 


his  creditors  will  meet  with  delay,  difficulty,  eKpenae^  or  litiga- 
tion in  obtaining  payment  and  realizing  their  claims.^ 

§  10.  Effect  of  insolvency  subsequent  to  transfer. — ^Except 
in  those  jurisdictions  where  all  voluntary  conveyances  are 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  existing  creditors^''  the  geueral  rule 
is  that  a  voluntary  conveyance  by  a  debtor,  who  is  solvent, 
though  indebted,  and  who  retains  sufficient  property  to  pay  his 
debts,  where  neither  insolvency  nor  inability  to  meet  his  obliga- 
tions is  contemplated,  will  not  be  rendered  fraudulent  and  void 
by  his  subsequent  insolven<7  resulting  from  causes  not  eodsting  at 
the  time  of  the  conveyance  nor  produced  thereby,  or  from  causes 
not  contemplated  or  to  be  anticipated.^     A  conveyance  from  a 


86.  Winiama  ▼.  Banks,  11  Md. 
198;  BuUett  ▼.  Worthington,  8  Md. 
Ch.  09.  But  see  Walker  ▼.  Loring,  80 
Tex.  668,  36  8.  W.  246,  although 
property  of  a  debtor  is  heavily  incum 
bered  the  value  of  the  equity  of  re- 
demption therein  may  be  included  in 
determining  whether  a  voluntary 
conveyance  by  him  of  other  property 
was  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  and 
the  fact  that  delay,  difficulty  and  ex- 
pense will  be  incurred  before  property 
can  be  available  for  creditors,  is  not 
a  ground  for  omitting  such  property 
in  so  determining. 

87.  See  Effect  of  want  of  consider- 
ation as  to  existing  creditors,  chap. 
VIII,  9  33,  infra. 

88.  N.  T.— Payne  v.  Freer,  4  N.  Y. 
Supp.  644;  Gray  v.  Craighead,  46 
App.  Div.  614,  61  N.  Y.  Supp.  088; 
Iivre  Kellogg,  104  N.  Y.  648,  10  N.  E. 

152. 

U.  flf.— Metropolitan  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Bogers,  63  Fed.  776,  3  C.  C.  A.  666,  3 
U,  S.  App.  406,  subsequent  failure 
due  to  panic  and  to  consequent  shrink- 
age in  value  of  property  and  bills  re- 
ceivable;  Wi«well  V.  Jarvis,  0  Fed. 


84,  where  the  indebtedness  was  $3,000 
and  personal  property  retained  worth 
four  times  the  amount  was  four  years 
after  the  conveyance  lost  by  extraor- 
dinary misfortunes;  In  re  Smith,  9 
Fed.  602. 

Arifc.— Smith  v.  Yell,  8  Ark.  470; 
Dodd  V.  McCraw,  8  Ark.  83,  46  Am. 
Dec.  301. 

Col.— Windhaus  v.  Boots,  92  Gal. 
617,  28  Pac.  557;  Morgan  v.  Hecker, 
16  Pac.  317. 

Conn, — State  v.  Martin,  77  Conn. 
142,  58  Atl.  746. 

Ga.— Ayers  v.  Harrell,  111  Ga.  864, 
36  S.  E.  946. 

/n.— Harting  v.  Jockers,  136  HI. 
627,  27  N.  E.  188,  29  Am.  St.  Rep. 
341,  where  makers  of  notes  held  by 
grantor  afterwards  failed;  Patterson 
V.  McKinney,  97  111.  41. 

/nd.-— Boyd  v.  Vickrey,  138  Ind. 
276,  37  N.  E.  972;  Eiler  v.  CruU,  112 
Ind.  318,  14  N.  E.  79;  Barkley  v. 
Tapp,  87  Ind.  25;  Dunn  v.  Dunn,  82 
Ind.  42. 

La.— Jacobs  v.  His  Creditors,  11  La. 
93. 


284 


FbATTBTTLEKT  CoNVXYAlfCBS. 


husband  to  his  wife  on  a  well  grounded  belief  of  his  early  death 
has  been  held  not  fraudulent  as  to  (creditors  where,  at  the  time 
of  the  conveyance,  his  other  property  was  ample  to  pay  his  debts, 
or  there  was  nothing  to  show  that  he  was  insolvent  and  unable  to 
pay  all  his  debts,  but,  on  aooonnt  of  his  living  longer  than  he 
expected,  he  afterwards  became  nnahle  to  pay  his  debts."  Where 
the  grantor  at  the  time  of  a  voluntary  conveyance  was  deeply 
indebted  and  of  doubtful  solvency  and  became  insolv^Dtt  within 
a  short  time  thereafter,  the  conveyance  has  been  held  to  be  fraud- 
vlent  as  to  existing  creditors."      Where  a  grantor  of  a  vcduntary 


Ife.— Usher  ▼.  Hasdtine,  6  Me.  471, 
17  Am.  Bee.  253. 

Mom. — Stratton  ▼.  Edward^  174 
Mass.  374,  54  N.  £.  886,  a  eomrejanee 
in  tmst  for  the  grantor,  made  with 
the  purpose  of  protecting  the  property 
from 'the  risks  incident  to  bnsiness, 
hut  without  any  intent  to  contract 
debts  and  avoid  them  by  such  eonyey- 
anoe,  is  not  in  fraud  of  future  credi- 
tors. 

ifo.-^Welch  ▼.  Mann,  103  Mo.  304, 
92  S.  W.  98;  American  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Thomburrow,  109  Mo.  App.  639,  83 
S.  W.  771;  Johnson  ▼.  Murphy,  180 
Mo.  597,  79  S.  W.  909,  subsequent 
conversion  by  the  trustee  of  a  trust 
fund,  the  grantor  having  a  contin- 
gent liability  as  surety  on  the  trus- 
tee's bond  at  the  time  of  the  convey- 
ance; Payne  v.  Stanton,  59  Mo.  158; 
Patten  v.  Casey,  57  Mo.  118;  Potter 
v.  McDowell,  31  Mo.  62;  Walsh  v. 
Ketchum,  12  Mo.  App.  580,  74  Mo. 
427.  But  see  lionberger  v.  Baker,  88 
Mo.  447. 

yeh.—mn  v.  Fouse,  32  Neb.  687, 
49  N.  W.  760. 

N.  ff.— Leavitt  v.  Leavitt,  47  N.  H. 
329. 

N,  i^.^Rankin  v.  Gardner  (Gh.), 
34  Atl.  925. 


Ohic—Cned.  v.  Lancaster  Bank,  1 
Ohio  St  1. 

Pa.— In  re  Gross'  Estate,  6  Pa.  Oi. 
Gt.  113,  where  the  debtcnr  relied  upon 
the  practice  of  his  profession  to  bring 
him  pecuniary  success. 

8,  C, — ^Buchanan  v.  MeNinch,  3  8. 
C.  498,  where  subsequent  insolvency 
arose  from  the  general  emancipation 
of  1865,  a  sudden  and  extraordinary 
event  which  the  debtor  oould  neither 
foresee  nor  prevent;  Hamilt<m  v. 
Hamilton,  2  Rich.  Eq.  355,  46  Am. 
Dec.  68;  Izard  v.  Middleton,  1  Bailey 
Eq.  228,  insolvency  caused  by  unfor- 
seen  calamity;  Howard  v.  Williams, 
1  Bailey,  575,  21  Am.  Dec.  483;  Jacks 
V.  Tunno,  3  Desaus  Eq.  1. 

F*.— Wilbur  v.  Nichols,  61  Vt.  432, 
18  AtL  154;  Brackett  v.  Waite,  4  Vt. 
389. 

WfuK — ^Deering  v.  Holoomb,  26 
Wash.  588,  67  Pac.  240,  561. 

W.  Va. — ^Kanawha  Valley  Bank  v. 
Wilson,  25  W.  Va.  242. 

Cimtra, — ^Black  v.  Sanders,  46  N. 
C.  67,  under  statutory  provision. 

89.  American  Forcite  Powder  Co. 
V.  Hanna,  31  App.  Div.  (N.  T.)  117, 
62  N.  Y.  Supp.  547. 

OO.  United    States    Trust    Co.    v. 
E,  97  U.  a  304,  24  L.  Ed. 


Indebtedness  ob  Insolvbnot  07  Gbantob. 


385 


oonveyance  was  solvemt  at  the  time,  subsequent  insolvency  will 
not  render  tiie  oonvejanoe  fraudulent  as  to  subsequent  credi- 
tors.^ In  determining  whether  a  voluntary  deed  is  in  fraud 
of  creditors,  the  true  test  of  solvency  is  the  value  of  the  grantor's 
other  property  at  the  time  the  deed  was  executed  as  compared 
with  his  debts,  and  not  the  estimated  value  thereof  after  his 
death,  which  occurred  at  a  considerable  time  later.^ 

%  11.  Executory  contract  or  gift  consummated  after  insol- 
vency.— ^Where  an  executory  contract  or  agreement  by  a  debtor 
to  convey  certain  property  is  made  on  an  actual  or  valuable  con- 
sideration while  the  debtor  is  solvent,  a  subsequent  execution  of 
the  agreement  or  contract,  when  the  debtor  has  become  insolvent, 
is  nevertheless  valid  as  against  his  creditors.**  But  a  voluntary 
conveyance  executed  by  a  debtor  in  consummation  of  a  parol 
gift  made,  when  unembarrassed,^  or  the  subsequent  acknowledg- 
ment of  an  ineffectual  conveyance  to  a  voluntary  grantee,^  is 
not  valid  as  against  existing  creditors.  Where  a  voluntary  con- 
veyance, made  while  the  grantor  is  insolvent,  is  withheld  from 
record  because  he  believes  it  inoperative,  a  subsequent  ccmvey- 
ance,  made  in  contemplation  of  insolvency,  is  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors,  though  made  to  effectuate  the  first  conveyance.^    And 


954;  Banning  ▼.  Purinton,  105  Iowa, 
642,  75  N.  W.  639. 

91.  N.  y.— Spicer  v. .  Ayeni,  53 
How.  Pr.  405. 

lotoa, — ^Lyman  ▼.  Cessford,  15 
Iowa,  229. 

OAio.^£van8  ▼.  Lewis,  30  Ohio  St. 
11. 

92.  Ayera  ▼.  Harrell,  111  Ga.  864, 
36  S.  E.  946. 

93.  La. — Wyer's  Syndics  v.  Sweet, 
2  Mart.  N.  S.  58S. 

Mobs. — ^Holmes  ▼.  Winchester,  133 
Mass.  140. 

Pa.— Hand  y.  Hitner,  140  Pa.  St. 
166,  21  Atl.  200,  a  contract  which  is 
unreasonable,  and  gives  extravagant 


compensation  for  services,  made  by  a 
solvent  debtor,  and  carried  out  after 
his  insolvency,  is  not  a  fraud  in  law 
against  creditors  who  were  not  such 
at  the  time  it  was  made.  See  Bou- 
stead  V.  Shaw,  27  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.) 
280. 

94.  Hubbard  v.  AUen,  59  Ala. 
283;  Rucker  v.  Abell,  8  B.  BIbn. 
(Ky.)  566,  48  Am.  Dec.  406;  Doe  v. 
McKinney,  5  Ala.  719;  First  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Bowman,  36  W.  Va.  649,  14 
S.  £.  989. 

95.  Hendon  v.  White,  52  Ala.  597. 

96.  Talcott  V.  Levy,  20  N.  Y. 
Supp.  440,  29  Abb.  N.  C.  (N.  Y.)  3 
alfd  143  N.  Y.  636,  37  N.  E.  828. 


286 


Fbaudulestt  Conyetances. 


a  parol  gift  of  land,  the  title  being  retained  until  tlie  grantor 
had  incurred  a  large  indebtedness^  when  a  voluntary  conveyance 
was  made,  is  ineffectual  as  against  creditors,  notwithstanding  the 
grantee  had  been  permitted  for  some  years  to  take  the  r^its  and 
profits.*^  But  a  gift  of  land  made  at  a  time  when  the  donor 
was  solvent  has  been  held  valid  where  the  donee  moved  on  the 
land,  paid  taxes  and  made  valuable  improvements,  although  later 
when  the  deed  was  given  the  donor  was  in  failing  circimistances 
and  soon  after  became  insolvent.'*  Where  a  gift  was  consum- 
mated before  insolvency  but  the  conveyance  in  exchange  for  the 
gift  was  after  the  donor's  insolvency,  the  conveyance  was  held 
valid,  in  the  absence  of  fraudulent  intent** 

§  12.  Insolvency  at  time  suit  is  brought. — The  rule  has  been 
maintained  in  some  jurisdictions  that,  in  order  to  entitle  a 
creditor  to  set  aside  his  debtor's  conveyance  as  fraudulent,  in 
the  absence  of  mtent  to  defraud,  he  must  all^e  and  prove  not 
only  that  the  grantor  had  no  other  property  subject  to  execution 
at.  the  time  of  the  conveyance,  but  also  that  he  had  no  such 
property  at  the  time  of  the  commencement  of  the  action.^  It 
has  also  been  hdd  that  it  is  not  essential  to  the  right  of  a  creditor 
to  attack  as  fraudulent  a  mortgage  executed  by  the  debtor,  that 
the  debtor  shall  have  been  insolvent  at  or  about  the  time  of  the 


97.  Bank  of  Willows  ▼.  Small, 
144  Cal.  709,  78  Pac.  263. 

d8.  Patteraon  ▼.McKiimey,97 111.41. 

99.  Second  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Merrill, 
81  Wis.  142,  29  Am.  St.  Rep.  870,  50 
N.  W.  603. 

1.  Taylor  ▼.  Johnson,  113  Ind. 
164,  16  N.  E.  238;  Eiler  ▼.  Crull,  112 
Ind.  318,  14  N.  E.  79;  Bishop  v. 
State,  83  Ind.  67;  Wooters  v.  Os- 
bom,  77  Ind.  613;  Burlington 
Protestant  Hospital  Assoc,  v.  Ger- 
linger,  the  plaintiff  must  show  that 
defendant  was  insolvent  when  action 
was  brought;  Montana  Lumber,  etc., 


Co.  V.  Qerhold,  17  Mont.  668,  44  Pac. 
87,  where  the  jary  found  that  a 
debtor  was,  at  or  since  the  time  he 
made  the  conveyance,  the  owner  of 
sufficient  property  subject  to  execu- 
tion for  the  satisfaction  of  his  in- 
debtedness, but  it  was  not  found  that 
he  was  possessor  of  any  property, 
other  than  that  conveyed  when 
the  original  action  was  brought 
or  when  the  judgment  therein  was 
entered,  or  when  the  action  to  sub- 
ject such  property  thereunder  was 
commenced,  the  conveyance  was  held 
to  be  fraudulent. 


Indebtedness  ob  Insolysnoy  of  Geantob. 


287 


execution  of  the  mortgage,  if  he  is  insolvent  at  the  time  the 
attack  is  made,  thon^  the  fact  of  his  insolvencj  at  the  time 
of  the  execution  of  the  mortgage  may  be  relevant  to  the  question 
of  fraud.'  Where  a  case  finds  that  the  debtor  is  insolvent  at 
the  time  judgment  is  rendered,  his  insolvency  will  be  considered 
as  extending  back  beyond  a  voluntary  conveyance  of  his  prop- 
erty made  during  his  insolvency,  unless  the  contrary  is  shown.' 
But  insolvency  at  the  time  when  suit  is  brou^t  cannot  relate 
back  to  the  time  the  conveyance  was  made  so  as  to  show  an 
intent  different  from  that  which  existed  when  the  conveyance 
was  made.^ 


8.  Banning  ▼.  Parinton,  105  Iowa, 
642,  75  N.  W.  639,  citing  Kain  ▼. 
Larkin,  141  K.  Y.  144,  36  N.  £.  9; 
Hager  ▼.  Shindler,  29  Cal.  4S; 
Bounds  ▼.  Onan*  29  Minn.  189,  and 


dUapfyroving  Bomine  v.  Bomine,  59 
Ind.  346. 

8.  Carlisle  ▼.  Bich,  8  N.  H.  44. 

4.  American  Forcite  Powder  Mfg. 
Co.  Y.  Hanna,  31  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.) 
117,  62  N.  Y.  Supp.  547. 


288  FMAXlDXlLEaT  COSVETAMCE^ 


CHAPTER  VnL 

COHBmSBATIOBr. 

Seetioii  1.  Katim  mad  anOtieaey  of  ooodderatioii  geBenOj. 

2.  NomiiiAl  oonsideration. 

3.  lUegal  eonsideratioiL 

4.  Fictitious  oonttderation. 
6.  Katnral  lore  and  aifeetion 

6.  Moral  obligation. 

7.  Ezecntoiy  oonaideratioii. 

8.  PromisBOiy  notes  and  bonds. 

9.  Future  services. 

10.  Future  support. 

11.  Future  advances. 

12.  Contingent  liability  in  generaL 

13.  Security  to  endorser,  surety  or  guarantor. 

14.  Assumption  of  liability  in  general. 

15.  Assumption  and  payment  of  debt  by  endorsee  or  snrety. 

16.  Assumption  of  mortgage  or  other  lien. 

17.  Executed  agreement  to  pay  debt. 

18.  Pre-existing  liability;  payment  or  satisfaction  of,  or  seeoriiy  for, 

pre-existing  debt. 

19.  Property  in  excess  of  debt. 

20.  Amount  secured  in  excess  of  actual  debt. 

21.  Debts  not  yet  due. 

22.  Debts  barred  by  limitation. 

23.  Taking  additional  security  for  debts  amply  secured. 

24.  Conveyance  in  execution  of  prior  valid  agreement. 
26.  Marriage  as  consideration;  ante-nuptial  settlement. 

26.  Effect  of  marriage  on  prior  voluntary  conveyance. 

27.  Conveyance  after  marriage  in  accordance  with  ante-nuptial  agree- 

ment. 

28.  Post-nuptial  agreement. 

29.  Adequacy  of  consideration. 

30.  Partial  invalidity  or  illegality  of  consideration. 

31.  Consideration  usurious  in  part. 

32.  Voluntary  conveyance;  effect  of  want  of  considerati<m. 

33.  Voluntary  conveyances  as  to  existing  creditors. 

34.  Conveyance  in  accordance  with  prior  parol  gift. 
36.  Statutory  rule. 

36.  Voluntary  conveyances  as  to  subsequent  creditors. 

37.  Insufficiency  or  inadequacy  of  consideration. 


COKSIDERATIOX,  289 

Section  38.  Transactions  between  husbaDd  and  wife;   nature,  adequacj  and 
sufficiency^  of  consideration. 

39.  Release  of  wife's  dower  right. 

40.  Helease  of  homestead  right. 

41.  Property  vested  in  husband  by  marriage. 

42.  Effect  of  failure  to  reduce  property  to  possession. 

43.  Earnings,  services  and  savings  of  wife. 

44.  Consideration  paid  by  husband  for  property  purchased  In  oame  of 

wife. 

45.  Assumption  of  husband's  debts. 

46.  Payment  of  pre-existing  debts  in  generaL 

47.  Repayment  of  money  loaned  by  wife. 

48.  Appropriation  of  wife's  separate  estate. 

49.  Rents  and  profits  of  wife's  separate  estates 

60.  Satisfaction  of  wife's  paraphernal  rights. 

61.  Property  in  excess  of  debt. 

62.  Laches  of  wife  in  asserting  claim. 

63.  Conveyance  in  execution  of  prior  agreement. 

64.  Conveyance  to  confirm  prior  conveyance. 

66.  Effect  of  want  or  insufficiency  of  consideration. 

66.  Transactions  between  parent  and  child;  nature,  adequacy  and  siiffi- 

ciency  of  consideration. 

67.  Earnings  of  minor  child. 

68.  Services  rendered  by  minor  child. 

69.  Services  rendered  by  a  child  after  majority. 

60.  Services  rendered  by  grandchild. 

61.  Future  support  generally. 

62.  Future  support  as  part  consideration. 

63.  Past  support  as  part  consideration. 

64.  Assumption  of  debts. 

66.  Payment  of  pre-existing  debts. 

66.  Effect  of  want  or  insufficiency  of  consideratiaiL 


Section  1.  Nature  and  suf&ciency  of  consideration  generally. 

— ^It  ia  not  sufficient  to  condemn  a  conveyance  of  land  made  by  a 
debtor,  as  a  fraud  upon  creditors  of  the  grantor,  that  it  was  vol- 
untary and  not  founded  on  a  valuable  consideration.  An  owner 
of  real  estate  can  make  a  voluntary  settlement  thereof  upon  his 
wife  and  children  without  any  consideration,  provided  he  has 
ample  property  left  to  satisfy  all  the  just  claims  of  his  creditors. 
The  person  assailing  the  deed  assumes  the  burden  of  showing  that 
it  was  executed  in  bad  faith,  and  that  it  left  the  grantor  insolvent 
and  without  ample  property  to  pay  his  existing  debts  and  liabili- 

19 


290 


FbAUDULSNT   CoNVETAlfCES. 


ties.^  A  conveyance  founded  on  a  good,  but  not  on  a  valuable, 
consideration  is  voluntary^  and  may  be  void  as  to  creditors ;  when 
a  consideration  is  necessary,  it  must  be  a  valuable  one.'  A  gratuity 
cannot  afterwards  be  converted  into  a  debt  so  as  to  become  the 
consideration  for  a  conveyance  made  by  the  grantor  to  the  injury 
of  his  creditors,'  nor  will  a  donatio  mmiis  cauaa  afFect  the  rights 
of  creditors  of  the  donor/  In  a  suit  to  set  aside  a  convej^ance  as 
in  fraud  of  creditors,  the  grantee  may  establish  a  valuable  con- 
sideration for  the  conveyance  by  showing  the  payment  of  money 
by  him  to  the  grantor,^  or  the  payment  by  him  of  debts  of  the 
grantor  due  to  third  persons,*  or  the  dischai^  of  legal  or  equitable 


1.  Kain  v.  Larkin,  131  N.  T.  300, 
30  N.  £.  106;  Qenesee  River  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Mead,  92  N.  Y.  637 ;  Holden 
▼.  Burnham,  63  N.  Y.  74;  Dygert  ▼. 
RemerBclmidec,  32  N.  Y.  637;  Wil- 
bur Y.  Fradenburgh,  52  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  480;  Seward  t.  Jackaon,  8  Cow. 
(N.  Y.)  406;  McCole  v.  Loehr,  79 
Ind.  432;  Wbitesel  v.  Hiney,  62  Ind. 
168;  Sherman  ▼.  HogUnd,  64  Ind. 
679;  Pence  ▼.  Croan,  61  Ind.  338. 
And  see  chap.  VIII,  SS  32-36,  infra. 

2.  N.  r.— ^Seymour  v.  Wilson,  19 
N.  Y.  417;  Smith  v.  Ferine,  49  Hun, 
606,  1  N.  Y.  Supp.  496;  Seward  ▼. 
Jackson,  8  Cow.  406. 

Ala. — ^Norwood  ▼.  Washington,  136 
Ala.  667,  33  So.  869;  KiUough  Y. 
Steele,  1  Stew.  &  P.  262. 

Conn, — Clarke  v.  Black,  78  Conn. 
467,  62  Atl.  767 ;  Trumbull  v.  Hewitt, 
62  Conn.  448,  26  Atl.  360;  Washband 
Y.  Washband,  27  Conn.  424. 

Mo, — ^Lyons  y.  Murray,  96  Mo.  23, 
8  S.  W.  170,  6  Am.  St.  Rep.  17. 

y.  O.— Jones  Y.  Ruffin,  14  N.  C.  404. 

Pa.— Wilson  y.  Howser,  12  Pa.  St. 
109. 

Tew, — Deutsch    y.    Allen,    67    Tex. 

89. 

Va, — ^DaYis  y.  Anderson,  99  Va. 
620,  39  S.  £.  688;  Harrey  y.  Steptoe, 


17  Gratt.  289;  Ruddle's  Ex'rs  y.  Ben, 
10  Leigh,  467 ;  Broadfoot  y.  Dyer,  3 
Munf.  360. 

A  deed  dkovld  mot  be  deemed 
Tolmitary  and  Yoid  because  no  con- 
sideration appears  on  its  face,  if  there 
is  in  reality  a  Yaluable  and  sufficient 
consideration.  Lowry  y.  Howard,  36 
Ind.  170,  9  Am.  Rep.  676;  Hanna  y. 
Towers,  3  Har.  ft  J.  (Md.)  147,  6  Am. 
Dec.  427.  Nor  because  there  is  a  mis- 
statement as  to  the  nature  of  the  oon> 
sideration.  Commonwealth  Bank  y. 
Reams,  100  Md.  202,  69  Atl.  1010. 
Compare  Recital  of  false  considera- 
tion, chap.  VI,  S  2,  supra. 

Uneertalaty  in  tbe  aatoiiiit  of 
ooiulder«tion  is  an  element  of 
fraud.  Montgomery's  Ex'rs  y.  Kirk- 
sey,  26  Ala.  172.  But  a  conYeyance  is 
not  necessarily  Yoid  because  it  trans- 
fers an  uncertain  amount  of  property 
for  an  uncertain  consideration.  An- 
gell  Y.  Pickard,  61  Mich.  661,  28  K. 
W.  680. 

3.  Clay  Y.  McCally,  6  Fed.  Gas. 
Ko.  2,869,  4  Woods,  606. 

4.  Chase  y.  Redding,  79  Mass.  418. 

5.  Miller  y.  Rowan,  108  Ala.  698, 
19  So.  9;  Billgery  y.  Ferguson,  30  La» 
Ann.  34. 

6.  Miller  y.  Rowan,  eupra;  Pique 


CONSIDEBATIOK. 


291 


liabilities  to  the  grantee.^    The  cansideration  may  consist  of  other 
things  than  money  but  which  possess  a  pecuniary  value,*  or  confer 


Arendale,  71  Ala.  91,  whether  cre- 
ated either  before  or  oontempor^pe- 
ously  with  the  conveyance. 
'  7.  Neal  ▼.  Foster,  36  Fed.  29;  Mil- 
ler V.  Rowan,  supra;  Carlisle  v.  Qas- 
kill,  4  Ind.  219,  a  conveyance  of  land 
to  a  husband  in  satisfaction  of  a  claim 
for  damages  for  the  seduction  of  his 
wife. 

A  eoATOTaaee  by  wot  lasolTeiit 
to  aa  attorney  of  preferred  ered- 
itor%  to  pay  counsel  fees  incurred  by 
such  cx^itors,  in  the  defence  of  the 
preference  against  other  creditors,  is 
invalid  as  to  other  creditors,  since 
there  being  no  obligation  on  the  part 
of  the  insolvent  to  pay  such  fees,  the 
consideration  was  not  a  valuable  one. 
Simon  v.  Norton,  56  Mo.  App.  338. 

8.  V.  «.— ^Stanley  v.  Schwalby,  162 
U.  S.  255,  16  Sup.  Ct.  754,  40  L.  Ed. 
960. 

Cal. — ^Hunt  v.  Hammel,  142  Gal. 
456,  76  Pac.  378,  services  rendered. 

Col. — ^Homestead  Min.  Go.  v.  Rey- 
nolds, 30  Colo.  330,  70  Pac.  422;  Mc- 
Murtrie  v.  Riddell,  9  Colo.  497,  13 
Pac.  181. 

/oioo. — Hinkel  v.  Downing,  116 
Iowa,  693,  88  N.  W.  1088. 

Mass, — ^Parker  v.  Barker,  43  Mass. 
423,  a  conveyance  of  land  for  a  mort- 
gage of  land. 

ifo. — ^Redpath  v.  Lawrence,  42  Mo. 
App.  101. 

"Seb. — Jones  v.  Dunbar,  52  Neb.  151, 
71  N.  W.  976,  relinquishment  of  a 
valid  entry  of  land  under  the  timber 
culture  act  of  Congress. 

2V.  J. — First  Nat.  Bank  of  Asbury 
Park  V.  White,  60  N.  J.  Eq.  487,  46 
AU.  1092. 

Tern, — ^Weaver  v.  Nugent,  72  Tex. 
272,  10  S.  W.  458,  13  Am.  St.  Rep. 


792;  Chessher  v.  Clamp,  10  Tex.  Civ. 
App.  350,  30  S.  W.  466,  merchandise. 

Fa.— Ruddle's  Ex'rs  v.  Ben,  10 
Leigh,  467. 

W.  Va, — Farmers'  Bank  v.  Gould, 
48  W.  Va.  99,  35  S.  E.  878,  86  Am. 
St.  Rep.  24. 

Can, — ^Randall  v.  Dopp,  22  Ont.  422. 

Bng, — ^Blount  v.  Doughty,  3  Atk. 
481,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  1076;  Stephens 
V.  Olive,  2  Bro.  Ch.  90,  29  Eng.  Re- 
print, 52;  Woerell  v.  Jacob,  3  Meriv. 
256,  36  Eng.  Reprint,  98;  Carter  v. 
Hind,  2  Wkly.  Rep.  27;  Heep  v. 
Tonge,  9  Hare,  90,  20  L.  J.  Ch.  661, 
41  Eng.  Ch.  90.  Compare  Doe  v. 
R<dfe,  35  E.  C.  L.  775,  3  N.  ft  P.  648. 

A  mortsaso  to  seenre  tbe  debt 
of  another  is  not  voluntary.  Mar- 
den  V.  Babcock,  2  Mete.  (Mass.)  99. 

Stoek  of  eorporation  orsaaiBed 
by  debtor. — Where  a  debtor  organ- 
izes a  corporation,  and  transfers  his 
property  to  it  without  other  consid- 
eration than  the  stock  of  such  corpor- 
ation, the  transaction  is  fraudulent 
as  to  creditors.  Shumaker  v.  David- 
son, 116  Iowa,  569,  87  N.  W.  441. 
But  see  Gardner  v.  Haines  (S.  D.), 
104  N.  W.  244.  See  also  Organization 
of  corporation,  chap.  II,  8  10,  supra. 

A  transfer  of  property  front 
aa  old  to  a  new  oorporatton 
through  an  individual  held  construc- 
tively fraudulent  as  to  creditors  of  the 
old  corporation.  McNeal  v.  Hayes 
Mach.  Co.,  103  N.  Y.  Supp.  312. 

The  release  by  a  leeeee  of  bia 
rights  under  the  leaee,  made  in 
consideration  of  the  lessor  agreeing 
to  forego  his  rights  to  collect  rent,  is 
supported  by  a  sufficient  considera- 
tion. Livesley  v.  Heise  (Or.),  85  Pao, 
509. 


292 


Fbaudulekt  Conveyances. 


same  sabfitantial  advantage  upon  the  grantor.*  Services  rendered 
by  an  attorney  are  suflScient  consideration.^*  The  true  ownership 
of  property  is  a  sufficient  consideration  to  support  the  reconvey- 
ance by  a  fraudulent  grantee  to  his  grantor.^  Where  the  con- 
sideration for  a  deed  fails,  the  obligation  to  reconvey  is  a  suffici^it 
consideration  for  a  deed  executed  for  that  purpose."  The  equit- 
able ownership  is  a  sufficient  consideration  to  sustain  a  convey- 
ance from  the  holder  of  the  bare  legal  title."  A  conveyance  of  an 
equity  of  redemption  by  a  mortgagor  to  a  mortgagee,  without  the 
payment  of  any  new  consideration,  and  with  intent  to  delay  or 
defeat  creditors,  cannot  be  regarded  as  a  voluntary  conveyance, 
and  therefore  void  as  against  creditors  of  the  mortgagor,  if  the 
amount  of  the  debt  secured  by  the  mortgage  is  equal  to  the  whole 
value  of  the  land." 

§  2.  Nominal  consideration* — ^A  conveyance  for  a  mere  nom- 
inal consideration,  when  attacked  as  fraudulent,  will  be  subjected 
to  the  same  rules  as  are  applicable  to  voluntary  transfers."  A 
purely  nominal  consideration,  no  actual  consideration  being  paid, 
for  the  conveyance  of  property  by  a  debtor,  is  not  a  good  or  valu- 
able consideration,  as  against  existing  creditors,  and  renders  the 
conveyance  voluntary  and  fraudulent  as  to  them."    But  a  nominal 


0.  Stanley  v.  Schwalby,  162  U.  S. 
266,  16  Sup.  Ct.  764,  40  L.  Ed.  MO, 
an  advantage  enuring  to  a  city  as  the 
grantor  of  lands  by  the  establishment 
of  military  headquarters  there  by  the 
United  States. 

PermlMion  for  eaaeellatioA  of 
a  JudKinont  of  separation  and  main- 
tenance is  a  consideration,  as  against 
creditors  of  the  husband,  for  his  as- 
signment to  the  wife.  Tisdale  ▼. 
Rider,  104  N.  Y.  Supp.  77. 

10.  Reed  v.  Mellor,  5  Mo.  App.  667 ; 
Sullivan  v.  Ball,  56  S.  C.  343,  33  S. 
E.  486;  Pirie  v.  Stem,  97  Wis.  150, 
72  N.  W.  370,  66  Am.  St.  Rep.  103. 

11.  Farmers*  Bank  v.  Gould,  48 
W.  Va.  99,  35  S.  E.  878,  86  Am.  St. 


Rep.  24.    See  Reconveyance  by  fraud- 
ulent grantee,  chap.  IV,  S  34,  supra. 

12.  Forbush  v.  WiUard,  33  Haas. 
42. 

13.  First  Nat.  Bank  of  Amsterdam 
V.  Miller,  24  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  661, 
49  N.  Y.  Supp.  981,  rev'd  on  other 
grounds,  163  N.  Y.  164,  57  N.  E.  308. 
See  also  Property  transferred  by 
debtor  to  equitable  owner,  chap. 
TV,  §  31,  supra, 

14.  Williams  v.  Robbins,  81  Mass. 
590.  See  Conveyance  of  property  of 
little  or  no  value — ^valueless  equity  of 
redemption,  chap.  IV,  S  4,  supra, 

16.  California  Consol.  Min.  Co.  v. 
Manley  (Idaho),  81  Pac.  50. 

16.  N.  r.— Ten  Eyck  v.  Witbect 


CONBIDBBATIOK. 


293 


condideration  is  sufficient  as  against  the  grantor.'^  A  slight  con- 
sideration, "wben  not  disproportionate  to  the  value  of  the  property 
or  interest  transferred,  is  sufficient,  as  against  creditors.^' 

§  3.  Illegal  consideration. — ^An  illegal  consideration  is  not  a 
good  or  valuable  consideration  to  support  a  conveyance  or  transfer 
of  a  debtor's  property.  For  example^  a  husband's  converyance  of 
property  to  his  wife  in  consideration  of  her  discontinuing  a  pend- 
ing divorce  action,"  or  a  conveyance  in  consideration  6f  future 
illicit  intercourse,*  or  of  past  illicit  sexual  intercourse^*^  or  a  con- 
veyance in  consideration  of  an  agreement  not  to  prosecute  a  debtor 
for  a  misdemeanor  affecting  public  interests,"  or  a  conveyance 
pursuant  to  an  antenuptial  contract  made  in-  consideration  of  a 
promise  of  marriage  where  both  parties  participated  in  the  fraud 


136  N.  T.  40,  31  N.  B.  994,  31  Am.  St. 
Rdp.  809;  (VBrieii  v.  Cavanagh,  36 
Misc.  Rep.  362,  73  N.  Y.  Supp.  658; 
Royer  Wheel  Go.  t.  Fielding,  61  How. 
Pr.  437,  a  nominal  consideration  of 
$100;  Manhattan  Co.  v.  Ererteon,  6 
Paige,  457. 

U,  Sf. — ^Polk  County  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Scott,  132  Fed.  897,  66  C.  C.  A.  51; 
Ridgeway  v.  Underwood,  20  Fed.  Ca». 
No.  11,815,  4  Wash.  129. 

Ato.— Gunn  ▼.  Hardy,  130  Ala.  642, 
31  So.  443;  Houston  v.  Blackman,  66 
Ala.  559,  41  Am.  Rep.  756;  Felder  ▼. 
Harper,  12  Ala.  612. 

Flo.— McKeown  v.  Allen,  37  Fla. 
490,  20  So.  556. 

iTy.— Ward  v.  Trotter,  3  T.  B.  Mon. 
1 ;  McKinley  y.  Combs,  1  T.  B.  Mon. 
105. 

Mo, — ^lionberger  ▼.  Baker,  88  Mo. 
447,  aifg  14  Mo.  App.  353. 

OAto.— Stoltz  ▼.  Vanatta,  32  Wkly. 
Lan.  Bui.  100. 

Or. — Scoggin  v.  Schloath,  15  Or. 
380,  15  Pac.  635. 

UtoA.— Gufltin     ▼.     Mathews,     25 


Utah,  168,  70  Pac  402.  Compare 
Martin  ▼.  White,  115  Ga.  866,  42  S. 
E.  279;  Ferguson's  Appeal,  117  Pa. 
St.  426,  11  Atl.  885. 

17.  See  cases  cited  in  last  preced* 
ing  note. 

18.  Klosterman  ▼.  Vader,  6  Wash. 
99,  32  Pac.  1055. 

19.  Friedman  ▼.  Bierman,  43  Hun, 
387;  Morgan  ▼.  Potter,  17  Hun,  403, 
a  note  given  liy  a  husband  to  his  wife 
for  money  lent  to  him,  which  had  pre- 
viously been  paid  to  her  for  discon- 
tinuing a  divorce  suit,  was  held  not  to 
be  a  valid  claim  against  the  hus- 
band's estate,  as  against  creditors; 
Oppenheimer  v.  Collins,  115  Wis.  288, 
91  N.  W.  690,  60  L.  R.  A.  406. 

20.  Wait  V.  Day,  4  Den.  (N.  Y.) 
439. 

21.  Jackson  v.  Miner,  101  111.  550; 
Hargroves  v.  Meray,  2  HiU  Eq.  (S. 
C.)  222,  such  conveyances  are  volun- 
tary and  may  be  avoided;  Fletcher  ▼. 
Sidl^,  2  Vern.  490. 

22.  Sharp  v.  Philadelphia  Wan- 
house  Co.,  10  Fed.  379. 


294 


FsAUDUiJeirT  Coitvetakces. 


or  bad  notice  of  the  frauduleoit  intent^**  will  be  set  a^de  at  tbe 
instance  of  creditorB  as  fraudnl^it  and  void. 


§  4,  Fictitious  conaideratioiu — ^A  conveyance  or  transfer  made 
with  intent  to  convey  property  in  discbarge  of  a  supposed  d^t, 
wbicb  in  law  is  not  a  debt,  or  to  indemnify  tbe  grantee  against  a 
responsibility  created  as  a  pretense,  or  for  any  fictitious  considera- 
tiosLf  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  creditors,  and  will  be  set 
aside,** 

§  5.  Natural  love  and  affection. — ^Tbe  law  sanctions  a  convey- 
ance founded  upon  the  consideration  of  blood  or  marriage  merely, 
and  the  legal  presumption  is  that  such  a  conveyance  is  valid  and 
not  a  fraud  upon  the  rights  of  anyone.*  But  a  conveyance  in 
consideration  of  natural  love  and  afFection  is  merely  voluntary 
and  cannot  be  supported  against  tbe  rights  of  prior  or  existing 
creditors,**  unless  the  grantor  is  not  so  indebted  as  to  deprive  tbe 


23.  Marmon  ▼.  White,  151  Ind. 
446,  51  N.  E.  930;  Dent  t.  Pickens,  46 
W.  Va.  378,  33  S.  E.  303. 

24.  Ato.— Weingarten  ▼.  MareiUy 
121  Ala.  187,  25  So.  862. 

Ky. — Drane  y.  Underwood,  1  Ky.  L. 
Hep.  317. 

La, — Preslar  ▼.  Walker,  116  La. 
661,  40  So.  1033. 

JffoA.^Hunt  ▼.  Schier,  59  Miob. 
286,  26  N.  W.  494. 

Mo. — ^Kramer  ▼.  McCaughy,  11  Mo. 
App.  426,  an  aUeged  trust  in  personal 
property. 

;y.  (7. — Johnson  y.  Murchison,  60  N. 
C.  286,  1  Winst.  292;  Leadman  v. 
Harris,  14  N.  C.  144. 

Pa.— Taylor's  Appeal,  45  Pa.  St.  71. 

Tenn. — Oibbs  v.  Thompson,  26 
Tenn.  179. 

Tew, — ^Watts  v.  Dubois  (Civ.  App. 
1902),  66  S.  W.  698;  Hinson  v.  Wal- 
ker, 65  Tex.  103. 

Wyo.— Stirling  ▼.  Wagner,  4  Wyo. 
5,  31  Pao.  1032,  32  Pac.  1128. 


Can, — ^Ball  y.  Ballantyne,  11  Oraat 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  199. 

See  Fictitlousness  of  consideration, 
chap.  VI,  S  3,  9upra;  Recital  of  false 
consideration,  chap.  VI,  {  2,  9upra; 
chap.  Xin,  S  11,  infra. 

25.  Fraaer  ▼.  Western,  1  Barb.  Ch. 
(N.  Y.)  220. 

26.  Aid.— McKee  ▼.  West  (1904), 
37  So.  740,  it  is  fraudulent  per  m  as 
against  existing  creditors;  Potter  ▼. 
Grade,  68  Ala.  303,  29  Am.  Rep.  748; 
Gannard  v.  Eslava,  20  Ala.  732. 

Mich. — Farrand  v.  Caton,  69  Mich. 
236,  37  N.  W.  199. 

Ohio. — ^Holmes  v.  Sullivan,  9  Ohio 
Dec.  499,  14  Wkly.  L.  Bui.  167. 

Tew. — ^Mbreland  v.  Atchison,  34  Tex. 
351. 

Eng, — ^Mathews  v.  Feaver,  1  Coz 
Ch.  278,  1  Rev.  Rep.  39,  29  Eng.  Re- 
print, 1165. 

Can.— Doe  v.  Blanchfield,  1  U.  C.  Q. 
B.  350. 


CONSIBEBATION. 


295 


creditors  of  an  ample  fund  for  the  payment  of  their  debts.*^  A 
conveyance  in  conaideration  of  blood  and  affection^  though  by  one 
indebted  at  the  time,  is  prima  facicj  and  not  conclusively,  fraudu- 
lent as  against  creditors."  A  conveyance  founded  on  natural  love 
and  affection  is  valid  as  against  subsequent  purchasers.** 

§  6.  Moral  obligation. — ^The  discharge  of  a  moral  obligation 
to  perform  a  duty  or  promise,  to  pay  a  debt>  or  to  convey  property, 
is  sufficient  to  sustain  a  conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  by  a 
debtor,  as  against  the  debtor's  creditors."^  In  some  jurisdictions 
it  is  held  that  a  moral  obligation  is  not  a  sufficient  consideration, 


27.  y,  y.— Stewart  v.  Town,  4  Cow. 
599,  15  Am.  Dec.  405. 

lfd.^Atkin8on  v.  PhiUips,  1  Md. 
Gh.  507. 

y.  H.— Pomeroy  v.  Bailey,  43  N. 
H.  118. 

28.  Thompaon  v.  Hammond,  1  Edw. 
Gh.  (N.  Y.)  497;  Seward  ▼.  Jackson, 
8  Cow.  (N.  Y.)  406;  Bedfield  v.  Buck, 
35  Conn.  328,  95  Am.  Dec.  241. 

29.  Stewart  v.  Town,  4  Cow.  (K. 
Y.)  699,  15  Am.  Dec.  405.  Contra, 
Freeman  v.  Eatman,  38  N.  C.  81,  40 
Am.  Dec.  444;  Burton  v.  LeRoy,  4 
Fed.  Gas.  Ko.  2217,  5  Sawy.  510. 

30.  y.  r.— Smith  V.  Ferine,  49 
Hun,  805,  1  N.  Y.  Supp.  495;  Ocean 
Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Hodges,  9  Hun,  161;  Fel- 
lows ▼.  Emperor,  13  Barb.  92. 

17.  8, — Bank  of  Georgia  v.  Higgin- 
bottom,  34  U.  S.  48,  9  L.  Ed.  46. 

Ala, — ^Moog  V.  Fraley,  79  Ala.  246, 
a  conveyance  which  equity  would  have 
sustained  is  not  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors. 

loioa. — Cottrell  t.  Smith,  63  Iowa, 
181,  18  N.  W.  865,  such  a  conveyance 
is  valid  as  against  a  judgment  credi- 
tor whose  judgment  was  not  a  lien 
on  the  land  conveyed. 

JTy.— Poynter  v.  Mallory,  20  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  284,  45  S.  W.  1042. 


yeb, — Columbia  Kat.  Bank  v.  Bald- 
win, 64  Neb.  732,  90  N.  W.  890,  a 
parol  trust  is  a  sufficient  considera- 
tion to  support  an  executed  deed 
against  the  grantor's  creditors. 

y,  D. — ^Lockren  v.  Rustan,  9  N.  D. 
43,  81  N.  W.  60. 

Pa. — ^Dougherty  v.  Mortland  8  Pa. 
Cas.  384,  11  Atl.  234. 

Tenn. — ^Rosenbaum  v.  Davis  (Ch. 
App.  1898),  48  S.  W.  706. 

Proadso  aaade  dvHac  eoTer- 
twe. — ^A  mortgage  by  a  widow  to  se- 
cure a  debt  of  her  deceased  husband, 
which  she  had  during  his  life  prom- 
ised to  pay,  is  valid  as  against  her 
creditors,  since  such  promise,  though 
not  binding  on  her,  constitutes  a  suffi- 
cient consideration  for  the  mortgage. 
Appeal  of  Sharpless,  140  Pa.  St.  63, 
21  Atl.  239. 

Not  a  Tolnatar^  eoirreyaaee* — 
A  conveyance  of  the  subsequently  ac- 
quired legal  title  of  real  property  to 
the  grantee  in  a  quitclaim  deed,  exe- 
cuted when  the  grantor  held  only  the 
equitable  title,  is  not  a  voluntary  con^ 
veyance  which  may  be  attacked  as 
such  by  creditors  of  the  grantor.  Stan- 
ton V.  Crane,  25  Nev.  114,  58  Pac.  53. 
See  also  Schreyer  v.  Piatt,  134  U.  S. 
405,  10  Sup.  Ct.  579,  33  L.  Ed.  955; 


206 


Fkaudulxnt  Gokveyakges. 


and  that  the  law  preBnmea  that  a  voluntary  oonveyanoe^  resting 
upon  moral  motivee,  is  void  aa  against  existing  creditors.*^ 

§  7.  ESxecutoiy  consideratioii* — An  execntoiy  consideration 
which  fails,  or  which  has  not  been  fally  executed,  is  insu£5^cient 
to  support  a  conveyance  or  transfer  as  against  the  creditors  of 
the  grantor.^  A  ccmveyance  by  an  insolvent  debtor,  with  the 
intention  of  using  the  proceeds  thereof  in  discharge  of  the 
claims  of  certaini  of  his  creditors,  need  not  be  made  for  cash  in 
hand,**  and  allowing  time  merely  for  the  payment  of  the  pur- 
chase money  does  not  affect  the  bona  fides  of  a  sale.^  But  un- 
usual length  of  credit  extended  to  the  purchaser,  taken  in  con- 
nection with  other  suspicious  circumstances,  will  render  a  con* 
veyance  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.*  When  a  debtor  conveys 
property  to  one  holding  his  notes  for  a  greater  amount  than  the 
price  of  the  property,  although  no  payment  in  money  is  made, 
nor  any  express  promise  of  payment,  nor  the  notes  given  up,  nor 


Property  transferred  to  debtor  bj 
equitable  owner,  chap.  IV,  S  31,  mtpra, 

81.  Ala.— Hubbard  ▼.  Allen,  59  Ala. 
283. 

OaX.— Fidelity,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Thomp- 
80B,  128  Cal.  606,  61  Pac.  94. 

J#e.— Jose  ▼.  Hewitt,  50  Me.  248, 
ooni^eyanoe  by  a  bank  director,  who 
wae  aurety  on  a  defaulting  cashier's 
bond,  to  the  bank  to  make  good  the 
defalcation. 

jriM.--Cock  y,  Oakley,  50  Miss.  628. 

Vi. — ^Fair  Haven  Marble,  etc.,  Co. 
T.  Owens,  69  Vt.  246,  37  AU.  749, 
transfer  of  property  to  pay  for  ser- 
vices rendered  to  a  debtor,  without 
contract  for  compensation,  by  mem- 
bers of  his  family. 

Eng, — Gilham  ▼.  Locke,  9  Ves.  Jr. 
612,  22  Eng.  Reprint,  741. 

See  chap.  VHI,  S  18,  infr;  as  to 
pre-existing  liability. 

32.  Robinson  v.  Stewart,  19  H.  Y. 


^  189;  Warren  ▼.  Wilder,  12  St  Rep. 

^  (N.  Y.)  757;  Farmer's,  etc.,  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Conner  (Ky.  1892),  20  8.  W. 
265;  Wiener  v.  Famham,  2  Ifich. 
472;  Blanik  ▼.  Barta,  130  Wis.  121, 
109  N.  W.  980. 

Tlia  yreavBivtloA  of  fnmd,  aris- 
ing  from  the  non-payment  of  the  con- 
sideration, may  be  rebutted,  if  subse- 
quently the  consideration  is  paid  in 
good  faith,  as  agreed  upon.  Alexan- 
der y.  Todd,  Fed.  Gas.  No.  175,  1 
Bond,  175. 

33.  Priest  v.  Brown,  100  Cal.  626, 
36  Pac.  323. 

34.  O'Neil  ▼.  Orr,  5  111.  1 ;  Helf rich 
▼.  Stein,  17  Pa.  St.  143;  Ligon  ▼.  Till- 
man (Tex.  CiY.  App.  1897),  43  8.  W. 
1060. 

36.  Sattler  v.  Marino,  30  La.  Ann. 
355;  Owen  ▼.  Anns,  26  N.  J.  L.  22; 
Grannis  ▼.  Smith,  22  Tenn.  179;  Hidc- 
autn  ▼.  Trout,  83  Va.  478,  3  S.  B,  181. 


OONSIDESATION. 


297 


Ibe  amount  of  the  bill  endorsed  on  them,  the  implied  piomiae 
to  pay  is  a  good  oonsideration.** 

§  8.  Proouasory  notes  and  bonds* — ^A  negotiable  promiaBory 
note  is  a  valuable  consideration  for  a  conveyance  or  transfer  by 
a  debtor^*^  especially  where  the  insolvency  of  the  maker  is  not 
showny**  or  where  the  conveyance  is  made  without  any  knowledge 
on  the  part  of  the  grantee  o£  the  fraudulent  intent  of  the  debtor 
to  defraud  his  creditors.**  But  where  the  insolvem^  of  the 
maker  is  shown,^  or  the  note  is  given  by  a  person  not  financially 
responsible  and  is  unsecured,^  or  where  knowledge  of  the  f  randu* 
lent  intent  of  the  grantor  is  brought  home  to  the  grantee,^  the 
note  is  not  a  sufficient  consideration,  and  the  grantee  is  not  snch 
a  pniohaser  as  the  law  will  protect. 

§  O",  Future  services. — A  conveyance  or  transfer  .of  property 
by  a  debtor  eiKecuted  in  consideration  of  future  services  of  any 
kind  is  void  as  against  existing  creditors.^    A  conveyance  by  an 


See  Sales  on  Ctedit^  chap.  VI,  S  18, 
Mipro. 

36.  BoeweU  ▼.  Oreen,  25  N.  J.  L. 
390. 

37.  McGreery  ▼.  Gordon,  38  Hun 
(N.  T.)  467;  Earl  ▼.  Earl,  186  111. 
370,  67  N.  E.  1079,  rw'g  87  111.  App. 
491;  Gordon  y.  Alexander  (Mich. 
1899),  80  N.  W.  078;  Crites  ▼.  Hart, 
49  Neb.  53,  68  N.  W.  362;  Rodgers  t. 
Kineey*  8  Ohio  Dec.  308,  7  Wkly.  L. 
Bui.  64;  Tillman  v.  Heller  (Tex. 
1890),  14  S.  W.  271.  Compare  Oppen- 
heimer  t.  Guckenheimer,  39  Fla.  617, 
23  So.  9;  Burgroff  v.  Bagby,  17  Ejr. 
L.  Bep.  820,  32  S.  W.  940;  WilliamB 
▼.  Bamett,  52  Tex.  130.  See  alao 
Sales  on  credit,  chap.  VI,  $18,  aiipra. 

Notes  of  aa  laf  aat  are  not  a  suf- 
ficient consideration.  Vanoe  t.  Phil- 
lips, 6  Hill  (N.  Y.)  433;  OveraU  ▼• 


Parker  (Tenn.  C%.  App.  1809),  68  S. 
W.  905. 

88.  Weaver  ▼.  Nugent»  72  TeoE.  272, 
10  S.  W.  458. 

89.  Starin  v.  Kelly,  36  N.  Y.  Super. 
Ct.  366;  LePage  v.  Slade,  79  Tex.  473, 
15  S.  W.  496. 

40.  Nesbitt  v.  Digby,  13  HI.  387. 

41.  Danby  v.  Sharp,  2  McArthur 
(D.  €.)  435;  Beaver  ▼.  Danyill  Shirt 
Ck».,  69  111.  App.  320;  Haymaker's 
Appeal,  53  Pa.  St.  306;  Dillard,  etc., 
Co.  y.  Smith,  105  Tenn.  372,  50  S.  W. 
1010. 

48.  Nesbitt  v.  Digby,  13  111.  387 ; 
Deakers  y.  Temple,  41  Pa.  St.  234; 
Kepner  v.  Burkhart^  5  Pa.  St.  478. 

43.  Bobinson  v.  Stewart,  10  N.  Y. 
180;  Swift  Y.  Hart^  35  Hun  (N.  Y.) 
128;  Lehman  y.  Bentley,  60  N.  Y. 
Super.  Ct.  473,  18  N.  Y.  Supp.  778; 


298 


Fraudulent  Convxtanoxs. 


insolvent  debtor  to  his  attorney,  to  pay  him  for  senrioes  to  be 
rendered  in  the  future,  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  existing 
creditors.^  It  is  a  fraud  on  creditors  to  allow  a  debtor  to  sell 
his  property  for  payment  of  contingent  and  possible  liabilities  for 
future  services.^  But  a  mortgage  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to 
secure  his  attorney  for  services  to  be  rendered  in  litigation  whidi 
such  debtor  anticipates  will  arise  over  the  winding  up  of  his 
business  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  other  creditors.^  An  assign- 
ment by  the  insolvent,  in  trust  to  secure  the  payment  of  serv- 
ices to  be  thereafter  rendered  by  one  under  no  presen^t  legal 
obligation  to  render  them,  is  void,  as  against  the  creditors  of 
the  assignor/^ 

§  10.  Future  support — ^A  conveyance  of  land  in  consideration 
of  future  maintenance,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  of  existing 
creditors  at  the  time  of  its  execution,  is  valid.^  But  an  agree- 
ment to  furnish  for  the  grantor  or  those  dependent  upon  him 
future  support  and  maintenance,  although  it  may  be  valid  as 


P^rry  ▼.  Hardison,  99  N.  C.  21,  6  S. 
E.  230.  See  also  South  Omaha  Nat. 
Bank  ▼.  Boyd  (Ark.  1906),  97  N.  W. 
288. 

Bmrwie^m  remdeved  prior  to 
deatb  of  sraartor. — ^A  conveyance 
by  an  intestate  to  her  children  in  ac- 
cordance with  an  agreement  that  they 
should  be  paid  for  their  senrices  will 
not  be  set  aside  as  fraudulent,  in  an 
action  by  her  administrator  in  behalf 
of  a  creditor,  merely  because  the 
Talue  of  the  property  was  in  excess 
of  the  sum  due  the  children  at  the 
date  of  the  conveyance,  where  at  the 
time  of  the  intestate's  death  the  value 
of  the  services  amounted  to  a  sum 
equal  to  the  value  of  the  property 
conveyed.  Darling  v.  Bicker,  68  Vt. 
471,  36  Atl.  376. 

44.  Shideler  v.  Fisher,  13  Colo. 
App.  105,  57  Pac.  864;  Binggold  v. 


Leith,  73  HI.  App.  656;  Winfield  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Crooo,  46  Kan.  629,  26  Pac. 
942;  Fuller  v.  Orooo^  46  Kan.  684, 
26  Pac.  944.  But  see  Farmers',  etc.. 
Bank  v.  Mosher,  63  Neb.  130,  88  N. 
W.  552. 

45.  Grain  v.  Gould,  46  lU.  203. 

46.  Cortland  Wagon  Co.  v.  Gordy, 
98  Ga.  527,  25  S.  £.  574;  In  re  Par- 
sons, 150  Mass.  343,  23  N.  £.  50,  a 
mortgage  to  secure  an  attorney  rea- 
sonable compensation  for  future  ser- 
vices in  obtaining  the  mortgagor's  dis- 
charge in  insolvency,  made  in  good 
faith,  is  not  void  as  to  creditors;  Hor- 
lell  V.  MiUer,  28  Or.  354. 

47.  Brainard  v.  Dunning,  30  N.  Y. 
211;  In  re  Gordon,  49  Hun  (N.  Y.), 
370,  3  N.  Y.  Supp.  589. 

48.  Hennon  v.  McClane,  88  Pa.  St. 
219. 


CONSIDSBATION. 


299 


between  the  parties,  is  not  a  good  and  valuable  consideration 
sufficient  to  sustain  a  conveyance  or  transfer  by  a  debtor,  as 
against  existing  creditors,  and  such  a  conveyance  is  fraudulent 
and  void  as  to  the  grantor's  existing  creditors,^  especially  where 
the  conveyance  includes  all  of  the  debtor's  property,"  Where 
tlie  grantee  partially  performs  his  contract,  however,  this  con- 
stitutes a  valuable  oonsiderati<m  for  the  conveyance,  when  at- 


48.  N,  y.— Robinson  v.  Stewart,  10 
N.  Y.  189;  Todd  ▼.  Monell,  19  Hun,  362. 

Ala, — Woodward  ▼.  Kelly,  85  Ala. 
868»  5  So.  164,  7  Am.  Si.  Rep.  67. 

Conn, — Pettibone  ▼.  Stevens,  16 
Conn.  19,  38  Am.  Dec.  67. 

/nd.— Spiers  ▼.  Whitesell,  21  Ind. 
App.  204,  61  N.  E.  28. 

/oiiTa.— Coleman  t.  Oammon 
(1900),  83  N.  W.  898;  Seekel  r. 
Winch,  108  Iowa,  102,  78  N.  W.  821, 
a  conveyance  in  consideration  of  fu- 
ture maintenance  is  voluntary; 
Strong  V.  Lawrence,  68  Iowa,  66,  12 
N.  W.  74;  Graham  ▼.  Rooney,  42 
Iowa,  667. 

JTy. — ^Brown  r.  Moore,  21  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  664,  62  S.  W.  044;  Hawkins  r. 
Moffitt,  49  Ky.  81. 

ife.— Spear  v.  Spear,  97  Me.  408, 
64  Atl.  1106;  Sidensparker  v.  Siden- 
sparker,  62  Me.  481,  83  Am.  Dec.  627; 
Webster  v.  Withey,  25  Me.  326. 

Minn. — ^McCord  ▼.  Knowlton,  79 
Minn.  299,  82  N.  W.  689. 

N.  H.— Albee  v.  Webster,  16  N.  H. 
362;  Smith  v.  Smith,  11  N.  H.  469. 

O^to. — ^Krider  v.  Koons,  6  Ohio  dr. 
Ct.  221,  3  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  110. 

Pa. — ^Downing  v.  Gault,  8  Pa. 
Super.  Ct.  62;  Shakely  v.  Guthrie,  2 
Pa.  Super.  Ct.  414. 

W.  Va. — Flaherty  v.  Stephenson 
(1904),  49  S.  £.  131;  Haana  t. 
Charleston  Nat  Bank,  65  W.  Va.  185, 
46  S.  E.  920. 


Ww.— Faber  v.  Mats,  86  Wis.  370, 
67  N.  W.  39. 

But  compare  Gale  v.  Williamson,  10 
L.  J.  Ezeh.  446,  8  M.  ft  W.  406. 

But  such  oonv^ance  is  good  as 
against  subsequent  creditors.  Blaho- 
ney  v.  Hunter,  30  Ind.  246;  Webster 
V.  Withey,  26  Me.  326;  Hennon  v. 
McClane,  88  Pa.  St.  219;  Gorman  v. 
Urquhart  (Can.),  2  N.  Brunsw.  £q. 
42.  See  also  Mills  v.  Mills,  40  Tenn. 
706. 

SO.  N.  Y. — ^Kain  v.  Larkin,  4  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  209,  38  N.  Y.  Supp.  646. 

/».— Davidson  v.  Burke,  143  III. 
139,  32  N.  E.  614,  36  Am.  St.  Rep. 
367 ;  Harting  v.  Jockers,  136  111.  627, 
27  N.  £.  188,  29  Am.  St.  Rep.  341, 
aff'g  31  111.  App.  67;  Annis  v.  Bonar, 
86  111.  128;  Parker  v.  Cain,  28  111. 
App.  698. 

lotoa. — ^Mallow  v.  Walker,  115 
Iowa,  238,  88  N.  W.  462,  91  Am.  St. 
Rep.  168. 

JTan.— Pettyjohn  v.  Newhart,  7 
Kan.  App.  64,  51  Pac.  969. 

Me. — Graves  v.  Blondell,  70  Me. 
190;  Rollins  v.  Mooers,  25  Me.  192. 

if  inn. — Henry  v.  Hinman,  25  Minn. 
199. 

Ifo.— Massey  v.  McCoy,  79  Mo.  169. 

F*.— Woodward  v.  Wyman,  53  Vt. 
645;  Church  v.  Chapin,  35  Vt.  223; 
Jones  V.  Spear,  21  Vt.  426;  Crane  v. 
Stickles,  15  Vt  252.  Compare  Town 
of  Lyndon  v.  Belden,  14  Vt.  423. 


aoo 


FBAXmUUfiNT   COVVEYANOSS. 


tfu^ed  by  the  grantor's  creditors,  and  the  grantee  maj  be  protected 
U>  tht»  uxtent  of  payments  made  by  him  in  good  faith.^^  Where  a 
<H44V«)yaiHV  is  made  in  consideration  of  future  support  and  the 
llgr«^u«)i%t  has  been  fully  executed,  the 'consideration  becomes  a 
valuable)  one^  and  the  conTeyance  cannot  be  set  aside  as  fraudu- 
t«kUt  aud  void  as  to  oxeditors>  unless  it  be  shown  that  it  was  made 
with  tb^  aoCual  intent  to  delay  and  defraud  creditors,  and  that 
thui  grautv^  at  the  time  of  the  c(»Teyance  had  notice  of  such 
lutviut.^  A  grantee  in  good  faith  and  for  value,  thou^  part  of 
tha  coiUMdt>ratio«t  was  his  agreement  to  support  the  grantor,  is 
(kriktwU'd^  althou^  the  conveyance  was  intended  by  the  grantor 
U>  Mxn^xkiX  his  orediU>rs ;  bat  the  careditors  may  hold  the  grantee 
lur  tht»  t)«itimate>d  value  of  the  agreement^  as  a  debt  to  the 
grauU^r.^  A  conveyance  by  a  debtor  of  all  his  property  to  an- 
i^tht^r  for  an  inadequate  present  consideration^  together  with  an 
agiventent  to  support  and  maintain  the  grantor  during  his  life, 
U  void  as  to  existing  creditors.**  Whttev  however,  a  full  and 
ad«H|uat6  consideration  is  paid  by  the  grantee^  the  fact  that  he 
alm^  agrees  to  suj^iort  the  grantor  will  not  rnider  the  conveyance 
void  as  to  creditors."  \¥here  property  is  conveyed  in  considera- 
tion of  an  agreement  for  future  support^  a  conveyance  of  the 
property  by  the  grantee  to  one  who  assumes  the  first  grantee's 
obligation,  is  held  to  be  valid  as  to  the  creditors  of  the  first 


§  11.  Future  advances. — ^A  hona  fide  mortgage  or  other  con- 
veyance is  not  fraudulent  as  to  the  creditors  of  the  mortgagor  or 


51.  Harris  v.  Brink,  100  Iowa,  366, 
69  N.  W.  684,  62  Am.  St.  Rep.  678; 
Walker  v.  Cady,  106  Mich.  21,  63  N. 
W.  1005 ;  Long  Braneh  Banking  Go.  v. 
Domis,  66  M.  J.  £q.  549,  39  Atl.  689; 
Constable  ▼.  Weaser,  8  Ohio  Dec.  339, 
7  Wkly.  L.  Bnl.  113. 

52.  Hayes  ▼.  Montgomery,  118  Ind. 
91,  20  N.  E.  646;  Gregory  r.  Lamb, 
19  Ky.  L.  Rep.  943,  42  8.  W.  339; 
Kelsey  t.  Kelley,  63  Vt.  41,  22  Atl. 


597,  13  L.  R.  A.  640:  Hisle's  Adm'r  ▼. 
RndasiD,  89  Va.  519,  16  S.  E.  673. 

58.  Fariin  y.  Sook,  30  Kan.  401, 
1  Pfte.  123,  46  Am.  Rep.  100. 

54.  Egery  y.  Johnson,  70  Me.  258; 
Grayes  v.  Blondell,  70  Me.  190. 

55.  Torrey  GBdar  Co.  y.  Bui,  96 
Wis.  615,  70  N.  W.  823. 

56.  Perkins  y.  Seott,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
596;  Hendrick  y.  Dmon,  62  Vt,  436, 


OONSIDXBATIOK. 


301 


grantjor,  as  a  matter  of  law^  because  it  is  given,  in  ivhole  or  in 
party  to  secure  future  advances  to  be  made  by  the  mortgagee  or 
grantee  to  tbe  mortgagor  or  grantor."  In  some  jurisdictions, 
it  is  held  that  such  a  conveyance  is  valid,  although  it  does  not 
state  on  its  face  that  it  is  given  to  secure  future  advances ;"  while 
in  other  jurisdictians,  the  rule  is  maintained  that  the  convey- 
ance must  express  the  object,  and  that  a  conveyance  intended  to 
cover  future  responsibilities  not  expressed  in  the  instrument,  is 
void  pro  tanto  as  against  crditors."  A  mortgage  which  does  not 
state  the  amount  intended  to  be  secured,  or  the  limit  of  which 
is  undefined,  is  valid  for  the  amount  of  the  advances,  as  against 


18  Ail.  814.  See  ABSumption  of  Lia- 
bility, S  14,  infra. 

57.  Alck — ^Lawson  r.  Alabama 
Warebouse  Co.,  80  Ala.  341. 

Ca{.— Tally  ▼.  Harloe,  35  Gal.  302, 
05  Am.  Dec.  102. 

lotoa, — Canon  ▼.  Byers,  67  Iowa, 
e06,  25  N.  W.  826,  tbere  is  no  pre- 
sumption of  fraud. 

Kan, — Clement  ▼.  Hartzell,  57  Kan. 
482,  46  Pac.  961. 

jf(i._Wil8on  ▼.  Russell,  13  Md. 
494,  71  Am.  Dec.  645. 

Mass. — Commercial  Bank  ▼.  Cun- 
ningham, 41  Mass.  270,  36  Am.  Dee. 
322;  Adams  T.  Wheeler,  27  Mass.  199. 

Mich, — ^Dummer  v,  Smedley,  119 
Mich.  466,  68  N.  W.  260,  38  L.  R.  A. 
400;  Brace  v.  Berdan,  104  Mich.  356, 
62  N.  W.  568;  Newkirk  ▼.  Newkirk, 
56  Mich.  525,  23  N.  W.  206. 

Minn, — ^Berry  ▼.  O'Connor,  33 
Minn.  29,  21  N.  W.  840. 

Mnss, — Arthur  ▼.  Commercial,  etc.. 
Bank,  17  Miss.  394,  48  Am.'  Dec.  719. 

y.  F.— North  V.  Crowell,  11  N.  H. 

251. 

Compare  Heiney  t.  Anderson,  9 
Lane.  Bar  (Pa.),  13. 

It  is  Talid  If  It  Is  tr^e  from 
frmnd^— Seaman  r.  Fleming,  7  Rich. 


£q.  283.  See  also  Garrin  y.  Qarrln, 
55  S.  C.  360,  33  S.  E.  458;  Farguson 
T.  Johnson,  36  Fed.  134. 

AdTamees  made  before  levy  ma 
proportj  traasferred. — ^Where  an 
insolvent  debtor  in  good  faith  con- 
veys properly  to  a  creditor,  partly  in 
consideration  of  an  existing  obliga- 
tion and  partly  as  security  for  future 
advances,  and  before  creditors  levy 
an  attachment  on  the  property  the 
grantee  has  made  advances  to,  and  in- 
curred liabilities  for,  the  debtor  to  the 
full  value  of  the  property,  the  convey- 
ance will  be  good  as  against  such 
creditors.  Coles  r.  Sellers,  1  Phila. 
(Pa.)  533,  11  Leg.  Int.  30. 

58.  Tully  V.  Harloe,  35  Cal.  302, 
95  Am.  Dec.  102;  Dummer  v.  Smed- 
ley, 110  Mich.  466,  68  N.  W.  260, 
38  L.  R.  A.  490,  3  Det.  L.  N.  417; 
Brace  v.  Berdan,  104  Mich.  356,  62 
N.  W.  568. 

69.  Diwer  v,  McLaughlin,  2  Wend. 
(N.  T.)  596,  20  Am.  Dec.  655;  Mats 
V.  Erick,  76  Conn.  388,  56  Atl.  630; 
Thurman  v.  Jenkins,  58  Tenn.  426; 
Turbeville  v.  Gibson,  52  Tenn.  565; 
Neuffer  v.  Pardue,  35  Tenn.  191; 
Alexandria  Sav.  Int.  v.  Thomas,  29 
Gratt  (Va.)  483. 


256 


Fbaudui^nt  Cokvbtavoes. 


§  18.  Sales  on  credit — Tlie  mere  fact  that  goods  or  other 
property  are  sold  by  a  debtor  on  credit  does  not  render  the  sale 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  or  require  that  the  transaction  should  be 
declared  invalid.  There  is  no  legal  presumption  of  fraud  from  a 
sale  on  credit*  The  sale  of  all  the  effects  of  an  insolvent  or  em- 
barrassed debtor,  upon  credit,  at  a  fair  valuation  to  a  responsible 
purchaser,  although  made  by  the  vendor  with  intent  to  hinder^ 
delay,  and  defraud  his  creditors,  and  although  the  purchaser  knew 
of  ihe  insolvency,  is  not  voidable  unless  the  purchaser  knew  of  the 
fraudulent  intent^  But  the  fact  that  a  sale  of  all  or  a  portion  of 
his  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  was  made  on  credit  is  a  cir- 
cumstance to  be  considered  with  other  evidence  by  the  jury  in 
determining  the  question  of  fraud  as  bearing  upon  the  question 
of  fraudulent  intent*  The  sale  of  a  debtor's  property  made  upon 
an  unusually  long  term  of  credit  has  a  tendency  to  delay  and 
hinder  creditors  by  interposing  a  legal  title  between  them  and  the 
debtor,  and  consequently  is  held  to  be  a  badge  of  fraud.*    The 


6.  V.  7.— Matthews  ▼.  Rice,  31  N. 
T.  457;  Evans  ▼.  Sims,  82  Hun,  396, 
31  N.  T.  Supp.  259. 

Ala. — ^Lienkauf  ▼.  Morris,  66  Ala. 
406 ;  Andrews  ▼.  Jones,  10  Ala.  400. 

Ga, — ^NiooU  y.  Crittenden,  55  Ga. 
497. 

/{I.— Nelson  ▼.  Smith,  28  HI.  495. 

Iowa. — ^Ray  ▼.  Teabout,  65  Iowa, 
157,  21  N.  W.  497;  Hughes  ▼.  Monty, 
24  Iowa,  499. 

Mioh.^LewiB  t.  Rioe,  61  Mich.  97, 
27  N.  W.  867. 

Ifo.— John  Deere  Plow  Go.  t.  Sulli- 
van, 158  Mo.  440,  59  S.  W.  1005,  the 
fact  that  the  vendee  gave  a  note  pay- 
able in  two  years  is  not  a  badge  of 
fraud;  Adam  Roth  Grocery  Go.  v. 
Lewis,  69  Mo.  App.  463.  Compare 
Seger  v.  Thomas,  107  Mo.  635,  18  S. 
W.  33,  a  sale  of  goods  to  a  creditor, 
where  they  exceeded  in  value  the 
amount  of  his  debt,  and  the  sale  as  to 
the  excess  was  on  credit,  is  void. 


2^.  C— Beasley  ▼.  Bray,  98  N.  C. 
266,  3  S.  £.  497. 

Tenn, — ^McCasland  v.  Carson,  1 
Head,  117,  a  sale  of  lands  on  eredit 
of  one,  two  and  three  years  is  not 
fraudulent  in  law;  Harper  v.  Trent 
(Gh.  App.  1899),  53  S.  W.  245. 

But  compare  Elser  v.  Graber,  69 
Tex.  222,  6  S.  W.  560;  Blum  v.  Mc- 
Bride,  69  Tex.  60,  5  S.  W.  641,  whM« 
a  sale  of  land  on  credit  was  held 
void. 

7.  Ruhl  V.  Phillips,  48  N.  Y.  126,. 
8  Am.  Rep.  522,  rev'g  4  Daly,  45; 
Loeschigic  v.  Bridge,  42  N.  T.  421. 

8.  Roberts  v.  Shepard,  2  Daly  (N. 
T.),  110;  Hughes  v.  Monty,  24  Iowa, 
499;  Smead  v.  Williamson,  16  B. 
Mon.  (Ky.)  492;  Tillman  v.  Heller 
(Tex.  1890),  14  S.  W.  271. 

9.  Ate.— Borland  v.  Walker,  7  Ala. 
269. 

/».— Cowling  V.  Estes,  15  111.  App. 
255. 


CoNBIDEBATIOir* 


30S 


secure  a  bona  fide  credkor^  whether  oantingent  or  otherwise^ 
even  though  it  be  intended  to  and  does  have  the  effect  of  giving 
him  a  preference  over  other  creditors,  is  not  fraudulent  in  law.*^ 
A  liability  for  another  on  a  contract  in  force  is  a  good  considera- 
tion for  a  conditional  sale,  and^  thou^  the  value  of  the  property 
exceed  the  amount  of  the  liability,  the  sale  is  not  therefore  fraud- 
ulent per  «e." 


§  13.  Security  to  endorser^  surety^  or  guarantor. — ^A  transfer  of 
property  by  a  debtor,  by  way  of  pledge,  judgment  note,  mortgage, 
deed  of  trust,  or  other  conveyance,  executed  for  the  purpose  of  in- 
demnifying or  protecting  one  who  has  become  endorser,  surety,  or 
guarantor  for  him  against  that  obligation,  is  based  on  a  valuable 
and  sufficient  consideration,  and  is  valid  as  against  his  creditors, 
in  the  absence  of  fraud.**   But  the  mere  liability  of  a  surety  to  pay 


67.  Braden  ▼.  (VNeil,  9upra,  See 
also  Confession  of  judgment,  chap. 
II,  S  11,  Mipra. 

68.  Jowett  T.  Warren,  12  Mass. 
300,  7  Am.  Dec.  74. 

A  eoresaat  from  wMek  oore- 
aaator  may  be  relieTed,  on  ac- 
count of  the  failure  of  a  transfer  for 
which  it  was  made,  is  not  a  good  con- 
sideration.  Arnold  ▼.  Hagerman,  46 
N.  J.  £q.  186,  17  Atl.  93,  14  Am.  St. 
Rep.  712. 

69.  y,  7. — Peetsch  ▼.  Sommers,  31 
App.  Div.  265,  53  N.  Y.  Supp.  438, 
28  Civ.  Proc.  124;  Miller  v.  Miller 
lOiitiing  Co.,  23  Misc.  Rep.  404,  62 
N.  y.  Supp.  184;  Dodge  v.  McKechnie, 
36  N.  Y.  Supp.  1106,  alf'd  166  N.  Y. 
514,  61  N.  E.  268.  But  compare 
Browning  ▼.  Hart,  6  Barb.  91 ;  BaUey 
V.  Burton,  8  Wend.  339. 

Del. — Tunnell  v.  Jefferson,  6  Har. 
206. 

lU. — Farmers',  etc..  Bank  ▼.  Spear, 
49  HI.  App.  409,  where  a  surely,  to 
whom  a  principal  debtor  has  given  a 


judgment  note  to  indemnify  him,  en- 
ters judgment  on  said  note  before 
he  has  paid  the  debts  on  which  he  is 
surety,  that  fact  does  not  render  the 
judgment  fraudulent. 

JTy.— Beatty  v.  Dudley,  4  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  212. 

La, — Edgar  v.  Simons,  2  La.  10,  a 
deposit  of  notes  as  collateral  security 
against  a  letter  of  credit;  Woodward 
▼.  Braynard,  6  Mart.  (0.  S.)  672. 

Jf  A— Griffith  V.  Frederic  County 
Bank,  6  Gill  &  J.  424.  Com- 
pare Amoss  ▼.  Robinson,  2  Har.  ft  J. 
320. 

JfMtf.— -Rogers  ▼.  Abbott,  128  Mass. 
102;  Gardner  v.  Webber,  34  Mass. 
407;  Cutler  v.  Dickinson,  26  Mass. 
386;  Ripley  ▼.  Severance,  23  Mass. 
474,  17  Am.  Dee.  397;  Stevens  v.  Bell, 
6  Mass.  330. 

Mieh. — ^Bostwidc  v.  Benjamin,  63 
Mich.  289,  20  N.  W.  714;  Spear  ▼. 
Rood,  61  Mich.  140,  16  N.  W.  312; 
Adams  v.  Niemann,  46  Mich.  136,  8 


304 


Fbauduubht  Conyxtahces. 


his  principal's  debt  cannot^  as  against  the  principal's  mfltiwg 
creditars,  be  deemed  a  valid  consideration  for  tbe  absolute  convejr- 
ance  by  the  principal  of  substantially  all  his  property  to  the 
surety.^  The  liability  of  the  Teodee  to  damage^  as  the  sorety  of 
the  vendor,  is  not  of  itsdf  a  sofficieat  consideration  to  support  an 
absolute  c<niveyance  of  property,  as  against  creditors.^  And  an 
absolute  conveyance  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  his  surety  on  an 
administration  bond,  intended  obIj  as  an  indeomity  against  die 
surety's  antecedent  liability,  is  fraudulent  as  against  existing 


N.  W.   719;   Hubbard  r.  Taylor,  6 
Mich.  166. 

jf  o.— Oee  ▼.  Van  Natta-LyndB  Dmg 
Go.,  106  Mo.  App.  27,  78  8.  W.  228. 

Moni.— Tudor  y.  DeLong,  18  Mont. 
490,  46  Pftc.  258. 

Veh. — Grimes  ▼.  Shermaii,  26  N^. 
843,  41  N.  W.  814.  Compare  Morse 
T.  Steinrod,  20  Neb.  108,  46  K.  W. 
922. 

y.  ff.— Lane  ▼.  Sleeper,  18  N.  H. 
200,  if  the  security  is  not  larger  than 
the  purpose  of  indemnity  requires. 

Pa.--Goodwin  ▼.  McMinn,  204  Pa. 
St.  162,  53  AtL  762;  Candee's  Ap- 
peal, 101  Pa.  St.  644,  43  Atl.  1003; 
Heiney  ▼.  Anderson,  0  Lane.  Bar,  IS- 
IS. /.--Johnson's  PetitiOT,  20  R.  I. 
108,  37  Atl.  531. 

Tenn, — Madisonrille  Bank  ▼. 
McCoy  (Ch.  App.  1807),  42  S.  W. 
814. 

Tex, — Keating  Implement,  etc.,  Co. 
▼.  Terre  Haute  Carriage,  etc.,  Co.,  11 
Tex.  CiT.  App.  216,  32  S.  W.  556; 
Alamo  Cement  Co.  ▼.  San  Antonio 
(CiT.  App.  1893),  23  S.  W.  440. 

Ft.— Spaulding  ▼.  Austin,  2  Tt. 
655,  although  the  note  upon  which 
he  becomes  surety  proves  to  be  yoid 
for  usury,  he  is  entitled  to  hold  the 
property  for  his  protection  until  he 
is  indemnified  or  relieved  from  lia- 
bility on  the  note. 


Fa.— Hairej  t.  Anderson  (1806), 
24  S.  E.  914. 

IF.  Fa.— Weaver  ▼.  R.  L.  Neal  ft 
Co.  (1906),  55  a  £.  009.  Compare 
Crawford  v.  Kiriney,  50  Ala.  690,  55 
Ala.  282,  27  Am.  Bep.  704. 

CewfeMJom  ef  JwdsiMmt  mm 
eHmikm  mot  d«e. — ^Before  maturity  off 
a  note  held  by  a  bank  whidi  had  dis- 
oounted  it  for  the  maker,  there  is 
nothing  due  from  the  maker  to  an  in- 
dorser,  and  a  confession  of  judgment 
on  the  note  by  the  maker  in  favor  of 
the  indorser  will  be  set  aside  at  the 
instance  of  a  subsequent  judgment 
creditor  of  the  maker.  Forrester  v. 
Straus,  18  K.  T.  Supp.  41,  21  Civ. 
Proc.  166.  See  Confession  of  judg- 
ment, chap.  II,  §  11,  supra. 

Xm  n  deed  of  trast  to  ladent* 
mitj  snretiea  by  giving  them  a 
preference,  the  debt  of  the  creditor 
supplies  the  consideration,  to  support 
Ihe  deed,  entitling  such  creditor's  in- 
terest to  be  considered  as  the  primary 
object  to  be  protected  in  equity,  and 
the  sureties'  indemnity  is  but  sec- 
ondary and  incidental  to  the  other 
object.  Wiswall  v.  Potts^  67  N.  C. 
184. 

70.  Craft  ▼.  Schlag,  61  K.  J.  Eq. 
667,  40  Ati.  431. 

71.  Gorham  ▼.  Herridc,  2  Me.  87. 


COHSIDBBATIOK. 


2)05 


creditors,  no  additional  liability  being  ccmtemporaneously  incurred 
by  such  surety."  A  mortgage  purporting  to  secure  an  absolute  in- 
debtedness! gi^6Ki  in  good  f  aitb,  is  not  void  aa  to  creditors  of  tke 
mortgagor,  because  it  "was  given  to  secure  the  mortgagee  against  a 
contingent  liability  as  surety." 

§  14.  Assumption  of  liability  in  general — ^llie  assumption  of 
certain  bona  fide  debts  or  obligations  of  an  insolvent  debtor  by  the 
grantee  is  a  valuable  and  su£5cient  consideration  for  the  convey- 
ance or  transfer  of  property  by  the  debtor  to  the  person  assuming 
them,^^  without  the  concurrence  or  assent  of  the  creditors  being 


72.  Proekauer  ▼.  People's  Say. 
Bank,  77  Ala.  257. 

73.  Rexroad  ▼-  Johnson,  6  Kan. 
App.  607,  49  Pac.  609.  See  Recital 
6t  false  consideration,  chap.  VI,  S  2, 
supra, 

74.  N.  r.— Rutherford  t.  Sehatt- 
man,  119  N.  Y.  604,  23  N.  E.  440; 
Hine  ▼.  Bowe,  114  N.  Y.  350,  21  N. 
E.  733,  debts  due  primarily  by  one 
of  a  flrm,  which  subsequently  the  Arm 
became  Uable  for  under  the  partner- 
ship agreement  and  by  indorsement; 
Weaver  y.  White,  64  Hun,  636,  19  N. 
Y.  Supp.  616.  Compare  Stutson  ▼. 
Brown,  7  Cow.  732. 

U.  8. — Sonstiby  ▼.  Keeley,  11  Fed. 
578. 

/fui.— Old  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Heckman, 
148  Ind.  490,  47  N.  E.  953 ;  Miller  ▼. 
Lebanon  Lodge  No.  48,  I.  0.  O.  F.,  88 
Ind.  286;  Anderson  ▼.  Smith,  5 
Blackf.  395. 

Iowa, — Smith  v.  Mack,  94  Iowa, 
539,  63  N.  W.  181. 

Ky. — Cavanagh  ▼.  Riley,  94  Iowa, 
539,  63  N.  W.  181. 

JfoM.— Pierce  v.  O'Brien,  189  Mass. 
58,  75  N.  E.  61 ;  Boston  Mar.  Ins.  Co. 
T.  Proctor,  168  Mass.  498,  47  N.  E. 
414;  Guild  ▼.  Leonard,  35  Mass.  511. 

20 


Mich, — Globe  Casket  Mfg.  Co.  v. 
Wolcott,  106  Mich.  161,  64  N.  W.  10. 

Mo. — ^Baker  ▼.  Harvey,  133  Mo.  453, 
34  S.  W.  853. 

N,  H, — Hutchins  r.  Sprague,  4  N. 
H.  496,  17  Am.  Dee.  439. 

Or.-^olley  ▼.  Kyle,  27  Or.  95,  89 
Pac.  999. 

Tea?.— Traders'  Nat.  Bank  y.  Clare, 
76  Tex.  47,  13  S.  W.  183;  Duyeneck 
V.  Kutjser,  17  Tex.  Civ.  App.  577,  43 
S.  W.  541. 

Can. — Dedesdemier  v.  Barton,  12 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  569. 

Eng, — ^Bungard  v.  Seabrook,  1  F.  ft 
F.  321. 

Compare  Rahn  v.  Kniess^  74  111. 
App.  367;  Riegel  v.  Wooley,  81  Pa. 
St.  227. 

An  aaatcnaieBt  of  oMPtaia 
rents  to  accrue  for  one  year,  in  con- 
sideration of  the  assignee's  agree- 
ment, provided  the  rents  are  paid  to 
him,  to  pay  certain  sums  oh  account 
of  the  assignor,  is  valid  against  the 
assignor's  creditors  to  the  extent  of 
such  payments  by  the  assignee,  al- 
though the  payments  are  made  before 
collecting  the  rents.  Smith  v.  Jen- 
nings, 81  Mass.  69. 

That  tke  expreaaed  ooaildevm* 


306 


Fraubui^nt  Oonvstanges. 


given  to  the  arrangement^  and  without  any  suspension  or  extin- 
guishment of  the  claims  of  those  creditors  as  against  the  original 
debtor,^'  and  although  the  assumption  was  without  the  knowledge 
of  the  persona  whose  debts  were  assumed.'*  But  a  transfer  of 
property  materially  greater  in  value  than  the  amount  of  the  debts 
assumed  will  be  regarded  as  constructively  fraudulent  as  to  the 
creditors  to  the  exceea  of  the  value  of  the  goods."  Where  a  debtor 
coonveys  or  transfers  property  to  a  creditor,  in  consideration  of 
the  satisfaction  of  a  debt  due  the  creditor  and  his  assumption  of 
the  payment  of  debts  due  other  creditors,  sudi  conveyance  is  not 
fraudulent,  if  the  debt  due  the  grantee  and  the  debts  due  other 
creditors  assumed  by  him  equal  the  amount  or  full  and  fair  value 
of  the  property  conveyed."  Where  a  grantee,  in  part  consideration 
of  a  conveyance,  makes  himself  personally  liable  for  the  payment 
of  distributive  shares  to  the  grantor's  heirs,  this  constitutes  a  valu- 


tion  WAS  iMPser  than  the  amount 
of  the  indebtedness  assumed  is  no  evi- 
dence of  fraud,  where  the  amount  of 
the  indebtedness  assumed  and  paid  by 
the  grantee  is  equal  to  or  greater 
than  the  actual  value  of  the  property 
conveyed  to  him.  Wall  v.  Beedy,  161 
Mo.  625,  61  S.  W.  864.  See  Recital 
of  false  consideration,  chap.  VI,  S  2, 
supra, 

76.  Seaman  ▼.  Hasbrouck,  35  Barb. 
(N.  y.)  151. 

76.  National  Bank  of  Republic  ▼. 
Dickinson,  107  Ala.  265,  18  So.  144. 

77.  Gamble  v.  Aultman,  125  Ala. 
372,  28  So.  30,  a  conveyance  of  land 
worth  $2,000  in  consideration  of  the 
payment  of  a  lien  of  $1,100;  Qrieb  v. 
Caraker,  69  111.  App.  236,  where  the 
debts  amounted  to  only  about  one- 
half  of  the  property;  Diamond  Coal 
Co.  V.  Carter  Dry  Goods  Co.,  20  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  1444,  49  S.  W.  438,  goods 
sold  for  less  than  half  their  value; 
Randall  v.  Vroom,  30  N.  J.  Eq.  353, 
where    incumbrances    assumed    were 


less  in  amount  than  the  actual  value 
of  the  property. 

78.  Ala. — Chipman  v.  Stem,  89 
Ala.  207,  7  So.  409;  McCord  v.  Ten- 
nille,  81  Ala.  168,  1  So.  177;  Smith 
V.  Spencer,  73  Ala.  299. 

Oal. — Saunderson  v.  Broadwell,  82 
Cal.  132,  23  Pac.  36. 

Iowa, — Gould  V.  Hurto,  61  Iowa» 
45,  15  N.  W.  588. 

Me. — Stevens  v.  Hinckley,  43  He. 
440.  Compare  Welcome  ▼.  Batchelder, 
23  Me.  85. 

Mies, — ^Agricultural  Bank  v.  Dor- 
sey,  Freem.  338. 

iVc6.~Berry  v.  Berk,  62  Neb.  536, 
87  N.  W.  309;  Keith  v.  Heifelfinger, 
12  Neb.  497,  11  N.  W.  749. 

Tea?.— Traders'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Clare, 
76  Tex.  47,  13  S.  W.  183;  Sweeney  ▼. 
Conley,  71  Tex.  543,  9  S.  W.  548; 
Hugo  &  Schmeltzer  Co.  v.  Hirseh 
(Civ.  App.  1901),  63  S.  W.  163;  Diz 
V.  Jackman  (Civ.  App.  1906),  37  S. 
W.  344;  Mack  v.  Block  (1888),  8  S. 
W.  495. 


Consideration. 


807 


able  consideration  for  the  oonveyanoe  ivhen  attacked  by  the 
grantor's  creditors.^  An  agreement  to  pay  a  portion  of  an  in- 
solvent's debts,  sufSoient  in  amount  to  have  formed  an  adequate 
consideration  for  a  transfer  of  his  land>  will  not  be  upheld  as 
against  his  creditors,  where  the  grantee  in  fact  paid  only  a  small 
portion  of  the  debts  agreed  to  be  paid.  In  order  to  support  the 
conveyance  the  consideration  must  have  been  fully  executed  in 
good  faith  before  notice  of  the  transferrer's  insolvency.^  An  as- 
sumption by  a  grantee  of  an  unmatured  debt  does  not  affect  the 
validity  of  the  sale  whiere  the  grantor  was  under  contract  to  pay 
such  debt'^  But  the  assumption  by  a  grantee  of  the  payment  of  a 
debt  for  which  the  grantor  is  not  liable,  and  of  the  payment  of 
attorney's  fees  for  services  to  be  rendered  for  the  grantor,  is  not  a 
valid  consideration."  And  the  assumption  of  indebtedness,  after 
the  conveyance  has  been  made,  and  process  has  issued  against  the 
property  included  therein,  is  not  a  valid  consideration.** 

§  16.  Assumption  and  payment  of  debt  by  endorser  or  surety. 

— If  a  surety  in  good  faith  assumes  the  payment  of  the  debt  of  his 
principal,  on  which  he  is  liable,  it  is  a  valid  and  suflBcient  con- 
sideration, for  a  conveyance  or  transfer  of  the  debtor's  property 
to  him,  and  such  conveyance  is  valid  as  against  creditors.**  A 
conveyance  or  transfer  of  property,  at  its  fair  value,  by  the  maker 
of  a  promissory  note  or  other  such  instrument  to  one  who  has 
endorsed  his  paper  in  consideration  of  the  latter^s  agreeing  to  as- 


79.  Oongtabl«  v.  Weaaer  (D.  C),  S 
Ohio  Dec.  339,  7  Wkly.  L.  Bui.  113. 

80.  Warren  v.  Wilder,  12  St.  Rep. 
(N.  y.)  767. 

81.  National  Bank  of  Hepublie  ▼. 
Dickinson,  107  Ala.  265,  18  So.  144. 

82.  Shepherd  ▼.  Fish,  78  III.  App. 

198. 

88.  Farmers',  etc..  Bank  ▼.  Conner, 
14  Ky.  L.  Rep.  316,  20  S.  W.  265. 

84.  Ato.— Pollock  v.  Jones,  96  Ala. 
492,  11  So.  529;  Harmon  v.  McRae, 
91  Ala.  401,  8  So.  548;  Pennin|^ 


T.  Woodall,  17  Ala.  685 ;  Bank  of  Ala- 
bama v.  McDade,  4  Port.  252. 

Oa.— McWhorter  v.  Wright^  5  Ga. 
655. 

Ind, — ^Powell  v.  Sticknej,  88  Ind.  310. 

Kan. — Smith  v.  Rankin,  45  E^an. 
176,  25  Pac.  586. 

Me. — Stevens  v.  Hinkley,  43  Me. 
440;  Stedman  v.  Vickery,  42  Me.  132. 

Neh. — ^Kaufman  v.  Oobum,  30  Neb. 
672,  46  N.  W.  1010. 

Compare  Ayers  ▼.  Hulsted,  15  Oonn. 
504. 


308 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


sume  the  payment  of  the  note,  is  based  upon  a  consideratioci  sufBr 
cient  to  sustain  the  transfer  as  against  existing  creditors  of  the 
grantor.^  Accommodation  endorsers  are  to  be  regarded  as  cred- 
itors and  not  as  mere  purchasers.^ 

§  16.  Assumptioa  of  mortgage  or  other  lien. — ^A  conveyance 
in  consideration  of  the  assumption  of  a  mortgage  or  other  lien  or 
encumbrance  on  the  properly  conveyed  or  transferred  renders  the 
grantee  liable  to  pay  for  it,  and  is  a  valuable  consideration.'' 
Where  the  encumbrances  assumed  are  less  in  amount  than  the 
actual  value  of  the  property  conveyed,  the  conveyance  will  be  set 
aside  as  fraudulent  as  against  creditors  of  the  grantor." 

§  17.  Executed  agreement  to  pay  debts. — ^Payment  of  the 
grantor's  debts  may  properly  be  taken  into  consideration  in  deter- 
mining the  sufficiency  of  the  consideration  for  a  conveyance  as 
against  creditors,  where  such  payment  was  made  in  pursuance  of 
an  assumption  of  the  debts  at  the  time  of  the  transfer,"  and  where 
the  grantee  has  paid  the  specified  debts  as  agreed  as  consideration 
for  the  conveyance,  it  is  a  good  defense  to  an  action  or  proceeding 
instituted  by  the  creditors  of  the  grantor  against  him." 


85.  Flanneiy  ▼.  Van  Tasael,  62  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  621,  16  N.  Y.  Supp.  741; 
Coffin  ▼.  Day,  34  Fed.  687;  SUte» 
Kramer  v.  Mason,  96  Mo.  559,  10  S. 
W.  179;  Ellis  v.  Herrin  (N.  J.  Ch. 
1892),  24  Atl.  129. 

86.  State,  Kramer  v.  Mason,  supra, 

87.  Goodenow  ▼.  Friott,  89  Iowa, 
671,  57  N.  W.  437;  Miles  v.  Miles,  6 
Or.  266,  25  Am.  Rep.  522;  Dubbs  ▼. 
Finley,  2  Pa.  St.  379.  See,  however, 
Webb  V.  Atkinson,  124  N.  C.  447, 
32  S.  E.  737,  where  property  was  con- 
veyed which  the  grantee  afterwards 
sold  for  $20,000  more  than  sufficient 
to  pay  the  liens,  the  surplus  being 
paid  over  to  the  debtor,  the  convey- 
ance was  declared  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors. 


88.  Jameson  r.  Dilley,  27  Ind.  App. 
429,  61  N.  E.  601 ;  Randall  ▼.  Vrooak, 
30  N.  J.  Eq.  353. 

88.  Watson  v.  Tool,  36  Ala.  13; 
Hannan's  Lessee  v.  Reese,  1  Browne 
(Pa.),  11. 

90.  Seaman  v.  Hasbrouck,  35  Barb. 
(N.  Y.)  151;  Robinson  V.  Mitchell,  62 
N.  H.  529.  It  haa  been  held  that 
where  a  debtor  gave  goods  to  a  credi- 
tor on  condition  that  certain  of  his 
debts  should  be  paid  from  the  pro- 
ceeds, and  part  of  the  goods  were  sold 
and  the  debts  paid,  that  other  credi- 
tors of  the  debtor  had  no  claim  upon 
the  r^nainder,  the  gift  having  been 
originally  valid  as  against  creditors. 
Riegel  v.  Wooley,  81  Pa.  St.  227. 

Pajaient    of    mortcace    after 


CONSIBEBATION. 


309 


§  18.  Pre-existing  liability  —  Payment  or  satisfaction  of»  or 
securi^  for,  pre-existing  debt. — ^A  conveyance  or  transfer  of 
property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  his  creditor  in  payment  of  a 
pre-existing  or  antecedent  debt  will  be  uj^ield  if  the  debt  be  bona 
fde,  ite  amount  not  materially  less  than  the  fair  and  reasonable 
value  of  the  property^  and  payment  of  the  debt  is  the  sole  consid- 
eration,  and  no  use  or  benefit  is  secured  or  reserved  to  the  debtor.*^ 


oMiTeyMiee  to  Mtother. — ^A  person 
-who  on  purchasing  property  has  as- 
sumed to  pay  off  a  mortgage  existing 
thereon,  and  who  has  subsequently 
conveyed  the  property  to  his  wife  by 
an  assignment  not  in  fraud  of  his 
creditors,  may  pay  off  the  mortgage 
without  committing  a  fraud  on  his 
creditors,  since  he  might  be  compelled 
to  pay  it  by  action ;  and  thereupon  he 
becomes  substituted  to  the  rights  and 
interest  of  the  original  mortgagee  in 
the  premises.  Wilbur  v.  Fradenburg, 
62  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  474. 

91.  N.  Y.— O'Connor  v.  Dooen,  50 
App.  DiT.  610,  64  N.  Y.  Supp.  206; 
Stacy  T.  Deshaw,  7  Hun,  449;  Loes- 
chigk  ▼.  Hatfield,  5  Rob.  26. 

17.  B. — Repauno  Chemical  Co.  t. 
Victor  Hardware  Co.,  101  Fed.  048, 
42  C.  C.  A.  106;  Budlong  v.  Kent,  28 
Fed.  13. 

AM.— O.  Ober  k  Sons  Co.  ▼.  Phil- 
lips Buttorff  Mfg.  Co.  (1906),  40  So. 
278;  Truitt  v.  Crook,  129  Ala.  377, 
30  So.  618;  McLendon  v.  Grioe,  119 
Ala.  513,  24  So.  846;  Goetter  v.  Nor- 
man, 107  Ala.  586,  19  So.  56;  Goet- 
ter V.  Smith,  104  Ala.  481,  16  So.  534; 
Curran  v.  Olmstead,  101  Ala.  692,  14 
So.  398;  Fargerson  v.  Hall,  99  Ala. 
209,  13  So.  302;  Steiner  v.  Lowery, 
98  Ala.  208,  13  So.  320;  Dawson  v. 
Flash,  97  Ala.  639,  12  So.  67;  Chip- 
man  ▼.  Stem,  89  Ala.  207,  7  So.  409; 
Mobile  Sav.  Bank  v.  McConnell,  87 
Ala.   736,  6  So.   703;    McDoweU   ▼. 


Steele,  87  Ala.  493,  6  So.  288; 
Knowles  ▼.  Street,  87  Ala.  357,  6 
So.  273;  Jefferson  County  Sav.  Bank 
V.  Ebom,  84  Ala.  529,  4  So.  386; 
Moog  T.  Farley,  79  Ala.  246. 

Ark. — Carl,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Beal,  etc.. 
Grocer  Co.,  64  Ark.  373,  42  S.  W.  664. 

Colo. — ^Tennis  v.  Barnes,  11  Colo. 
App.  196,  52  Pac.  1038. 

/U.— Beidler  v.  Crane  (1889),  19 
N.  E.  714;  Hessing  v.  McClosky,  37 
Ul.  341;  McQuown  v.  Law,  18  111. 
App.  34. 

Ind, — Jones  v.  Gott,  10  Ind.  240. 

Md, — Washington  Brewing  Co.  r. 
Garry  (1892),  24  Atl.  151. 

Mich. — Oliver,  etc..  Wire  Co.  ▼. 
Wheeler,  106  Mich.  408,  64  N.  W. 
195. 

ifo.— Kuykendall  ▼.  McDonald,  15 
Mo.  416,  67  Am.  Deca  212;  Pierce  ▼. 
Lowder,  54  Mo.  App.  25;  State  v. 
Excelsior  Distilling  Co.,  20  Mo.  App. 
21. 

Pa.— -Rahn  v.  McElrath,  6  Watts, 
151. 

Tenn. — ^Hickman  v.  Quinn,  6  Yerg. 
96. 

Tc».— Clark  ▼.  Bell  (Tex.  Civ.  App. 
1905),  89  S.  W.  38;  La  Belle  Wagon 
Works  V.  Tidball,  69  Tex.  161,  6  S.  W. 
672;  Smith  v.  Whitfield,  67  Tex.  124, 
2  S.  W.  822;  Noyes  v.  Sanger,  8  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  388,  27  S.  W.  1022. 

W%9. — ^Noyes  v.  Schner,  70  Wis. 
224,  35  N.  W.  310;  Gleaaon  v.  Day, 
9  Wis.  498. 


310 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


Such  a  oonveyance  protects  the  vendee  to  the  same  extent  as  if 
there  had  heen  a  new  oonsideration^  if  taken  in  good  faith  and 
without  intent  to  defraud  the  creditors  of  the  vendor.^  But  where 
a  debtor  makes  a  preferential  transfer  to  a  creditor  in  payment  of 
a  debt,  not  only  must  the  indebtedness  be  bona  fide  but  the  pay- 
ment mu9t  be  a  bona  fide  transaction.*^  Where  the  evidence  of  the 
indebtedness  is  insufficient,^  or  it  appears  that  it  was  not  recog- 
nized or  acknowledged  as  a  legal  indebtedness  or  obligation  by  the 
parties,  until  the  grantor  was  threatened  with  financial  troubles 
or  became  insolvent,^  the  conveyance  will  not  be  sustained  as 
against  existing  creditors.  A  pre-existing  debt  is  a  good  and  suf- 
ficient consideration  for  a  conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  by 
a  debtor,  either  in  payment  or  satisfaction  of,  or  as  security  for, 
such  debt,  both  as  against  creditors  and  subsequent  purchasers.** 


Lt  to  conTey  to 
craator's  wife. — A  conveyance  of 
real  estate  to  the  father-in-law  of  the 
grantor,  in  payment  of  a  pre-existing 
debt,  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  other 
creditors,  although  made  with  the 
understanding  that  the  property 
should  be  conireyed  to  the  grantor's 
wife  as  a  gift.  Smith  v.  Riggs,  56 
Iowa,  488,  8  N,  W.  479,  9  N.  W.  386. 

Wl&ere  note  is  giTom  for  ox- 
ooMi  ia  TAlno  oTor  dobt. — A  pur- 
chase bona  fide  made  by  a  creditor 
from  his  debtor,  who  is  in  failing  cir- 
cumstances, is  not  fraudulent  simply 
because  the  consideration  of  the  pur- 
chase is  the  debt  due  and  a  promis- 
sory note,  6ona  fide  given  at  the  time, 
for  an  overplus  in  the  price  agreed 
to  be  paid  above  the  debt  due.  Hobbe 
V.  Davis,  60  Ga.  213. 

92.  SUrr  v.  Dow  (Neb.  1906),  108 
N.  W.  1066. 

9h3.  Hulse  V.  Merahon,  125  Dl.  62, 
17  N.  E.  50;  Morris  v.  Coombs,  109 
111.  App.  176;  Edrington  v.  Bogers, 
15  Tex.  188;  Long  v.  Deposit  Bank, 
28  Ky.  L.  Rep.  913,  90  8.  W.  961. 


94.  Tanner  v.  Eckhart,  107  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  79,  94  N.  Y.  Supp.  1013; 
Walters  v.  Merrit  Pants  Co.  (Ark. 
1905),  88  S.  W.  879;  CKane  v.  Vin- 
nedge,  108  Ky.  34,  66  S.  W.  711,  21 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  1661. 

96.  Ashmead  v.  Baylor,  69  N.  J.  £q. 
469,  46  Atl.  699;  Adoue  v.  Spencer, 
69  N.  J.  £q.  231,  46  Atl.  643;  Fleisch- 
ner  v.  Bank  of  McMinville,  36  Or.  663, 
64  Pac.  884,  60  Pac.  603,  61  Pac.  346; 
Mitchell  V.  Mitchell,  42  S.  C.  476,  20 
S.  E.  406. 

96.  N.  Y.— New  York  County  Nat. 
Bank  v.  American  Surety  Co.,  174  N. 
Y.  544,  67  N.  E.  1086,  aff'g  69  App. 
Div.  163,  74  N.  Y.  Supp.  692;  Sey- 
mour V.  Wilson,  19  N.  Y.  417;  Pear- 
son ▼.  Cuthbert,  68  App.  Div.  395,  68 
N.  Y.  Supp.  1031;  King  v.  Simmons, 
36  App.  Div.  623,  56  N.  Y.  Supp,  173; 
Commercial  Bank  v.  Bolton,  SM  App. 
Div.  70,  46  N.  Y.  Supp.  734;  Colum- 
bus Watch  Co.  V.  Hodenpyl,  61  Hun, 
667,  16  N.  Y.  Supp.  337;  Loeschigk 
V.  Baldwin,  1  Rob.  377;  Goff  v.  Alex- 
ander, 20  Misc.  Rep.  498,  45  N.  Y. 
Supp.  737;  Fitts  v.  Beardsley,  8  N.  Y. 


CONSIDSBATION. 


311 


But  the  debt  whidi  cou&titates  the  conaideration  must  be  an  obli- 
gation for  which  the  debtor  is  legally  liable  and  which  he  could  be 
oompelled  to  pay  bj  action.^  A  oonvejanoe  by  a  debtor  to  his 
creditor  is  voluntary  and  without  consideration  where  no  acquit- 
tance of  the  debt  is  given,  and  there  is  no  consent  or  understanding 
that  the  conveyance  is  to  discharge  the  debt,*  and  the  transfer  of 


Supp.  667 ;  Ludlow  v.  Hurd,  19  Johns. 
218. 

U.  8. — Gonard  t.  Atlantic  Ins.  Go., 

26  U.  S.  386,  7  L.  Ed.  189,  afg  2  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  627,  4  Wash.  662;  United 
SUtes  V.  C<^n,  33  Fed.  337. 

Ato.— Taylor  v.  Dwyer,  131  Ala.  91, 
32  So.  509;  Henderson  ▼.  Perryman, 
114  Ala.  647,  22  So.  24;  Harmon  y. 
McRae,  91  Ala.  401,  8  So.  648;  Tur- 
ner ▼.  McFee,  61  Ala.  468. 

Ark, — DtmB  ▼.  Jtmes,  67  Ark.  122, 
63  S.  W.  301;  Smith  v.  Jones,  63 
Ark.  232,  37  S.  W.  1052. 

(7ai.— Oasey  y.  Leggett,  125  Cal. 
664,  58  Pac.  264. 

Coto.— Wellington  v.  Terry  (1906), 
88  Pac.  467;  Beaman  ▼.  Stewart,  19 
Colo.  App.  226,  74  Pac.  344;  Denver 
Jobbers'  Assoc,  v.  Rumsey,  19  Colo. 
App.  320,  71  Pac.  1001;  Krippendorf- 
Dittman  Co.  v.  Trenoweth,  16  Colo. 
App.  178,  64  Pac.  373;  Sargent  v. 
Chapman,  12  Colo.  App.  529,  56  Pac. 
194. 

Del. — Brown  v.  Dickerson,  2  Manr. 
119,  42  Atl.  421. 

Fla. — ^Mercantile  Exch.  Bank  v. 
Taylor  (1906),  41  So.  22. 

Oa. — ^Davis  v.  Anderson,  1  Ga.  176. 

Ky. — Jones  v.  Dulaney  &  Mitchell, 

27  Ky.  L.  Rep.  702,  86  S.  W,  547. 
Tex, — Sparks  ▼.  Ponder   (Tex-  Civ. 

App.  1906),  94  S.  W.  428;  Riske  v. 
Rotan  Grocery  Co.  (Tex.  Civ.  App. 
1906),  93  S.  W.  708. 

97.  y,  y. — ^Lippert  v.  Gilmartin, 
37   App.   Div.  411,  55  K.  Y.  Supp. 


1042;    Wilbur    v.    Fradenburgh,    52 
Barb.  474. 

U.  £f.— Knower  v.  Haines,  31  Fed. 
513,  24  Blatchf.  488. 

Ala, — British,  etc.,  Mort.  Co.  v. 
Norton,  125  Ala.  522,  28  So.  31 ;  Hub- 
bard V.  Allen,  59  Ala.  283. 

OaL — ^Fidelity,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Thomp- 
son, 128  Cal.  506,  61  Pac.  94. 

/n.— Banton  v.  Smith,  113  111.  481. 

/fkJ.— Hadley  v.  Hood,  94  Ind.  119. 

Iowa, — Schoonover  v.  Foley  ( 1903 ) , 
94  N.  W.  492;  Parriott  v.  Bowers, 
111  Iowa,  740,  82  N.  W.  998;  Bur- 
lington Protestant  Hoapital  Assoc,  v. 
Gelinger,  111  Iowa, 293, 82  N.  W.  766. 

Kan. — Holyoke  Envelope  Co.  v. 
Heagler    (App.   1901),  63   Pac.  450. 

Me, — Jose  v.  Hewett,  50  Me.  248. 

Pa. — In  re  Hoover,  12  Montg.  Co., 
L.  Rep.  113. 

Wm.— Livre  v.  Thielke,  115  Wis. 
389,  91  N.  W.  975.  Compare  First 
Nat.  Bank  v.  Bertschky,  62  Wis.  438, 
9  N.  W.  534. 

27n^.— Penhall  v.  Elwin,  1  Smale 
&  G.  268. 

Inoludliic  interest  not  eoUeoti- 
ble  hj  law  in  a  mortgage  given  for 
a  just  debt  does  not  render  it  fraudu- 
lent, where  the  allowance  of  interest 
is  just  and  equitable.  Spencer  v. 
Ayrault,  10  N.  Y.  202 ;  Doty  v.  Clint, 
11  St.  Rep.  (N.  Y.),  87. 

98.  Ames  v.  Dorroh,  76  Miss.  187, 
23  So.  768,  71  Am.  St.  Rep.  522; 
Crecelius  v.  Bierman,  72  Mo.  App. 
866. 


312 


Fbauduusnt  Convetanoes. 


property  for  antecedent  debts,  without  extingoiahment  or  sur- 
render of  such  debts  and  of  the  old  securities  therefor,  is  not  suf- 
ficient to  constitute  the  transferee  a  hana  fide  purchaser  for  a 
valuable  consideration.**  The  payment  or  securing  of  an  actual 
debt  by  a  debtor  must  be  impeached  by  evidence  tending  to  show, 
either  some  other  advantage  or  benefit  to  the  debtor  beyond  the 
discharge  of  his  obligation,  or  some  other  benefit  to  the  creditor 
beyond  the  mere  payment  of  his  debt,  or  some  injury  to  the  other 
creditors  beyond  the  mere  postponement  to  the  debt  preferred.' 
The  surrender  by  the  grantee  of  notes  which  he  holds  against  the 
grantor  is  such  a  valuable  consideration  as  will  sustain  it  as  against 
the  grantor's  other  creditors,*  unless  the  notes  are  in  fact  without 
consideration.'  A  creditor's  definitely  extending  the  time  for  pay- 
ment of  a  debt  is  a  sufficient  consideration  for  a  mortgage  and 
renders  him  a  bona  fide  purchaser.^  A  deed  of  trust  made  to 
secure  a  pre-existing  debt  in  consideration  of  further  indulgence 
for  a  year  is  not  so  unreasonable  as  to  raise  any  presumption  of  an 
intent  to  hinder  or  delay  creditors.*  A  deed  to  one  for  whose  wife 
the  grantor  held  funds  in  trust  for  whidi  he  had  not  accounted, 
and  which  was  made  to  satisfy  the  trust,  cannot  be  regarded  as  a 
voluntary  conveyance.*    Fraud  cannot  be  attributed  to  a  debtor 


09.  Wood  T.  Robinson,  22  N.  Y. 
664;  In  re  Morse,  17  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
9,851,  17  Blatchf.  72;  Wellington  v. 
Puller,  38  Me.  61 ;  Whitaker  v.  Sum- 
ner, 37  Mass.  399;  Pope  v.  Pope,  40 
Miss.  516;  Harney  ▼.  Pack,  4  Sm.  & 
M.  (Miss.),  229;  Oliver  v.  Moore,  23 
Ohio  St.  473 ;  Starr  v.  Starr,  1  Ohio, 
321.  '  But  see  Westerly  Sav.  Bank  ▼. 
Stillman  Mfg.  Co.,  16  R.  I.  497,  17 
Atl.  918. 

It  is  a  badi^e  of  f rand  for  the 
grantee  to  retain  the  evidence  of  in- 
debtedness in  his  possession  uncan- 
celed, when  a  conveyance,  made 
in  consideration  of  a  pre-existing 
debt  has  been  perfected.  Gardner 
T.      Brouasard,      39      Tex.       372; 


Webb  V.  Ingham,  29  W.  Va.  389,  I 
S.  £.  816. 

1.  Meyers  ▼.  Meyers,  24  Pa.  Super. 
Gt.  (1904),  603;  Snayberger  ▼.  Fahl, 
195  Pa.  St.  336,  46  Atl.  1065,  78  Am. 
St.  Rep.  818. 

2.  Starin  v.  Kdly,  36  Super.  Gt. 
(N.  Y.),  366. 

3.  Neal  v.  Foster,  36  Fed.  29. 

4.  Snellgrave  T.  Evans  (Ala.  1906), 
40  So.  567.  A  mortgage  given  in 
consideration  of  the  extention  of  a 
debt,  and  of  the  mortgagor  being 
permitted  to  pay  the  debt  in  install- 
ments, is  not  necessarily  void.  U.  S. 
Nat.  Bank  v.  Westervelt,  55  Neb.  424,. 
75  N.  Y.  857. 

6.  Lee  v.  Flanagan,  29  N.  G.  471. 
6.  Irion  ▼.  Mills,  41  Tex.  310. 


CONSIDEBATION. 


813 


vrho  sells  his  property  for  a  fair  oonsideration  and  applies  the 
proceeds  to  the  payment  of  bona  fide  creditors/  A  transfer  of 
property  to  pay  a  loan  is  valid  as  against  the  vendor's  creditors^ 
although  he  had  contracted  to  pay  nfliirious  interest,  if  the  value  of 
the  property  does  not  exceed  the  principal.*  The  fact  that  fraud 
was  practiced  by  an  insolvent  corporation  in  the  use  of  money 
borrowed  from  a  bank  and  loaned  to  it  in  good  faith  and  without 
iwrticipation  in  the  fraud^  does  not  invalidate  the  corporation's 
transfer  of  its  property  in  payment  of  the  money  borrowed.*  A 
mortgage  executed  by  a  fraudulent  purdiaser  of  goods,  to  secure 
antecedent  creditors,  will  be  held  valid  as  to  such  creditors,  where, 
in  consideration  of  the  mortgage  and  without  notice  of  fraud,  they 
extended  the  time  of  their  debt  or  assumed  any  new  or  additional 
obligation.^  A  worthlese  debt  of  a  third  person  is  not  a  valuable 
consideration  for  a  oonveyanoet,^^  and  a  transfer  of  partnership 
property  in  payment  of  an  individual  debt  of  one  of  the  partners 
is  void  as  to  creditors  of  the  partnership.^ 

§  19.  Property  in  excess  of  debt. — ^A  debtor  may  pay  his  cred- 
itor in  goods  or  other  property ;  but  if  the  property  conveyed  or 
transferred  by  a  debtor  to  one  of  his  creditors  largely  exceeds  in 
value  the  amount  of  the  debt  in  payment  of  which  the  conveyance 
or  transfer  is  made,  the  conveyance  is  fraudulent  as  to  other  cred- 
itors and  may  be  set  aside  by  them."    Where  an  insolvent  debtor 


7.  Pochel  ▼.  Read,  20  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.),  208,  46  N.  Y.  Supp.  775; 
FarweU  v.  Norton,  77  HI.  App.  685. 
Compare  Lehman  ▼.  Kelly,  68  Ala. 
102. 

8.  McLendon  v.  Grioe,  119  Ala. 
513,  24  So.  846;  Belknap  v.  Groover 
(Tex.  Civ.  App.  1900),  56  S.  W.  249. 

9.  FerguBon  v.  Oxford  Mercantile 
Ck>.  (Miss.  1900),  27  So.  877. 

10.  Adam,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Stewart,  157 
Ind.  678,  61  N.  £.  1002,  87  Am.  St 
Bep.  240. 

11.  Seymour  v.  Wilson,  19  N.  Y. 

417. 


1«.  Henderson  v.  Ferryman,  114 
Ala.  647,  22  So.  24;  Leonard  v.  Wins- 
low,  2  Grant  Oas.   (Pa.),  139. 

IS.  N,  r.— First  Nat.  Bank  of  Am- 
sterdam  v.  Miller,  163  N.  Y,  164,  57 
N.  E.  308,  revg.  24  App.  Div.  551,  49 
N.  Y.  Supp.  981,  where  other  attend- 
ant circumstances  show  fraudulent  in- 
tent; Hollis  V.  Drescher,  46  App.  Div. 
151,  63  N.  Y.  Supp.  378. 

Ala. — ^Henderson  v.  Ferryman,  114 
Ala.  647,  22  So.  24;  Mooie  v.  Penn, 
95  Ala.  200,  10  Sa  343. 

Cat— Sukeforth  v.  Lord,  87  Gal. 
399,  26  Pao.  497. 


3U 


Fbaudui-ent  Conveyances. 


transfers  to  his  creditor  property  of  a  value  greatly  in  excess  of  the 
debt^  in  a  state  wheare  transfers  for  the  purpose  of  preferring  one 
creditor  to  another  are  valid,  the  tran&fer  is  void  at  common  law, 
as  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  with  respect  to  the  property  trans- 
ferred which  is  in  excess  of  the  value  of  the  debt"  Where  a  trans- 
fer to  secure  a  preferred  creditor  conveys  an  unreasonable  amount 
of  property,  or  includes  practically  all  of  the  debtor's  property, 
the  value  of  which  is  greatly  in  excess  of  the  debt,  and  the  pre- 


(?a.— Banks  t.  dapp,  12  Ga.  514; 
Peck  V.  Lang,  2  (xa.  1,  46  Am.  Dec 
368.      Compare   Carey   v.   Giles,    10 

/».— Head  v.  Harding,  166  III.  353, 
46  N.  E.  890,  affg  62  111.  App.  302. 

Kan» — Schram  v.  Taylor,  61  Kan. 
547,  33  Pac.  315,  the  property  trans* 
ferred  must  bear  a  just  proportion  to 
the  amount  of  the  debt  sought  to  be 
paid. 

La. — Sattler  ▼.  Marino,  30  La.  Ann. 
355;  Worrell  v.  Vickers,  30  La.  Ann. 
202. 

Mich, — Steuben  County  Wine  Co.  v. 
Lee,  127  Mich.  698,  87  N.  W.  129; 
Ryan  v.  M^er,  108  Mich.  638,  66  N. 
W.  667. 

Ifo.— Hewitt  v.  Price,  99  Mo.  666, 
74  S.  W.  414;  Scott  Hardware  Co.  v. 
Riddle,  84  Mo.  App.  275.  But  see 
Alberger  v.  National  Bank  of  Com- 
merce, 123  Mo.  313,  27  S.  W.  657. 

^e6.-~Ogg  V.  Schultz,  61  Neb.  221, 
85  N.  W.  64;  Morse  ▼.  Steinrod,  29 
Neb.  108,  46  N.  W.  922. 

"S,  J, — Clinton  Hill  Lumber,  etc., 
Co.  V.  Strieby,  52  N.  J.  Eq.  576,  29 
Atl.  589,  when  conveyed  without  right 
of  redemption.  Compare  Brock  ▼. 
Hudson  County  Bank,  48  N.  J.  Eq. 
615,  23  Atl.  269,  27  Am.  St.  Rep.  451 ; 
Demarest  v.  Terhune,  18  N.  J.  Eq. 
532. 
B,  C— Fiyer  v.  Bryan,  2  Hill  Eq.  66. 


Tea?. — ^Torrey  v.  Cameron,  73  Tex. 
583,  11  S.  W.  583;  Oppenheimer  t. 
Halff,  68  Tex.  409,  4  S.  W.  662 ;  How- 
erton  v.  Holt,  23  Tex.  61;  Baylor  r. 
Brown,  3  Tex.  Civ.  App.  177,  21  8.  W. 
73. 

W.  Fa.— Reilly  v.  Barr,  34  W.  Va. 
95,  11  S.  I:.  750;  Knight  v.  Capito, 
23  W.  Va.  639. 

See  Inadequacy  of  consideration, 
chap.  VI,  S  4,  tupra. 

Compare  George  v.  Kimball,  41 
Mass.  234. 

The  •srig^ment  of  »  rigibt  of 
•etioa  of  a  speenlatiTe  Talwe  is 
not  fraudulent  as  to  other  creditors 
because  its  value  is  in  excess  of  the 
debts  secured.  Hutmacher  v.  An- 
heuser-Busch Brew.  Assoc,  71  111. 
App.  154. 

14.  Mitchell  V.  McBabbin,  17  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  9,666;  Jaroslawaki  v.  Simon, 
3  Brewst.    (Pa.),  37. 

Eseees  ia  anoiuit  seevred  by 
tmet  deed. — ^Where  there  is  more 
property  included  in  a  trust  deed 
than  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  all  the 
debts  secured  by  it,  a  pursuing  credi- 
tor may  file  a  bill,  against  all  the 
parties  interested,  to  have  the  trust 
closed  and  the  property  subjected,  first 
to  the  payment  of  the  trust  debts, 
and  the  excess  to  the  satisfaction  of 
the  complainant's  debts.  Cornish  v. 
Dews,  18  Ark.  172. 


COITSIDEBATION. 


81S 


f erred  creditor  has  knowledge  of  the  insolyeiu^  of  the  debtor,  it 
will  be  deemed  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  whose  claims  are  thereby 
defeated.^  A  sli^t  exoees  in  the  value  of  the  property  conyeyed 
oyer  the  amount  of  the  debt  paid  or  secured  does  not,  however, 
show  inadequacy  of  consideration  sufficient  to  evince  a  fraudulent 
purpose  and  to  justify  the  setting  aside  of  the  conveyance  as  a 
fraudulent  transfer.^*  In  such  cases  the  law  allows  room  for 
ordinary  differenoes  of  opinion  and  will  not  weigh  the  estimates 
of  opinion  in  too  exacting  a  balanoe.^^  In  the  absence  of  circum- 
stances showing  insolvency  or  bad  faith,  a  mortgage  or  a  trust 
conveyance  or  other  transfer,  made  for  the  security  of  a  preexist- 
ing debt,  will  not  be  invalid  for  the  reason  that  the  property  con- 
veyed is  much  larger  in  value  than  the  debt  which  it  is  given  to 
secure."    Where  the  value  of  the  property  included  in  such  a  con- 


15.  Williams  t.  Stowell,  6  Kan. 
App.  880,  48  Pac.  894;  Scott  Hard- 
ware Co.  V.  Riddle,  84  Mo.  App.  276; 
Oppenheimer  v.  Halff,  68  Tex.  409, 
4  S.  W.  562;  Edrington  v.  Rogers, 
15  Tex.  188;  Thompson  t.  Rosenstein 
(Tex.  Civ.  App.  1902),  67  S.  W.  439; 
Halff  V.  Ooldfrank  (Tex.  Civ.  App. 
1899),  49  8.  W.  1095. 

16.  N.  r.— Laidlaw  v.  Gilmore,  47 
How.  Pr.  67. 

U,  8. — ^Rapanno  Chemical  Co.  ▼. 
Victor  Hardware  Co.,  101  Fed.  948, 
42  C.  C.  A.  106. 

Ate.— Redd  v.  Wallace  (1906),  40 
So.  407. 

/oira.— Warfleld  v.  Lynd,  67  Iowa, 
722,  25  K.  W.  896;  Rusie  v.  Jameson, 
62  Iowa,  52,  17  N.  W.  103. 

fan.— Wilhite  v.  Daniels  (1902), 
67  Pac.  452. 

Mio. — Scott  Hardware  Co.  v.  Riddle, 
84  Mo.  App.  275. 

Neh» — Chamberlain  ▼.  Woolsej,  66 
Neb.  141,  92  N.  W.  181,  95  N.  W.  38. 

Pa.— Werner  ▼.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa.  St. 
360,  29  Atl.  737;  Hand  v.  Hitner,  140 


Pa.  St.  166,  21  Atl.  260,  where  the 
property  was  real  estate  upon  which 
an  arbitrary  value  was  placed;  Covan- 
hovan  v.  Hart,  21  Pa.  St  495,  60  Am. 
Dec.  57. 

Tenn, — McGrew  ▼.  Hancock  (Ch. 
App.  1899),  52  S.  W.  500. 

Tem. — Davis  v.  Reason,  77  Tex.  604, 
14  S.  W.  198. 

17.  Fkcgerson  v.  Hall,  99  Ala.  209, 
13  So.  302;  Mobile  Sav.  Rank  v.  Mc- 
Donnell, 89  Ala.  434,  8  So.  137,  18 
Am.  St.  Rep.  137,  9  L.  R.  A.  645. 

18.  N,  Y, — ^Boeesneck  v.  Cohn,  7 
K.  T.  Supp.  620. 

U,  £f.— Davis  v.  Schwartz,  155  U. 
S.  631,  15  Sup.  Ct.  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
289;  Downs  v.  Kissam,  10  How.  102, 
13  L.  Ed.  346. 

D.  C— Birdsall  v.  Welch,  6  D.  C. 
316. 

Iowa, — ^Ward  v.  Parker,  128  Iowa, 
124,  103  N.  W.  104. 

Kam, — Clement  v.  HartzeU,  57  Kan. 
482,  46  Pac.  961. 

Uioh, — Michigan  Trust  Co.  v.  Ben- 
nett, 106  Mich.  381,  64  N.  W.  330; 


316 


Fraudui-ent  Conveyanobs. 


veyance  is  greatly  in  excess  of  the  debt  secured  a  presumption  of 
fraud  may  be  raised/*  but  fraud  will  not  be  indisputably  presumed 
from  the  mere  taking  of  excessiye  security,  althou^  it  is  a  cir- 
cumstance  to  be  considered  by  the  court  or  jury  in  determining 
whether  a  transaction  waa  in  fraud  of  creditors." 

§  20.  Amount  secured  in  excess  of  actual  debt — ^Tfae  mere 
fact  that  a  moontgage  or  other  oonyeyance,  givem  by  an  insolvent 


Warner  t.  Littlefield,  89  Mich.  329, 
50  N.  W.  721. 

If iM.— Taylor  y.  Walkins  (1893), 
13  So.  811. 

^Te&.^Kilpatrick-Kocli  Dry  Goods 
Oo.  ▼.  Strauss,  45  Neb.  793,  64  N.  W.  .. 
223;  Grand  Island  Banking  Co.  ▼.  ' 
Goetello,  45  Neb.  119,  63  N.  W.  376; 
Sherwin  v.  Gaghagen,  39  N^.  238,  57 
N.  W.  1005;  Grimes  y.  Farrington,  19 
Neb.  44,  26  N.  W.  618. 

N.  C— Burgin  y.  Burgin,  23  N.  G. 
453. 

Term, — Roane  y.  Bank  of  Nasbyille, 
38  Tenn.  526. 

Wi«.— Cunningham  y.  Eagan,  102 
Wis.  272,78N.W.402;  Menzesheimer 
V.  Kennedy,  75  Wis.  411,  44  N.  W. 
508. 

Btlpvlatiom  to  delay  f ofeoloa- 
To^ — A  mortgage  of  nearly  all  the 
debtor's  estate  to  a  principal  credi- 
tor, fifty  per  cent,  more  in  yalue  than 
the  debt  secured,  with  a  stipulation 
for  two  years'  delay  in  its  foreclosure, 
IS  yoid.  Reynolds  V.  Welch,  47  Ala. 
200. 

Mortcase  held  to  be  aa  iiLTalid 
asailpuiieat. — A  finding  that  a  mort- 
gage of  land  was  as  inyalid  «u»ign- 
ment  by  the  mortgagor  of  his  prop- 
erty to  one  creditor  to  the  exclusion 
of  other  creditors,  will  not  be  dis- 
turbed where  it  appears  that  the 
mortgage  ooyered  all  the  mortgagor's 


land,  and,  with  other  mortgages  on 
the  land,  amounted  to  oyer  seren- 
eighths  of  its  yalue,  and  there  was 
no  other  property  out  of  which  credi- 
tors oould  collect  their  claims. 
Mitchell  y.  Mitchell,  42  S.  C.  475,  20 
8.  E.  405. 

SeTeral  ekattel  mortcmces  exe* 
e«ted  afanvltaiieovflly  to  seewre 
debta,  the  aggregate  of  which  is  not 
unreasonably  less  than  the  property 
mortgaged,  are  not  yoid  be<aiuse  no 
one  of  such  debts  is  in  itself  suffi- 
cient to  justify  so  great  a  security. 
Jones  y.  Loree,  37  Neb.  816,  56  N.  W. 
390. 

19.  Williams  y.  Stowell,  5  Kan. 
App.  880,  48  Pac.  894;  Crosby  y. 
Huston,  1  Tex.  203.  Compare  Black 
Hills  Mercantile  Co.  y.  Gardner,  5 
S.  D.  246,  58  N.  W.  557. 

SO.  Tackaberry  y.  Gilmore,  57 
Neb.  450,  78  N.  W.  32;  Dayton  Spice 
Mills  y.  Sloan,  49  Neb.  622,  68  N.  W. 
1040;  Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Oo. 
y.  Strauss,  45  Neb.  793,  64  N.  W.  223 
{dieiin^^hing  Thompson  y.  Richard- 
son Drug  Co.,  33  Neb.  714,  50  N.  W. 
948,  29  Am.  St.  Rep.  505;  Brown  y. 
Work,  30  Neb.  800,  47  N.  W.  192; 
Morse  y.  Steinrod,  29  Neb.  108,  46 
N.  W.  922);  Grand  Island  Banking 
Co.  y.  Cbstello,  45  Neb.  119,  63  N.  W. 
376;  Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Co. 
▼.  Bremers,  44  Neb.  868,  62  N.  W. 


OONSIDBBATION. 


317 


debtor  as  seourity  for  a  debt^  is  giv^i  for  a  greater  sum  than 
is  actually  due  on  the  debt  secured,  is  not  conclusive  evidence 
of  fraud."  But  a  mortgage  or  oither  oonvejance  executed  by  a 
debtor  who  is  insolvent  or  in  failing  circumstances,  as  security 
for  a  debt,  for  a  sum  known  by  the  creditoor  at  the  time  to  be  in 
excess  of  what  is  actually  due  on  the  debt,  is  presumptively 
f raudulent^    A  miscalculadon,  mistake,  or  unintentional  error 


1105;  Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Go. 
T.  McPheely,  37  Neb.  800,  66  N.  W. 
389;  Menzesheimer  v.  Kennedy,  75 
Wis.  411,  44  N.  W.  508. 

21.  U.  fif.— United  States  t.  Grit- 
wold,  8  Fed.  496,  7  Sawy.  296. 

/«.— Bell  V,  Prewitt,  62  111.  361; 
Wooley  V.  Fry,  30  111.  168. 

Ind. — Adams  v.  Laugel,  144  Ind. 
608,  42  N.  £.  1017;  Goff  v.  Rogers,  71 
Ind.  459. 

louxi, — ^Van  Patten  ▼.  Thcnnpson,  73 
Iowa,  103,  34  N.  W.  763;  Wood  v. 
Scott,  65  Iowa,  114,  7  N.  W.  466. 

Kan. — Bowling  ▼.  Searles,  57  Kan. 
174,  45  Pac.  584;  Bush  v.  Bush,  33 
Kan.  556,  6  Pac.  794;  Hughes  t. 
ShuU,  33  Kan.  127,  133,  6  Pac.  414, 
770. 

Mass. — ^Parker  ▼.  Barker,  43  Kass. 
423. 

Mich. — ^Louden  y.  Vinton,  108  Ifioh. 
313,  66  N.  W.  222;  Willison  v.  Desen- 
berg,  41  Mich.  156,  2  N.  W.  201. 

Iftnn.— Helm  v.  Chapel,  62  Minn. 
338,  64  N.  W.  825;  Berry  v.  O'Con- 
nor, 33  Minn.  29,  29  N.  W.  840,  nor 
the  fact  that  its  condition  fails  to 
describe  the  real  character  of  the  in- 
debtedness or  liability  intended  to  be 
secured. 

Neh. — Smith  v.  Bowen,  51  Neb.  246, 
70  N.  W.  949. 

N.  ff.—Whittredge  ▼.  Edmonds,  63 
N.  H.  248. 

Pa, — Gordon  t.  Preston,  1  Watts» 
385,  26  Am.  Dec.  75. 


Tenn. — ^Bumpas  t.  Botson,  26  Tenn. 
310,  46  Am.  Dec.  81. 

Wis. — Barkow  v.  Sanger,  47  Wis. 
500,  3  N.  W.  16.  But  see  Butte  v. 
Peacock,  23  Wis.  359. 

2St.  U.  £r.~Hart  v.  Heidweyer,  152 
U.  S.  547,  14  Sup.  Ct.  671,  38  L.  Ed. 
548;  Kellogg  v.  Clyne,  54  Fed.  696, 
12  U.  S.  App.  174,  4  C.  C.  A.  664; 
Hubbard  v.  Turner,  12  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
6,819,  2  McLean,  519. 

Ala. — ^Marriott  ▼.  Givens,  B  Ala. 
694;  Stover  ▼.  Herrington,  7  Ala.  142, 
4i  Am.  Dec.  86. 

Ark. — ^Henry  y.  Harrell,  67  Ark. 
569,  22  S.  W.  433. 

CoZ.— Tully  V.  Harloe,  35  Cal.  302, 
96  Am.  Dec.  102;  Wiscoxson  v.  Bur- 
ton, 27  Cal.  228,  87  Am.  Dec.  66. 

Conn. — ^Bramhali  v.  Flood,  41  Conn. 
68. 

IlL — ^Adams  v.  Pease,  113  111.  App. 
356. 

Iowa. — ^Bussard  t.  Bullitt,  95  Iowa, 
736,  64  N.  W.  668;  Taylor  t.  Wend- 
ling,  66  Iowa,  562,  24  N.  W.  40; 
Lombard  v.  Dows,  66  Iowa  243,  23 
N.  W.  649;  City  of  Davenport  v. 
Cummings,  15  Iowa,  219. 

Kan. — ^Williams  v.  Stowell,  6  Kan. 
App.  880,  48  Pac.  894. 

Mioh. — Patrick  v.  Riggs,  105  Mich. 
616,  63  N.  W.  532;  Ferris  v.  Mc- 
Queen, 94  Mich.  367,  54  N.  W.  164; 
Showman  v.  Lee,  86  Mich.  556,  45 
N.  W.  678;  King  v.  HubbeU,  42  Mich. 
697,  4  N.  W.  440. 


318 


Fraudulent  Contstancxs. 


in  the  amount  of  the  debt  secured  by  a  mortgage  or  other  con- 
veyance will  not  vitiate  such  a  conveyance.''     It  must  appear 


Iflfifi. — Hanson  v.  Bean,  51  Minn. 
546,  53  N.  W.  871,  38  Am.  St.  Rep. 
516. 

Ifo.^Flrst  Nat  Bank  t.  Fry,  168 
Mo.  402,  68  S.  W.  348;  Imhoff  t. 
MeArthur,  148  Mo.  371,  48  S.  W. 
456.  But  see  Colbem  v.  Robinson,  80 
Mo.  541. 

y.  /.— Heintce  v.  Bently,  34  K  J. 
Eq.  562,  aff'g  33  N.  J.  Eq.  405. 

Pa.— Orr  y.  Peters,  197  Pa.  St.  606, 
47  Atl.  840;  Whiting  ▼.  Johnson,*  11 
Serg.  &  R.  328,  14  Am.  Dec.  633; 
Hieber  y.  Neary,  7  Pa.  Dist  596.  But 
see  Heiney  y.  Anderson,  0  Lane.  Bar 
13. 

8.  C— Hipp  V.  Sawyer,  1  Rich.  Eq. 
Cas.  410.  Compare  Smith  y.  Pate,  3 
S.  C.  204. 

Wi9.— Rioe  y.  Momer,  64  Wis.  590, 
25  N.  W.  668;  Stein  y.  Hermann,  23 
Wis.  132. 

Wliere  ezaet  aaioiiB.t  of  debt 
vaa  mot  louiwa. — ^The  giying  of  a 
note  and  mortgage  by  an  insolyent 
for  an  amount  larger  than  he  really 
owes  is  not  a  fraud  on  his  other 
creditors,  where  it  appears  that 
neither  he  nor  the  mortgagee  knew 
accurately  the  amount  due,  which 
embraced  mutual  dealings  for  a  series 
of  years;  that  it  was  agreed  that  the 
mortgage  should  secure  only  the  sum 
actually  due;  and  that  there  was  no 
intent  to  defraud  other  creditors. 
Lycoming  Rubber  Co.  y.  King,  90 
Iowa,  343,  57  N.  W.  864.  See  also 
Wood  y.  Scott,  55  Iowa,  114,  7  N. 
W.  465;  Dayis  y.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St 

82. 

Whtof  valiM  of  propertj  wms 
leas  tkBM,  aetval  debt.~The  execu- 
tion of  a  deed  of  trust  to  secure  a 


debt  of  three  thousand  dollars,  when 
only  about  half  that  amount  is  due, 
does  not  show  the  deed  to  be  fraud- 
ulent as  to  other  creditors,  where  the 
value  of  the  land  is  but  $650. 
Sawyer  y.  Bradshaw,  125  111.  440,  17 
N.  £.  812. 

A  deed  intended  as  a  mortgage 
which  expresses  a  consideration 
largely  in  excess  of  the  debt  will 
be  yiewed  by  the  court  with  suspicion, 
and  the  eyidence  of  good  faith  and 
absence  of  fraudulent  intent  aa 
against  contesting  creditors  must  be 
full  and  satisfactory;  but  such  a  con- 
veyance is  not  constructiyely  fraudu- 
lent. Jefferson  County  Bank  y.  Hum- 
mel, 11  Colo.  App.  337,  53  Pac.  286. 
See  also  McCiure  y.  Smith,  14  Colo. 
297,  23  Pac.  786;  Ross  y.  Duggan,  5 
Colo.  85. 

Wbere  debt  aad  fmtmre  ad* 
▼aaoes  eqmal  aaioiuit  of  atort- 
smco. — Chattel  mortgages  are  not 
fraudulent  aa  purporting  to  secure 
a  debt  larger  than  the  actual  debt 
and  future  adyances,  where  the  agree- 
ment was  that  the  remainder  of  the 
money  was  to  be  adyanced  substan- 
tially at  once.  Bradley  Co.  y.  Paul, 
94  Wis.  488,  69  N.  W.  168. 

23.  Ala, — ^Pennington  y.  Woodall, 
17  Ahi.  685. 

Kan. — Symns  Grocer  Co.  y.  Lee,  0 
Kan.  App.  574,  58  Pac.  237. 

Mo. — ^Rogers,  etc..  Hardware  Co.  y. 
Randell,  69  Mo.  App.  342. 

Neh. — ^Trompen  y.  Yates,  66  Neb. 
525,  92  N.  W.  647. 

Pa. — Baldwin  y.  Harron,  19  Pa.  Co. 
Ct.  634. 

Tear.— Freybe  y.  Tieman,  76  Tex. 
286,  13  S.  W.  370. 


CoNSIDESATIOir. 


319 


that  it  was  so  taken  intentioiially,  and  not  by  mere  miatake^  in 
computation  or  otherwise.^ 

§21.  Debta  not  yet  due. — ^A  oonv^ance  of  property  at  a 
fair  valuation  by  a  failing  debtor  to  bis  creditor,  in  payment 
of  a  subsisting  and  honest  debt,  which  has  not  yet  matured,  is 
not  fraudulent  in  respect  to  his  other  creditors.^  The  fact  that 
notes  on  which  judgment  was  confessed  were  not  due,  or  the 
cause  of  action  had  not  matured,  is  not  sufficient  to  show  that 
a  confession  of  judgment  was  fraudulent.**  Where  the  property 
conveyed  by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  greatly  exceeds  the  amount  of 
his  claim,  and  the  claim  is  not  yet  due,  the  conveyance  will  be 
held  to  be  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors.^ 

§  22.  Debts  barred  by  limitation — ^The  fact  that  the  recovery 
of  a  debt,  alleged  to  be  the  consideration  of  a  conveyance,  was 
barred  by  the  statute  of  limitations  when  the  conveyance  was 
made,  does  not  affect  the  sufficiency  of  the  consideration,  or 
render  the  conveyance  void  aa  against  creditors.^     Only  the 


24^,  EaUc  T.  Fielding,  50  Wis.  339, 
7  N.  W.  296. 

25.  Bedell  v.  Chase,  34  N.  Y.  386; 
Symns  Grocer  Co.  v.  Smith,  6  Kan. 
App.  258,  51  Pac.  803;  Shedd  y.  Bank 
of  BrattleboTO,  32  Vt.  709;  McGrew 
T.  Hancock  (Tenn.  Ch.  App.  1899), 
52  S.  W.  500.  Contra.— Taaffe  v. 
Josephson,  7  Cal.  352,  such  a  convey- 
ance is  conatructively  fraudulent; 
Mansfield  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  5 
Wash.  665,  32  Pac  789,  999. 

26.  Pond  T.  Davenport,  45  Cal. 
225;  East  Side  Bank  v.  Columbus 
Tanning  Co.,  15  Pa.  Co.  Ct.  357. 

27.  Lee  v.  Wathen,  42  Ky.  297; 
Brown  V.  Work,  30  Neb.  800, 47  N.  W. 
192;  Hartman  v.  Allen,  77  Tenn.  657. 

2&  2^.  r.-^Manchester  v.  Tibbetts, 
121  N.  Y.  219,  24  N.  E.  304,  18  Am. 


St.  Bep.  816;  McConnell  v.  Barber, 
86  Hun,  360,  33  N.  Y.  Supp.  480; 
Del  Valle  v.  Hyland,  76  Hun,  493,  27 
N.  Y.  Supp.  1059;  Davis  v.  Howard, 
73  Hun,  347,  26  N.  Y.  Supp.  194; 
Mellen  v.  Banning,  72  Hun,  176,  25 
N.  Y.  Supp.  542;  Ellis  v.  Myers,  8  N. 
Y.  Supp.  139,  4  Silv.  323. 

U.  £f.— Vansickle  v.  Wells,  Fargo  k 
Co.,  105  Fed.  16;  Wilson  v.  Jones,  76 
Fed.  484,  when  part  of  debts  were 
barred  by  the  statute  of  limitations. 

Oa, — Comer  v.  Allen,  72  Qa.  1, 
mortgage  by  husband  to  wife. 

lotoa, — Roberts  v.  Brothers,  119 
Iowa,  309,  93  N.  W.  289;  City  Bank 
V.  Wright,  68  Iowa,  132,  26  N.  W. 
35,  transfer  by  husband  to  wife. 

JTcMi. — ^Kennedy  v.  Powell,  34  Kan. 
22,  7  Pac.  606. 


320 


Fraudulent  Convbyanges. 


debtor  himself  can  take  advantage  of  the  statute  imdeir  such 
circumstanoes;  and  he  is  not  obliged  by  any  duty  he  owes  his 
other  creditors  to  interpose  the  statute  of  limitations  as  a  de- 
fence.**  But  the  fact  that  the  consideration  of  the  conveyance 
was  a  debt  barred  by  limitation  is  a  ciieumstance  v^hich  may 
be  coaxsidered  in  determining  the  question  of  good  faith,*^  al- 
though it  is  not  controlling  or  conclusive.'^  A  judgment  by  con- 
fession for  a  debt  barred  by  the  statute  of  limitations,  or  founded 
on  aax  obligation  not  enforceable  under  the  statute  of  frauds,  is 
valid  as  against  other  creditors." 

§  23.  Taking  additional  security  for  debts  amply  secured — 
A  mortgage  executed  by  an  insolvent  or  one  greatly  in  debt, 


Minn» — ^Frost  ▼.  Steele,  46  Minn.  I, 
48  N.  W.  413. 

Ifo.— Oentry  v.  Field,  143  Mo.  399, 
45  S.  W.  286. 

Neb, — ^Plummer  v.  Rohman,  61 
Neb.  61,  84  N.  W.  600,  62  Neb.  145, 
87  N.  W.  11;  Dayton  Spice-Mills  Co. 
y.  Sloan,  49  Neb.  622,  68  N.  W.  1040. 

8,  C. — ^Leake  v.  Anderson,  43  S.  0. 
448,  21  S.  £.  439;  McPheraon  v.  Mc- 
Pherson,  21  8.  C.  261. 

Tea, — ^Meyer  Bros.  Drug  Co.  v. 
Rather  (Civ.  App.  1895),  30  S.  W. 
812;  Pierce  v.  Winberly.  78  Tex.  187, 
14  S.  W.  454,  conveyaiice  by  father  to 
son. 

Va. — Robinson  ▼.  Bass,  100  Va. 
190,  40  S.  E.  660. 

Iioan  by  wife  to  liiaabaaA.— 
Neither  the  statute  of  limitations  nor 
the  presumption  of  payment  arising 
from  lapse  of  time  applies  to  a  loan 
made  by  wife  to  her  husband,  so  as  to 
render  fraudulent  a  conyeyance  by 
the  husband  preferring  her.  Dice  v. 
Irvin,  110  Ind.  661,  11  N.  E.  488. 
The  statute  of  limitations  does  not 
run  against  a  wife  upon  a  debt  due 
from  her  husband.  Beliot  Second  Nat. 


Bank  t.  Merrill,  etc..  Iron  Works,  81 
Wis.  151,  50  N.  W.  505,  29  Am.  St. 
Rep.  877. 

89.  Manchester  v.  Tibbetto,  121  N. 
Y.  219,  24  N.  E.  304,  18  Am.  St.  Rep. 
816;  Ellis  ▼.  Myers,  54  Hun  (N.  Y.), 
638,  8  N.  Y.  Supp.  139;  Kennedy  t. 
Powell,  34  Kan.  22,  7  Pac  606,  the 
debtor  is  not  compelled  to  resort  to 
this  defense,  nor  can  his  other  cred- 
itors interfere  and  insist  upon  it  for 
him. 

30.  McConnell  r.  Barber,  88  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  360,  33  N.  Y.  Supp.  480; 
Vansickle  v.  Wells,  Fargo  k  Co.,  105 
Fed.  16;  Sturm  v.  Chalfant,  38  W. 
Va.  248,  18  S.  E.  451 ;  Kanawha  Val- 
ley Bank  v.  Atkinson,  32  W.  Va.  203, 
9  S.  E.  175,  25  Am.  St.  Rep.  806. 

31.  McConnell  y.  Barber,  9upra; 
French  v.  Motley,  63  Me.  326. ' 

32.  Keen  v.  Kleckner,  42  Pa.  St. 
529.  Judgment  notes  or  bonds,  given 
by  a  son-in-law  to  his  father-in-law 
for  debts  upon  which  the  statute  of 
limitations  had  run,  are  in  fraud  of 
creditors,  within  the  meaning  of  the 
Virginia  Code.  Crawford  v.  Craw- 
ford, 4  W.  Va.  56. 


CoUfBlDJSMAriOJX. 


321 


and  purporting  to  secure  a  debt  already  amply  secured,  will  bo 
considered  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.''  A  ^secret  transfer  of 
choses  in  action,  made  by  a  creditor  after  tibe  execution  of  a 
deed  of  trust  for  bis  benefit,  with  intent  to  give,  him  additional 
security,  is  fraudulent  as  to  other  creditors.'*  But  a  creditor 
may  take  any  number  of  securities  for  the  payment  of  a  debt, 
without  subjecting  himself  or  the  debtor  to  suspicion,  if  the  latter 
be  solvent,  and  if  insolvent,  without  exciting  just  suspicion,  un- 
less the  securities  are  excessive,  indicating  a  purpose  to  shield 
the  property  of  the  debtor  from  the  reach  of  other  creditor.*^ 

§  24.  Ckmveyance  in  execution  of  prior  valid  agreement. — 

Where  a  deed  is  executed  in  pursuance  of  a  prior  parol  agree- 
ment, made  for  a  valuable  consideration,  the  payment  of  the 
consideration  creates  a  trust  by  implication,  and  renders  the 
oonveyanoe  in  accordance  with  such  trust  agreement  valid  as 
against  creditors  of  the  grantor.**  Where  a  final  agreement,  on 
a  valuable  consideration,  is  made  to  convey  lands,  and  it  is 
carried  into  effect  by  giving  a  deed,  the  consideration  for  the 
agreement  is  to  be  deemed  the  consideration  for  the  deed,  and, 
if  sufScient,  will  support  it  as  against  creditors." 


33.  Lombard  v.  Dows,  06  Iowa, 
243,  23  N.  W.  649,  a  mortgage  for  ad- 
vances made  and  to  be  made  where 
the  mortgagee  did  not  obligate  him- 
self to  make  any  future  advances  and 
past  advances  were  already  amply  se- 
cured; Crapster  v.  Williams,  21  Kan. 
109;  Jaffray  v.  Wolf,  4  Okla.  303,  47 
Pac.  496. 

34.  Reeves  v.  John,  95  Tenn.  434, 
32  8.  W.  312. 

35.  Hendon  v.  Morris,  110  Ala. 
106,  20  So.  27. 

36.  Norton  v.  Mallory,  63  N.  Y. 
434,  afTg  1  Hun  (N.  Y.),  499;  Bils- 
borrow  v.  Titus,  15  How.  Pr.  (N.  Y.) 
95,  deeds  given  in  pursuance   of  a 

21* 


prior  parol  partition,  fully  carried 
into  effect  by  each  party  taking  pos- 
session of  his  allotted  share;  Qott- 
stein  V.  Wist,  22  Wash.  581,  61  Pac. 
715,  the  grantor  having  executed  the 
deed  in  satisfaction  of  a  legal  obliga- 
tion, could  not  question  its  validity, 
and  his  creditors  can  occupy  no  bet- 
ter position. 

37.  Pulte  V.  Geller,  47  Mich.  560, 
11  N.  W.  385.  See  also  Mundy  v. 
Mason,  67  Ky.  339.  Compare  Zim- 
merman V.  Bannon,  101  Wis.  407,  77 
N.  W.  735,  where  the  alleged  agree- 
ment was  one  upon  which  the  debtor 
making  the  conveyance  did  not  ap- 
pear to  have  been  liable. 


322 


Fraudulent  Cokvstancss. 


§  25.  Marriage  as  consideration  for  antenuptial  settlement. 
— ^A  oonvejance,  the  cansiderati<Hi  of  which  is  marriage^  is  not 
a  volmitary  convejanca"  Marriago  heing  the  hi^iest  conflider- 
ation  kDown  to  the  law,^  an  antenuptial  oonvejanoe  or  settlement 
of  property  made  in  consideration  of  marriage  is  upon  a  good 
and  valuable  considQrati<»iy  and  is  valid  as  against  creditors  of 
the  grantor.^     Marriage  is  a  valid  consideration  suffideont  to 


88.  Toulmin  v.  Buchanan,  1  Stew. 
(Ala.)  67;  Cohen  ▼.  Knox,  90  Gal. 
266,  27  Pac.  215,  13  L.  R.  A.  711; 
Bonser  v.  Miller,  5  Or.  110;  La 
Prince  ▼.  Guillemot,  1  Rich.  Eq.  (S. 
C.)   187;  Moore't  Adm'r  v.  Dawnej, 

3  Hen.  k  M.  (Va.)  127.  Compare 
Lionberger  v.  Baker,  88  Mo.  447, 
aifg  14  Mo.  App.  353;  Davidson  t. 
Graves,  Riley  Eq.  (S.  C.)  219. 

39.  Magniae  v.  Thomson,  32  U.  8. 
348,  8  L.  Ed.  709,  alfg  16  Fed.  Gas. 
No.  8,956;  Johnston  v.  Dilliard,  1 
Bay  (8.  C.),  232. 

40.  V,  Y. — ^De  Hierapolis  v. 
Reilly,  44  App.  Div.  22,  60  N.  Y. 
Supp.  417,  aif*d  168  N.  Y.  685,  60  N. 
E.  1110;  Wright  v.  Wright,  59  Barb, 
505,  aif*d  54  N.  Y.  437;  Verplank  v. 
8terry,  12  Johns.  536,  7  Am.  Dee. 
348;   Sterryv.Arden,!  Johns.  Ch.  261. 

AZa.-— Nance  v.  Nance,  84  Ala.  375, 

4  So.  699,  5  Am.  St  Rep.  378;  An- 
drews V.  Jones,  10  Ala.  400. 

Cal.— Gohen  v.  Knox,  90  Gal.  266, 
27  Pac.  215,  13  L.  R.  A.  711;  Peck  v. 
jeeck,  77  Gal.  106,  19  Pac.  227,  11  Am. 
St.  Rep.  244,  1  L.  R.  A.  185. 

Conn» — Sanford  v.  Atwood,  44 
Conn.  141. 

Go.— Bradley  v.  Saddler,  54  Ga. 
681;  Vason  v.  Bell,  53  Ga.  416. 

7ZI.--McAnnulty  v.  McAnnulty,  120 
111.  26,  11  N.  E.  897,  60  Am.  Rep. 
552;  Gampbell,  etc..  Go.  v.  Ross,  86 
111.  App.  356,  affd  187  lU.  553,  58  N. 
i:.  390. 


Ind, — Marmon  v.  White,  151  Ind. 
445,  51  N.  E.  930;  State  v.  Osbom, 
143  Ind.  671,  42  N.  E.  921. 

Ky. — Sanders  v.  Miller,  79  Ky.  517, 
42  Am.  Rep.  237. 

Me, — ^Tolman  v.  Ward,  86  Me.  305, 
29  Atl.  1081,  41  Am.  St  Rep.  556. 

ird.--Albert  v.  Winn,  5  Md.  66; 
Betts  V.  Union  Bank,  1  Harr.  &  O. 
175,   18  Am.  Dec.  283. 

IfoM.— Glark  v.  McMahon,  170 
Mass.  91,  48  N.  E.  939. 

Miss, — ^Armfield  v.  Armfleld,  4 
Freem.  311;  Spears  v.  Shropshire,.  11 
La.  Ann.  559,  66  Am.  206,  decided 
under  the  Mississippi  law. 

Mo, — ^Ploss  V.  Thomas,  6  Mo.  App. 
157. 

OhAo, — ^Henry  v.  Henry,  27  Ohio 
St.  121. 

Or.— Bonser  v.  MUler,  5  Or.  110. 

Pa. — ^Provident  life,  etc.  Go.  v. 
Fidelity  Ins.  Trust,  etc.  Go.,  203  Pa. 
St.  82,  52  Atl.  34;  Appeal  of  Jones, 
62  Pa.  St.  324;  Appeal  of  Frank,  59 
Pa.  St  190;  Ethridge  v.  Dunshee,  31 
Pittsb.  L.  J.  39. 

B,  C. — ^Rivers  v.  Thayer,  7  Rich. 
Eq.  136;  Ramsay  v.  Richardson, 
Riley  Eq.  271 ;  Tunno  v.  Tresevmnt,  2 
Desauss.  264. 

Tenn. — Gains  v.  Jones,  13  Tenn. 
249. 

F^.^Pieroe  v.  Harrington,  58  Vt. 
649,  7  Atl.  462. 

Fa.— Bumgardner  v.  Harris,  92  Va. 
188,  23  8.  £.  229;  Noble  v.  Davies 


CONSIDEBATION. 


323 


sustain  a  oanveyairce  made  with  intent  on  the  part  of  the  grantor 
to  defraud  his  creditors,  unless  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the 
grantee  of  such  fraudulent  intent  is  alleged  and  proven.  But 
a  marriage  settlement  cannot  be  made  a  cover  for  fraud.  If 
the  purpose  is  to  delay  or  defraud  creditors,  and  both  parties 
are  cognizant  of  it,  the  consideration  of  marriage  will  not  sup- 
port the  settlement/^    A  conveyance  to  a  woman  in  consideration 


(1887),  4  S.  E.  206;  Herring  v. 
Wickham,  29  Gratt.  628,  26  Am.  Rep. 
405;  Bentley  v.  Harris,  2  Gratt.  357; 
Coutte  V.  Greenhow,  2  Munf.  363,  5 
Am.  Dec.  472,  rev^g  4  Hen.  k  M.  485. 
By  statute,  conveyanoes  in  considera- 
tion of  marriage  are  now  void  as  to 
existing  creditors.  Va.  Code,  S  2459 ; 
Snyder  y.  Grandstaff,  96  Va.  473,  31 
S.  E.  647,  70  Am.  St.  Rep.  863. 

TF.  Va, — ^Boggess  v.  Richards 
Adm'r,  39  W.  Va.  667,  20  S.  E.  599, 
45  Am.  St.  Rep.  938,  26  L.  R.  A.  537. 

Eng, — Barrow  v.  Barrow,  2  Dick. 
504,  21  Eng.  Reprint,  365;  Campion 
V.  Cotton,  17  Ves.  Jr.  263,  34  Eng. 
Reprint,  102;  Nairne  v.  Prowse,  6 
Ves.  Jr.  762,  6  Rev.  Rep.  37,  31  Eng. 
Reprint,  129. 

Can.— Ryland  v.  Almutt,  11  Grant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  135.  Compare  Turgeon 
Y.  Shannon,  20  Quebec  Super.  Ct.  C. 
S.  135. 

See  Rights  of  grantee  under  marriage 
settlement,  chap.  XIV,  §  41,  inl',a. 

In  Iiovisiana  a  donation  propter 
nuptias  by  the  husband,  comprising 
all  his  property,  of  a  value  less  in 
amount  than  that  of  a  judgment 
entered  up  against  him,  will  be  re- 
garded as  in  fraud  of  creditors.  Har- 
mon V.  Ryan,  10  La.  Ann.  661.  A 
donation  propter  nuptias  could  not, 
by  the  Spanish  law  or  the  Code  of 
1808,  be  made  to  the  prejudice  of 
creditors.  Cable  v.  Coe,  4  La.  654; 
Mercer  v.  Andrews,  2  La.  638. 


A  deed  of  tntvt  to  aeeue  a 
pro-eziatiiic      Tolitatarj      bond, 

executed  by  a  father  to  his  daughter 
payable  on  her  marriage,  the  father 
being  wealthy  and  unembarrassed  at 
the  time  of  the  execution  of  the  bond, 
but  insolvent  at  the  time  the  deed  is 
executed,  is  valid  against  creditors 
becoming  such  after  the  marriage  of 
the  daughter.  Welles  v.  Cole,  6 
Gratt.  (Va.)   645. 

Wbero  propertj  '  Is  settled 
upon  a  wife  for  her  life,  with 
remainder  over  to  the  sister  of  the 
grantor  and  her  children,  the  re- 
mainder is  without  valuable  consid- 
eration and  void  as  to  creditors 
whose  claims  existed  at  the  time  of 
the  settlement.  Bumgardner  v.  Har- 
ris, 92  Va.  188,  22  S.  E.  229. 

The  trustees  of  a  marrlaffo 
settlement  are  purchasers  for  a 
valuable  consideration.  In  re  Don- 
dan  (1902),  1  Ir.  109. 

Af  ter-aeqvlred  property. —  A 
covenant  by  a  husband  in  a  settle- 
ment made  in  consideration  of  mar- 
riage to  settle  all  his  after-acquired 
property  except  builiness  assets  is 
not  too  vague  and  uncertain  to  be 
enforced.  In  re  Reis,  73  L.  J.  K.  B. 
929  (1904),  2  K.  B.  769,  91  Law  T. 
692,  53  Wkly.  Rep.  122,  11  Manson, 
229,  20  T.  L.  R.  547. 

41.  U.  iSf.—Prewett  v.  Wilson,  103 
U.  S.  22,  26  L.  Ed.  360,  rev*g  30  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  17,828,  3  Woods,  681. 


278 


Fbaudulent  CoirvBtAisrGEs. 


ertj,  as  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  creditors,  if  it  appear 
that  there  is  retained  bj  the  debtor  property  other  than  that 
oonvejed  out  of  which  their  claims  can  be  satisfied,  or  sufficient 
to  pay  all  the  just  debts  of  the  debtor,^  except  in  those  states 


76.  N,  y.—Kain  t.  lArkin,  131  N. 
Y.  300,  30  N.  E.  105;  Dunlap  t.  Haw- 
kins, 50  N.  T.  342 ;  Cushman  y.  Addi- 
son, 52  N.  Y.  628;  Loeschigk  v.  Hat- 
field, 51  N.  Y.  660;  Guy  v.  Craig- 
head, 46  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  614,  61 
N.  Y.  Supp.  988,  21  App.  Div.  (N. 
Y.)  460,  47  N.  Y.  Supp.  576;  McCot- 
mick  V.  Wilder,  61  App.  Dir.  (N.  Y.) 
619,  70  N.  Y.  Supp.  627;  Aultman, 
etc.,  Co.  V.  Syme,  23  App.  Div.  (N. 
Y.)  344,  48  N.  Y.  Supp.  231;  Car- 
penter V.  Roe,  10  N.  Y.  237 ;  Wilbur 
y.  Fradenburgh,  52  Barb.  (N.  Y.) 
474;  Holmes  v.  Clark,  48  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  237;  Spicer  v.  Ayers,  53  How. 
Pr.  (N.  Y.)  405;  Jackson  v.  Peek,  4 
Wend.  (N.  Y.)  300;  Van  Wyck  v. 
Seward,  6  Paige  (N.  Y.),  62;  Starr 
v.  Strong,  2  Sandf.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)   130. 

U.  fif.— Bean  v.  Patterson,  122  U.  S. 
406,  7  Sup.  Ct.  1208,  30  L.  Ed.  1126; 
Providence  Sav.  Bank  v.  Huntington, 
10  Fed.  871;  Hinde  v.  Longworth,  11 
Wheat.  (U.  S.)  199,  6  L.  Ed.  454; 
Dick  V.  Hamilton,  7  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
3,890,  Deady  (U.  S.)  322;  Hopkirk 
V.  Randolph,  12  Fed.  Cas.  No.  6,698, 
2  Brock.  (U.  S.)   132. 

Ala.-^ohnson  v.  West,  43  Ala. 
689.  But  see  Miller  v.  Thompson,  3 
Port  (Ala.)   198. 

^rik.— Chambers  v.  Sallie,  29  Ark. 
407 ;  Smith  v.  Yell,  8  Ark.  470. 

Cal.— Windhaus  v.  Bootz  (Cal.),25 
Pac.  404;  Morgan  v.  Hecker,  74  Cal. 
540,  16  Pac.  317;  Swartz  ▼.  Hazlett, 
8  Cal.  118. 

Con».— State  ▼.  Martin,  77  Conn. 
142,  68  Atl.  745;  Graves  v.  Atwood, 
62  Conn.  512,  52  Am.  Rep.  610;  Sal- 


mon V.  Bennett,  1  Conn.  525,  7  Am. 
Dec.  237. 

Fkk— -Howse  ▼.  Judson,  1  Fla.  133. 

6ki.— Wellmaker  v.  Wellmaker,  115 
6a.  1155,  39  S.  E.  475;  Brown  r. 
Spivey,  53  Ga.  155;  Weed  v.  Davis,. 
25  Ga.  684. 

/».— Eames  v.  Doraett,  147  HI.  640, 
35  N.  E.  735;  Bittenger  v.  Kasten, 
111  111.  260;  Merrell  t.  Johnson,  96 
111.  224;  Fanning  v.  Russell,  94  111. 
386;  Bridgford  t.  RiddeU,  65  HI.  261; 
Gridley  v.  Watson,  53  HI.  186; 
Moritz  V.  Hoffman,  35  111.  553;  Hitt 
V.  Ormsbee,  12  111.  166;  Koster  ▼. 
Hiller,  4  111.  App.  21 ;  Lytle  v.  Scott, 
2  HI.  App.  646;  Russell  v.  Fanning, 
2  111.  App.  632. 

7iul.~Ritchie  v.  McKay  (Ind. 
App.),  75  N.  E.  161;  Emerson  v.  Opp, 
139  Ind.  27,  38  N.  E.  330;  Sell  v. 
Bailey,  119  Ind.  51,  21  N.  E.  338; 
Phelps  V.  Smith,  116  Ind.  387,  17 
N.  E.  602,  19  N.  E.  156;  Eiler  v. 
Crull,  112  Ind.  318,  14  N.  E.  79; 
Bishop  V.  State,  83  Ind.  67;  Noble  ▼. 
Hines,  72  Ind.  12;  Holman  v.  Elliott 
65  Ind.  78;  Bentley  v.  Dunkle,  57 
Ind.  374;  Eagan  ▼.  Downing,  55  Ind. 
65;  McConnell  v.  Martin,  52  Ind. 
434;  Brookbank  v.  Kennard,  41  Ind. 
339;  Ewing  v.  Patterson,  35  Ind.  326. 

Imoa, — Robinson  v.  Frankville  First 
M.  E.  Church,  59  Iowa,  717,  12  N. 
W.  772;  Peerson  v.  Maxfield,  51  Iowa, 
76,  50  N.  W.  77;  Shepard  v.  Pratt, 
32  Iowa,  296;  Stewart  v.  Rogers,  25 
Iowa,  395,  95  Am.  Dec.  794. 

Kan, — ^Hunt  v.  Spencer,  20  Kan. 
126. 

ITy.— Harris  ▼.  Harris,  10  Ky.  L. 


CONSIDESATION. 


325 


not  aJSect  the  title  1x>  the  oonsideration/^  Where  a  man  conveys 
land  to  a  woman  on  promise  of  marriage  by  her,  she  can  hold 
the  same  against  his  creditors,  although  the  marriage  is  pre- 
vented bj  deatL^  A  deed  made  in  consideration,  of  marriage 
is  valid;  as  against  existing  creditors  of  the  grantor,  although 
not  delivered  until  after  the  marriage  is  consunmiated,  in  the 
absence  of  bad  faith  on  the  part  of  the  wife.^  An  ante-nuptial 
settlement,  securing  the  future  earnings  of  the  wife  to  her  sole 
use,  would  be  fraudulent,  even  in  respect  to  future  creditors/^ 

§  26.  Effect  of  marriage  on  prior  voluntary  conveyance. — 
Where  there  is  a  voluntary  conveyance,  not  actually  fraudulent, 
in  the  hands  of  the  grantee,  if  a  subsequent  marriage  takes 
place  and  the  conveyance  forms  any  inducement  to  the  marriage, 
it  is  confirmed  by  the  subsequent  marriage  and  becomes  a  con- 
veyance for  a  valuable  consideration  sufficient  to  render  it  valid, 
not  only  as  against  a  subsequent  purchaser,  but  also  against  the 
creditors  of  the  grantor.^  But  the  rule  that  marriage  constitutes 
a  good  and  valuable  consideration  does  not  apply  where  a  volun- 
.tary  conveyance  is  made  by  a  father  to  his  child,  who  after- 
wards marries,  imless  it  appears  affirmatively  that  the  marriage 
was  induced,  wholly  or  in  part,  by  the  conveyance.^ 

%  27.  Conveyance  after  marriage  in  accordance  with  ante- 
nuptial agreement. — A  postrnuptial  settlement,  or  a  conveyance 
from  a  husband  to  his  wife  pursuant  to  an  antenuptial  settle- 


44.  De  Hierapolis  ▼.  Beilly,  44  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  22,  60  N.  Y.  Supp.  417. 

45.  Smith  y.  Allen,  87  MasB.  454, 
81  Am.  Dec.  758. 

46.  Wood  k  Huston  Bank  v.  Read, 
131  Mo.  553,  33  8.  W.  176. 

47.  Keith  v.  Woombell,  *  25  Mass. 
211.  See  Wages  or  earnings  of 
debtor's  wife,  chap,  IV,  S  9i  8Upra, 

48.  Wood  V.  Genet,  8  Wend.  (N. 
Y.)  0,  22  Am.  Dec  603;  Whelan  ▼. 


Whelan,  3  Cow.  (N.  Y.)  537;  Ver- 
plank  v.  Sterry,  12  Johns.  (N.  Y.) 
536,  7  Am.  Dec.  348;  Sterry  v.  Arden, 
1  Johns.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)  261;  Huston's 
Heirs  v.  Cantril,  11  Leigh  (Va.), 
136;  Guardian  Assur.  Co.  t.  Avon- 
more,  Jr.  R.  6  Eq.  306. 

49.  Whelan  t.  Whelan,  3  Cow.  (N. 
Y.)  537;  Stokes  ▼.  Jones,  18  Ala. 
734;  O'Brien  ▼.  Coulter,  2  Blackf. 
(Ind.)  421. 


32  G 


Fbaitdulent  Conveyances. 


meD.t,  is  Talid,  even  as  against  creditors  or  purchasers^  if  it  is 
tmade  in  pursuance  of  a  valid  agreement  entered  into  before 
marriaga^  But  under  statutes  requiring  agreenaents  in  con- 
sideration of  marriage  to  be  in  writing  and  signed  by  the  pai> 
ties,  a  conveyance  of  land,  the  only  consideration  for  which 
was  the  promise  to  marry,  though  the  marriage  takes  place,  is 
invalid  as  against  the  existing  creditors  of  the  grantor.^^  Mar- 
riage is  not  such  a  part  performance  of  an  oral  ante-nuptial 
contract,  the  sole  consideration  of  which  is  marriage^  as  to  take 
it  out  of  the  operation  of  the  statute  of  frauds,  and  the  contract 
cannot  be  specifically  enforced  in  a  court  of  equity;  and,  there- 
fore, such  an  ante-nuptial  agreement  is  not  a  sufficient  considera- 
tion to  sustain  a  conveyance  from  the  husband  to  the  wife  after 
marriage,  as  against  the  creditors  of  the  former." 


60.  U,  8. — Magniac  ▼.  Thompson, 
32  U.  S.  348,  8  L.  Ed.  709,  affg  16 
Fed.  Cas.  No.  8,966. 

Ala. — Nance  v.  Nanoe,  84  Ala.  375, 
4  So.  699,  5  Am.  St.  Rep.  378;  Loek- 
wood  y.  Nelson,  16  Ala.  294. 

Ind. — ^Marmon  t.  White,  161  Ind. 
445,  61  N.  E.  930;  Clow  v.  Brown 
(Ind.  App.  1904),  72  N.  W.  634. 

Ky, — Sanders  v.  Miller,  79  Ky.  517, 
42  Am.  Rep.  237;  Eannard  y.  Daniel, 
52  Ky.  496. 

Va. — ^Dabney  y.  Kennedy,  7  Gratt. 
317. 

Wyo. — ^Metz  y.  Blackburn,  9  Wyo. 
481,  65  Pac.  857;  North  PUtte  Mill- 
ing, etc.,  Co.  y.  Price,  4  Wyo.  293,  33 
Pac.  664. 

Eng. — Brunsden  y.  Stratton,  Prec. 
Ch.  520,  24  Eng.  Reprint,  233.  Con^ 
pare  Battersby  y.  Farrington,  1 
Swanst.  106,  36  Eng.  Reprint,  317,  1 
Wils.  Ch.  88,  37  Eng.  Reprint,  40,  18 
Rey.  Rep.  32.  Compare  Bank  of 
South  Carolina  y.  Mitchell,  Rioe  Eq^ 
(S.  C.)  389,  a  deed  of  marriage  set- 
tlement  executed    previous    to    mar- 


riage, which  was  neyer  recorded,  is 
not    a    sufficient    consideration    as 
against  subsequent  creditors. 
An     aate-vnptlal     settlanteiit 

whioli     wms     eztliisvisli^tt^     ^ 

agreement  between  all  the  parties  in- 
terested under  it  after  the  marriage, 
and  the  property  named  in  it  divided 
and  deliyered,  cannot  constitute  a 
consideration  for  a  subsequent  con- 
veyance by  the  husband  to  the  wife 
of  the  property  received  by  him  un- 
der such  division.  Harper  y.  Scott, 
12  Ga.  125. 

Wliere  a  greater  interest  in 
tlie  property  is  seonred  to  the 
wife  than  was  provided  for  in  the 
marriage  articles,  by  a  post-nuptial 
settlement,  it  is  void  as  against  cred- 
itors. Saunders  v.  Ferrill,  23  N.  C. 
97. 

51.  Dygert  v.  Remerschnider,  32 
N.  Y.  629,  affg  39  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  417; 
Lamb  v.  Lamb,  18  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.) 
250,  46  N.  Y.  Supp.  219;  Manning  y. 
Riley,  52  N.  J.  Bq.  39,  27  Atl.  810. 

52.  N.  y.— Hunt  v.  Hunt,  171  N. 


CONSIDEBATION. 


827 


§  28.  Post-nuptial  settlements. — A  post-nuptial  settlement 
upon  or  conveyance  to  a  husband  or  wife,  made  without  a  valuable 
consideration  and  not  in  pursuance  of  a  valid  ante-nuptial  agree- 
menty  is  a  mere  voluntary  conveyance,  and  void  as  to  prior  credi- 
tors of  the  grantor ;"  but  a  post-nuptial  voluntary  settlement  by  a 


Y.  296,  64  N.  E.  159,  59  L.  R.  A. 
306,  aff'g  55  App.  Div.  430,  66  N.  Y. 
Supp.  957;  Wliyte  v.  Denike,  53  App. 
Diy.  320,  65  N.  Y.  Supp.  577;  Reade 
V.  LiviDgBton,  3  Johna.  Ch.  481,  8 
Am.  Dec.  520;  Wickee  v.  Clarke,  3 
Edw.  Ch.  58. 

KeeoTerj  by  tanurtee  in  bamk- 
mptey* — A  oonveyance  by  an  inaol- 
vent  to  his  wife  of  a  large  amount  of 
house  furnishings  bought  on  credit,  in 
consideration  of  the  marriage,  under 
a  previous  oral  agreement,  held 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  in  suit  by 
trustee  in  bankruptcy.  Hosmer  v. 
Tiffany,  54  Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)  402, 
105  N.  Y.  Supp.  1055,  17  Am.  B.  R. 
318. 

Ala, — Carter  v.  Worthington,  82 
Ala.  334,  2  So.  516,  60  Am.  Rep.  738. 

/M.— Keady  v.  White,  168  111.  76, 
48  N.  E.  314,  aifg  69  lU.  App.  405. 

ifd.— Albert  v.  Wynn,  5  Md.  66. 
Md.  66. 

IfoM. — Deshon  v.  Wood,  148  Mass. 
132,  19  N.  £.  1,  1  L.  R.  A.  518. 

V,  (7.— Credle  v.  Carrawan,  64  N. 
C.  422. 

Pa.--Bames  v.  Black,  193  Pa.  St. 
447,  44  Atl.  550,  74  Am.  St.  Rep. 
694 ;  Flory  v.  Houck,  186  Pa.  St.  263, 
40  Atl.  482,  it  cannot  be  sustained 
by  relation  back  to  an  oral  ante- 
nuptial agreement. 

i^n^.— In  re  Holland  (1902),  2  Ch. 
360,  71  L.  J.  Ch.  518,  86  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  542,  9  Manson,  259,  50  Wkly. 
Rep.  575;  Warden  v.  Jones,  2  De  G. 
k  J.  76,  4  Jur.  N.  S.  269,  27  L.  J. 


Ch.  190,  6  Wkly.  Rep.  180,  69  Eng. 
Ch.  61,  44  Eng.  Reprint,  916;  Trowell 
V.  Shenton,  L.  R.  8  Ch.  Div.  318; 
L'Estrange  v.  Robinson,  1  Hog.  202; 
Randall  v.  Morgan,  12  Ves.  Jr.  67, 
8  Rev.  Rep.  289,  33  Eng.  Reprint,  26. 

Compare  Mechanics'  Bank  v.  Tay- 
lor, 16  Fed.  Cas.  No.  9,386,  2  Cranch 
C.  C.  507,  where  the  husband  pur- 
chased real  estate  in  his  wife's  name 
with  money  which  belonged  to  the 
wife  before  the  marriage;  Wood  v. 
Savage,  Walk.   (Mich.)   471. 

53.  m,  r.— Wickes  v.  Clarke,  3 
Edw.  Ch.  58,  8  Paige,  161,  where  the 
settlement  was  sustained  as  to  per- 
sonalty but  declared  void  as  to  real 
property. 

V,  ^.— Cathcart  v.  Robinson,  30  U. 
S.  264,  8  L.  Ed.  120;  WisweU  v.  Jar- 
vis,  9  Fed.  84. 

Ala, — Costillo  V.  Thompson,  9  Ala. 
937. 

Ga.^Denbell  v.  Fisher,  R.  M. 
Charlt.  36. 

/«.— Philips  V.  Meyers,  82  lU.  67, 
25  Am.  Rep.  295;  Sweeney  v.  Dam- 
Ton,.47  111.  450. 

Ifo.— Potter  V.  McDowell,  31  Mo. 
62. 

'S.  J, — ^Manning  v.  Riley,  52  N.  J. 
Eq.  39,  27  Ati.  810;  Belford  v. 
Crane,  16  N.  J.  Eq.  265,  84  Am. 
Dec.  155;  Doughty  v  King,  10  N.  J. 
Eq.  396. 

U,  (7.— Woodruff  V.  Bowles,  104  N. 
C.  197,  10  S.  E.  482;  Walton  v.  Par- 
rish,  95  N.  C.  259;  Kissam  v.  Ed- 
monston,  36  N.  C.  180. 


328 


Ebattdulsnt  Conveyances. 


debtor  for  his  wife  and  duldr^OL  may  be  valid  as  to  subsequent 
creditors,"  or  purchasers,"  of  the  grantor.  A  post-nuptial  con- 
tract or  settlement  made  for  an  honest  purpose  and  a  valuable 
consideration,^  or  a  reasonable  settlement  upon  the  wife,  made  by 
the  husband  out  of  property  coming  to  her  by  descent  or  devise 
during  coverture,^^  is  valid  and  will  be  supported,  even  against 
existing  creditors  of  the  husband.  But  if  the  settlement  be  in 
consideration  of  an  indebtedness  much  less  than  the  value  of  the 
property,  or  conveys  property  for  an  insufficient  consideration,  i% 


Ohio. — ^Bank  of  U.  S.  ▼.  Eixnis, 
Wright,  604;  Woodrow  t.  Sargent,  6 
Ohio  Bee.  209,  3  Am.  L.  Bee.  522; 
Case  v.  Hewitt,  10  Ohio  S.  &  G.  PI. 
Dec.  366,  7  Ohio  N.  P.  609. 

S.  C. — ^Dayidfloa  v.  Gravea,  Riley 
Eq.  246;  Teasdale  ▼.  Reabonie,  2  Bay, 
546. 

Tenn, — Perkina  ▼.  Perkins,  1  Tenn. 
Gh.  537. 

Tw. — Beynolds  ▼.  Lansford,  16 
Tex.  286. 

Va, — Flynn  y.  Jackson,  03  Va.  341, 
25  8.  E.  1;  De  Farges  t.  Ryland,  87 
Va.  404,  12  S.  E.  805,  24  Am.  St. 
Kep.  669;  Pcny  v.  Ruby,  81  Va.  317; 
Fink  V.  Denny,  75  Va.  663;  Russell  ▼. 
Randolph,  26  Gratt  705;  Harv^  v, 
Alexander,  1  Rand.  219,  10  Am.  Dee. 
518. 

Eng, — ^Middlecome  v.  Marlow,  2 
Atl.  519,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  712;  Ste- 
phens Y.  Olive,  2  Bro.  Ch.  90,  29  Eng. 
Reprint,  52;  Kidney  v.  Coussmaker, 
12  Ves.  Jr.  136,  2  Rev.  Rep.  118,  33 
Eng.  Reprint,  53;  Lush  v.  Wilkin- 
son, 5  Ves.  Jr.  384,  31  Eng.  Reprint, 
642.  Compare  Offutt  v.  King,  1  Mc- 
Arthur  (D.  C),  312;  Hume  v.  Con- 
don, 44  W.  Va.  553,  30  S.  E.  56. 

54.  N.  r.— Seaman  v.  Wall,  54 
How.  Prac.  47. 

{7.  £f.-.United  States  v.  Griswold,  8 


Fed.  556,  7  Sawy.  311;  Sexton  v. 
Wheaton,  21  U.  S.  229,  5  L.  Ed.  603. 

ifd.— Atkinson  v.  Phillips,  1  Md. 
Ch.  507. 

Ifistf.— BuUit  ▼.  Taylor,  34  Miss. 
708,  69  Am.  Dec.  412;  Vertner  v. 
Humphreys,  22  Miss.  130. 

Ohio, — Bank  of  U.  S.  v.  Ennis,. 
Wright,  604. 

Pa, — ^Thomp8<m  v.  Allen,  103  Pa^ 
St.  44,  49  Am.  Rep.  116. 

65.  Bank  of  Alexandria  v.  Patt<»,. 
1  Roh.   (Va.),  499. 

56.  Butler  v.  Rickets,  11  Iowa,  107, 
money  advanced  by  a  woman,  before 
marriage  and  subsequent  thereto^ 
from  her  own  estate;  Hargroves  v. 
Meray,  2  Hill  Eq.  (S.  C.)  222,  a 
settlement  by  a  husband  on  his  wife> 
on  a  separation,  where  there  is  a 
covenant  to  save  him  harmless  from 
his  wife^s  debts;  Walden  v.  Walden, 
33  Gratt.   (Va.),  88. 

57.  Wickes  v.  Clarke,  3  Edw.  Ch. 
58,  8  Paige,  161;  Trustees  of  Wads- 
MTorthville  Poor  School  v.  Pryson,  34 
S.  C.  401,  13  S.  E.  619;  Bank  of 
U.  S.  V.  Brown,  2  Hill  Eq.  (S.  C.),. 
558,  30  Am.  Dec.  380,  Riley  Eq.  (S. 
C),  131;  Napier  v.  Wightman,  Speer 
Eq.  (S.  C),  157;  In  re  T^ey,  66= 
L.  J.  Q.  B.  Ill,  75  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S. 
166,  3  Manson,  226. 


CoirSIDEBATION. 


329 


will  be  held  void  as  against  existing  creditors.^  A  wife's  release 
of  dower  is  a  sufficient  consideration  for  a  settlement  on  her  from 
her  husband's  property^  and  such  settlement  will  be  valid  as 
against  creditors  having  no  specific  lien^  unless  it  manifestly 
appears  to  be  grossly  excessive," 

§  29.  Adequacy  of  ccmsideration. — ^A  valuable  consideration 
does  not  necessarily  mean  full  value ;  the  statute  is  complied  with 
if  the  sum  is  a  substantial  amount  when  compared  with  the  value 
of  the  property  transferred.  If  it  is,  although  inadequate,  it  will 
be  held  sufficient  to  sustain  the  grantee's  title,  unless  he  is  charge- 
able with  notice  of  the  fraudulent  intent  of  the  grantor.^  If  a 
sale  is  made  for  a  valuable,  though  inadequate  consideration,  in 
good  faith,  it  will  not  be  defeated  either  by  the  common  law  or  the 
statute  of  frauds.*^  A  conveyance  expressing  as  a  consideration  a 
sum  of  money  or  any  other  thing,  no  matter  how  small  in  value, 
cannot  be  said  as  a  matter  of  law  to  be  a  voluntary  conveyance." 
The  adequacy  of  a  valuable  consideration  will  be  inquired  into 


58.  Hord's  Adm'rs  ▼.  Rnst,  7  Ky. 
231;  Peigne  v.  Snowden,  1  Desauss 
Eq.  (S.  C.)  591;  Beecher  ▼.  Wilson, 
S4  Va.  813,  6  S.  E.  209,  10  Am.  St. 
Rep.  883. 

50.  Hoot  y.  Sorrell,  11  Ala.  386, 
Hereby  ▼.  Latham,  46  Ark.  542; 
Ficklin'g  Adm'r  ▼.  Rixey,  89  Va. 
832,  17  S.  E.  325,  37  Am.  St.  Rep. 
891;  Keagy  v.  Trout,  85  Va.  390,  7 
S.  E.  329 ;  Burwell's  Ex'r  V,  Lumsden, 
24  Gratt  (Va.),  443,  18  Am.  Rep. 
648;  Lewis  v.  Caperton,  8  Gratt. 
(Va.),  148;  Harrison  v.  Carroll,  11 
Leigh  (Va.),  476;  Glascock  ▼.  Bran- 
don, 36  W.  Va.  84,  12  S.  E.  1102. 

60.  Tniesdale  v.  Sarles,  104  N.  Y. 
164,  10  N.  E.  .139;  Greenough  v. 
Greenough,  21  Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.), 
727,  47  N.  Y.  Supp.  1096;  King  ▼. 
Simmons,  56  N.  Y.  Supp.  173;  Mc- 
Caskle  t.  Amarine,  12  Ala.  17;  Day 


▼.  Cole,  44  Iowa,  462;  Purcell,  etc.. 
Grocery  Co.  ▼.  Bryant  (Ind.  Ter. 
1905),  89  S.  W.  662;  Mullins  ▼. 
Hand,  17  Ky.  L.  Rep.  612,  31  S.  W. 
726,  where  the  amount  paid  was  equal 
to  the  value  of  the  land  less  the  in- 
cumbrance thereon  assumed  by  the 
grantee,  the  consideration  was  suffi- 
cient. 

The  fact  that  the  tiUe  is  in 
doubt  is  to  be  ooasidered  upon 
the  question  of  the  adequacy  of  the 
consideration  for  the  conveyance. 
Banta  v.  Terry,  2  Ky.  L.  Rep.  202. 

A  oonaldermtioa  wUoh  is  im- 
adoquate  is  not  '^  Taluablev" 
within  the  meaning  of  the  Kentucky 
statute.  Carter  v.  Richardson,  22  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  1204,  60  8.  W.  397. 

61.  Andrews  v.  Jones,  10  Ala.  400. 

62.  Martin  v.  White,  115  Ga.  866, 
42  8.  E.  279. 


284 


FRAJWJTLEJfT  CONVXYANOES. 


husband  to  his  wife  ozu  a  well  grounded  belief  of  his  early  death 
has  been  held  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  where^  at  the  time 
of  the  conveyance,  his  other  property  was  ample  to  pay  his  debts, 
or  there  was  nothing  to  show  that  he  was  insolvent  and  unable  to 
pay  all  his  debts,  but,  on  account  of  his  living  longer  than  he 
expected,  he  afterwards  became  unable  to  pay  his  debts.^  Where 
the  grantor  at  the  time  of  a  voluntary  conveyance  was  deeply 
indebted  and  of  doubtful  solvency  and  became  insolvent  within 
a  short  time  thereafter,  the  conveyance  has  been  held  to  be  fraud- 
ulent as  to  existing  creditors.^      Where  a  grantor  of  a  voluntary 


Me. — ^Uslier  v.  Haseltine,  5  Me.  47 !» 
17  Am.  Dee.  253. 

Mass, — Stratton  v.  Edwards,  174 
Mass.  374,  54  N.  K  886,  a  oonv^yanee 
in  tnut  for  the  grantor,  made  with 
the  purpose  of  protecting  the  property 
from '  the  risks  incident  to  business, 
but  without  any  intent  to  contract 
debts  and  avoid  them  by  such  convey- 
ance, is  not  in  fraud  of  future  credi- 
tors. 

ifo.— Welch  V.  Mann,  193  Mo.  304» 
02  S.  W.  98;  American  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Thomburrow,  109  Mo.  App.  639,  83 
S.  W.  771;  Johnson  v.  Murphy,  180 
Mo.  597,  79  S.  W.  909,  subsequent 
conversion  by  the  trustee  of  a  trust 
fund,  the  grantor  having  a  contin- 
gent liability  as  surety  on  the  trus- 
tee's bond  at  the  time  of  the  convey- 
ance; Payne  v.  Stanton,  59  Mo.  158; 
Patten  v.  Casey,  57  Mo.  118;  Potter 
V.  McDowell,  31  Mo.  62;  Walsh  v. 
Ketchum,  12  Mo.  App.  580,  74  Mo. 
427.  But  see  Lionberger  v.  Baker,  88 
Mo.  447. 

2V66.— Hill  V.  Fouse,  32  Neb.  687, 
49  N.  W.  760. 

y.  F.— Leavitt  v.  Leavitt,  47  N.  H. 
329. 

N.  c^.— Rankin  v.  Gardner  (Ch.), 
34  Atl.  925. 


0*io.— Creed  v.  Lancaster  Bank,  1 
Ohio  St.  1. 

Pa.— In  re  Gross'  Estate,  6  Pa.  Co. 
Ct.  113,  where  the  debtor  relied  upon 
the  practice  of  his  profession  to  bring 
him  pecuniary  success. 

8,  C. — ^Buchanan  v.  MoNinch,  8  S. 
C.  498,  where  subsequent  insolvency 
arose  from  the  general  emancipation 
of  1865,  a  sudden  and  extraordinary 
event  which  the  debtor  could  neither 
foresee  nor  prevent;  Hamilton  v. 
Hamilton,  2  Rich.  £q.  355,  46  Am. 
Dec.  58;  Izard  v.  Middleton,  1  Bailey 
£q.  228,  insolvency  caused  by  unfor- 
seen  calamity;  Howard  v.  Williams, 
1  Bailey,  575,  21  Am.  Dee.  483;  Jacks 
V.  Tunno,  3  Desaus  Eq.  1. 

F*.— Wilbur  v.  Nichols,  61  Vt.  432, 
18  Atl.  154;  Brackett  v.  Waite,  4  Vt. 
389. 

Wash. — ^Deering  v.  Holcomb,  26 
Wash.  588,  67  Pac.  240,  561. 

W.  Va. — ^Kanawha  Valley  Bank  v. 
Wilson,  25  W.  Va.  242. 

Contra, — ^Black  v.  Sanders,  46  N. 
C.  67,  under  statutory  provision. 

80.  American  Forcite  Powder  Co. 
V.  Hanna,  31  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  117, 
52  N.  Y.  Supp.  547. 

90.  United  States  Tnut  Co.  v. 
Sedgwick,  97  U.  S.  304,  24  L.  Ed. 


C0N8n>XBATI0ir« 


331 


Teyanoe  is  made  wiiSi  fraudulent  intent  on  the  part  of  both  parties 
to  the  transaction^  or  the  fraudulent  intent  of  the  grantor  is  par- 
ticipated in  by  the  grantee^  it  is  absolutely  fraudulent  as  against 
creditors  and  cannot  stand  as  security  or  indemnity  for  part  of  the 
consideration  expressed  which  was,  in  fact,  paid,  or  as  a  security 
for  any  purpose  of  indemnity  or  reimbursement.** 

§  30.  Partial  invalidity  or  illegality  of  consideration. — ^Whem 
a  part  of  the  oonsideration  for  a  conveyance  or  transfer  is  ficti- 
tious, invalid,  illegal,  or  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  though  the  con- 
sideration may  be  in  part  valid,  the  conveyance  or  transfer  is  void 
in  toto,  and  will  not  be  sustained  to  the  extent  of  the  adequate 
and  honest  debt  or  consideration,  as  against  creditors  of  the 
grantor.^   Where^  however,  there  was  no  actual  intent  to  defraud,^ 


ner,  56  N.  J.  Eq.  796,  35  Atl.  1057, 
40  Atl.  721,  67  Am.  8t.  Rep.  505; 
Muirhead  v.  Smith,  35  N.  J.  Eq.  303. 

N.  C. — ^McOanless  ▼.  RejnoldB,  74 
N.  C.  301. 

8.  C— McMeekin  ▼.  Edmunds,  1 
Hill  Eq.  288,  26  Am«  Dec.  203. 

Ff. —Foster  v.  Foster,  56  Vt.  540; 
Church  V.  Cfhapin,  35  Vt.  223. 

ya.— Rixey's  Adm'r  v.  Deitrick,  85 
Va.  42,  6  S.  E.  615. 

W«.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Bertschy, 
52  Wis.  438,  0  N.  W.  534. 

68.  Baldwin  ▼.  Short,  125  N.  Y. 
653,  26  N.  E.  928,  afTff  64  Hun,  473, 
7  N.  Y.  Supp.  717;  Billings  ▼.  Russell, 
101  N.  Y.  226;  Dewey  v.  Moyer,  72 
N.  Y.  70;  Sands  v.  Codwise,  4  Johns. 
(N.  Y.)  336,  4  Am.  Dec.  305;  Boyd 
V.  Dunlap.  1  Johns.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)  478; 
Loring  v.  Dunning,  16  Fla.  119; 
Farmers'  Bank  y.  Long,  7  Bush. 
(Ky.)  337.  See  also  Effect  of  con- 
sideration, chap.  XIII,  i  30,  infra; 
Partially  invalid  or  illegal  considera- 
tion, chap.  VIII,  9  30,  infra;  Re- 
imbursement^  indemnity  and  subroga- 


tion in  case  of  actual  fraud,  chap. 
XIV,  (  41,  infra. 

69.  N,  F.— Baldwin  v.  Short,  125 
N.  Y.  553,  26  N.  E.  928,  aff'g  64  Hun, 
473,  7  N.  Y.  Supp.  717;  Levy  v. 
Hamilton,  68  App.  Div.  277,  74  N.  Y. 
Supp.  159;  Shaffer  v.  Martin,  25  App. 
Div.  501,  49  N.  Y.  Supp.  853;  John- 
son V.  Phillips,  2  N.  Y.  Supp.  432. 

Ala. — Harris  v.  Russell,  93  Ala.  59, 
9  So.  541;  Tatum  v.  Hunter,  14  Ala. 
557. 

Conn. — ^Hawes  v.  Mooney,  39  Omn. 
37. 

711.— Oakfield  v.  Dunlap,  63  111. 
App.  498. 

Ind. — ^Reagan  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
157  Ind.  623,  61  N.  E.  575,  62  N.  E. 
701,  unless  the  contract  is  such  that 
the  legal  part  thereof  may  be  separ- 
ated from  the  illegal. 

Ifo^. — ^Klauber  v.  Schloss,  198  Mo. 
502,  95  S.  W.  930;  First  Nat.  Bank 
V.  Fly,  168  Mo.  492,  68  S.  W.  348; 
Mansur,  etc.,  Implement  Co.  v.  Jones, 
143  Mo.  253,  46  S.  W.  41;  Boland 
▼.  Boss,  120  Mo.  208,  25  S.  W.  520; 


332 


FSAXTBUXENT   CoiTVEYANCES. 


nor  any  actual  fraud,^  and  tlie  conflideration  is  not  one  and  indi- 
visible," but  is  sudi  that  tbe  legal  part  is  separable  from,  the 
illegal,"  a  court  of  equity  will  separate  the  bad  part  from  the  good 
and  sustain  the  conveyance  as  to  the  good  consideration.^^  It  has 
been  held  that  the  general  rule  that  the  ill^ality  of  a  part  of  a 
separable  consideration  taints  the  whole,  cannot  be  made  a  teet  of 
the  validity  of  a  conveyance,  as  against  creditors."  A  transfer  of 
property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  two  or  more  of  his  creditors, 
in  payment  of  a  distinct  indebtedness  owing  to  each,  gives  eadi  of 
them  an  undivided  interest  in  the  property  or  an  interest  in  pro- 
portion to  the  debts  secured,  and  may  be  sustained  as  to  one  of 


National  Tube  Works  Co.  v.  Ring  Re- 
frigerating, etc.,  Co.,  118  Mo.  365,  22 
8.  W.  947;  State  ▼.  Hope,  102  Mo. 
410,  14  S.  W.  085 ;  Hayden  v.  Alkire 
Grocery  Co.,  88  Mo.  App.  241;  Webb 
City  Lumber  Co.  v.  Victor  Min.  Co., 
78  Mo.  App.  676;  Ball  v.  O'Neill,  64 
Mo.  App.  388;  Cole  ▼.  Taney,  62  Mo. 
App.  234;  H.  T.  Simon  Gregory  Dry 
Goods  Co.  Y.  McMaban,  61  Mo.  App. 
499;  Gregory  ▼.  Sitlington,  54  Mo. 
App.  60;  Cordes  v.  Strasxer,  8  Mo. 
App.  61. 

F^— Dow  V.  Taylor,  71*  Vt.  337, 
45  Atl.  220,  76  Am.  St.  Rep.  775. 

Tft«.— Blanik  v.  Barta  (Wis.  1906), 
109  N.  W.  980. 

Can.— Campbell  y.  Patterson,  21 
Can.  Sup.  Ct.  645;  Totten  v.  Doug- 
lass, 15  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  126;  Com- 
mercial Bank  ▼.  Wilson,  14  Grant  Ch. 
(U.  C.)  473,  3  Grant  Err.  &  App.  (U. 
C.)  257. 

70.  C6ley  v.  Coley,  14  N.  J.  Eq. 
350;  Rosenbaum  y.  Davis  (Tenn.  Ch. 
App.  1898),  48  S.  W.  706;  First  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Bertschy,  52  Wis.  438,  9  N. 
W.  534. 

71.  Mats  ▼.  Arick,  76  Conn.  388, 
56  Atl.  630. 

72.  Hawes  v.  Mooney,  39  Conn.  37. 


73.  Reagan  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  157 
Ind.  623,  61  N.  E.  575,  62  N.  E.  701. 

74.  y,  y. — ^McArthur  v.  Hoysradt, 
11  Paige,  495,  a  vendee  of  the  debtor 
may  be  compelled  to  account  to  the 
creditor  for  amounts,  iniproperly  as 
against  creditors,  deducted  ftom  the 
contract. 

Ate.— Gilkcy  v.  Pollock,  82  Ala. 
503,  3  So.  99. 

/U.— Deunchy  v.  Smith,  83  111.  App. 
656. 

/nd.— Reed  v.  Thayer,  9  Ind.  157. 

/otoa.— Morrell  v.  Sharp  (1898),  74 
N.  W.  749. 

JTy.— Seller  v.  Walz,  100  Ky.  105, 
29  S.  W.  338,  31  S.  W.  729,  17  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  301;  Williamson  v.  Black- 
bum,  26  Ky.  L.  Rep.  857,  82  8.  W. 
600. 

La, — ^Brown  v.  Kenner,  3  Mart. 
(La.)  370. 

Mo. — Columbia  Sav.  Bank  v.  Winn, 
132  Mo.  SO,  33  S.  W.  457. 

N.  7.— Smith  V.  O'Brien.  57  N.  J. 
L.  365,  41  Atl.  492. 

Eng. — Stokoe  v.  Cowan.  29  Beav. 
637,  7  Jur.  N.  S.  901,  4  L.  T.  N.  S. 
695,  9  Wkiy.  Rep.  801,  54  Eng.  Re- 
print, 775. 

75.  Albee  v.  Webster,  16  N.  H.  362. 


CoNBIDERATIOir. 


333 


them  which  is  bona  fide,  although  the  transfer  as  to  the  others  is  in- 
valid as  in  fraud  of  creditors,  because  the  debts  are  fictitious  and 
fraudulent"  A  conveyance  may  be  void  in  part,  not  only  at 
common  law,  but  by  statute  also,  and  stand  good  as  ta  the  residue.^ 
But  transfers  and  mortgages  made,  or  judgments  confessed,  to 
one  creditor  in  payment  or  security  for  his  indebtedness,  made 
partly  for  valid  debts,  but  including  false  and  fraudulent  debts  or 
fictitious  liabilities,  are  fraudulent  and  void,  not  to  the  extent  of 
the  fraud,  but  absolutely  and  as  an  entirety." 


76.  N.  r. — Commercial  Bank  v. 
Sherwood,  162  N.  Y.  310,  66  N.  E. 
834;  Ck>mmercial  Bank  v.  Bolton,  20 
App.  Div.  70,  46  N.  Y.  Supp.  734. 

Ala. — ^Anderson  ▼.  Hooks,  9  Ala. 
704. 

Ark. — Riggan  v.  Wolfe,  63  Ark.  637, 
14  S.  W.  922. 

III. — ^Hutmacher  v.  Anheuser-Busch 
Brewing  Assoc.,  71  111.  App.  154. 

Iowa. — ^Miller  Co.  v.  Bracken,  104 
Iowa,  643,  74  N.  W.  2. 

Ma88. — Prince  v.  Shepard,  9  Pick. 
176. 

ififin. — Henderson  ▼.  Kendrick,  72 
Minn.  253,  75  N.  W.  127. 

Mo. — ^Woodson  v.  Carson,  136  Mo. 
621,  36  S.  W.  1006,  37  S.  W.  197. 

2V.  c.— Blair  v.  Brown,  116  N.  C. 
031,  21  S.  E.  434;  Woodruff  ▼. 
Bowles,  104  N.  C.  197,  10  S.  E.  482; 
Morris  v.  Pearson,  79  N.  C.  253,  28 
Am.  Rep.  315,  distinguishing  Hafner 
v^  Irvin,  23  N.  C.  490,  and  overruling 
Stone  V.  Marshall,  62  N.  C.  300,  and 
Johnson  v.  Murchison,  60  N.  C.  286. 

Tew, — ^Pittman  ▼.  Roian  Grocery 
Co.,  15  Tex.  Civ.  App.  676,  39  S.  W. 
1108;  Linz  v.  Atchison,  14  Tex.  Civ. 
App.  647,  38  S.  W.  640,  47  S.  W.  542 ; 
Ryder  v.  Hunt,  6  Tex.  Civ.  App.  238, 
26  S.  W.  314,  overruling  Simon  v. 
Ash,  1  Tex.  Civ.  App.  202,  20  S.  W. 
719. 


Va. — ^Lewis  v.  Caperton's  Ex'r,  8 
Oratt.  148. 

W.  Fa.— Zell  Guano  Co.  v.  Heath- 
erly,  38  W.  Va.  409,  18  8.  E.  611; 
Cohn  V.  Ward,  36  W.  Va.  616,  16  S. 
E.  140,  32  W.  Va.  34,  9  8.  E.  41. 

Contra. — Showman  y.  Lee,  86  Mich. 
666,  49  N.  W.  678;  Adams  v.  Nie- 
mann, 46  Mich.  136,  8  N.  W.  719. 

77.  Anderson  v.  Hooks,  9  Ala.  704. 

78.  N.  y.— Simons  v.  Goldbach,  66 
Hun,  204,  9  N.  Y.  Supp.  369;  John- 
son V.  Phillips,  2  N.  Y.  Supp.  432. 

Ala. — Proekauer  v.  Peoples'  Sav. 
Bank,  77  Ala.  267. 

Kan. — Miami  County  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Barkalow,  63  Kan.  68,  35  Pae.  796, 
inclusion  in  a  mortgage  from  a  fail- 
ing firm  of  a  debt  due  from  one  not  a 
member  of  the  firm;  MJarborough  y. 
Lewis  Cook  Mfg.  Co.,  32  Kan.  636,  5 
Pac.  181;  Winstead  v.  Hulme,  32 
Kan.  668,  4  Pac.  994;  Wallach  y. 
Wylie,  28  Kan.  138. 

Mioh. — Clark  v.  Lee,  78  Mich.  221, 
44  N.  W.  260;  King  v.  Hubbell,  42 
Mich.  695,  4  N.  W.  440. 

Afo. — ^Bates  County  Bank  v.  Gailey, 
177  Mo.  181,  76  S.  W.  646;  First  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Fry,  168  Mo.  492,  68  S.  W. 
348;  Boland  v.  Ross,  120  Mo.  208,  26 
S.  W.  624;  Seger  v.  Thomas,  107  Mo. 
636,  18  8.  W.  33;  State  v.  Hope,  102 
Mo.  410,  14  S.  W.  986. 


334 


Fraudulent  Convetancbs. 


§  31.  Consideration  usurious  in  part — ^A  failing  debtor  maj 
pay,  or  secure  to  be  paid,  a  debt  barred  by  the  statute  of  limita- 
tions, or  one  which  he  may  defend  as  usurious ;  or  if  he  has  agreed 
to  pay  interest  upon  unpaid  interest,  he  may  pay  or  secure  its  pay- 
ment ;  and,  if  done  in  good  faith,  the  payments  made  or  security 
taken  cannot  be  set  aside  by  his  creditors.^*  And  the  fact  that  part 
of  the  consideration  for  a  conveyance  is  compound  interest  does 
not  render  it  void  as  to  creditors,  where  no  agreement  for  com- 
pound interest  was  made  in  advance.^  The  mere  faot  that  a 
debtor  has  paid,  or  agreed  to  pay,  more  than  the  legal  rate  of  in- 
terest does  not  constitute  a  fraud  on  the  debtor's  other  creditors, 
and  the  mere  refusal  of  the  debtor  to  contest  the  claim  does  not  of 
itself  amount  to  such  fraud.*^  It  is  only  where  a  usurious  con- 
tract is  entered  in>to  collusively,  as  a  scheme  to  hinder  and  delay 
creditors,  that  the  latter  may  have  any  standing  to  contest  a  judg- 
ment entered  upon  sudi  usurious  contract^  Only  subsequent 
creditors  can  contest  a  prior  obligaticoi  of  their  debtor  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  usurious;"  and  they  cannot  do  so  unless  in  the 
inception  of  the  contract  it  was  intended  to  defraud  them  by  swell- 
ing the  amount  of  the  debt,  or  would  necessarily  have  that  eflFect.** 
A  confession  of  judgment  is  not  void  because  it  includes  usury  ;'^ 
and  a  mistake  in  the  computation  of  interest  is  no  evidence  that 
the  confession  of  judgment  was  made  to  defraud  creditors.*^    Hie 


Oltla.— Jaffray  v.  Wolfe,  4  OUa. 
303,  47  Pac.  490. 

re».— Blair  v.  Finlay,  76  Tex.  210, 
12  S.  W.  983;  Brasher  ▼.  Jamison, 
76  Tex.  139,  12  S.  W.  809. 

79.  Mellen  v.  Banning,  72  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  176,  26  N.  Y.  Supp.  642;  MiHs  ▼. 
Camley,  1  Bosw.  (N.  Y.)  169.  See 
ako  Pennington  v.  Woodall,  17  Ala. 
686;  Spencer  v.  Ayrault,  10  N.  Y. 
202. 

80.  St«wart  v.  Petree,  66  N.  Y.  621 ; 
McConnell  v.  Barber,  86  Hun  (N.  Y.), 
360. 

81.  Appeal  of  Lenning,  93  Pa.  St. 
301;    Wheelock  ▼.  Wood,  93  Pa.  St 


208 ;  Appeal  of  Second  Nat.  Bank,  86 
Pa.  St.  628 ;  Cahn  ▼.  Farmers'  &  Trad- 
ers' Bank,  1  S.  D.  237,  46  N.  W.  186; 
Spaulding  v.  Austin,  2  Vt  666. 

81^.  Appeal  of  Lenning,  supra; 
Wheelock  v.  Wood,  8Upra, 

83.  Lombaert  v.  Morris,  2  Del.  Co. 
R.  (Pa.)  467;  Building  Assoc,  v. 
O'Connor,  3  Phila.  (Pa.)  463,  16  Leg. 
Int.  300. 

84.  Loucheim  v.  First  Nat  Bank,  98 
Ala.  621,  13  So.  374;  Harris  v.  Rus- 
sell, 93  Ala.  69,  9  So.  641;  Lombaert 
▼.  Morris,  supra, 

85.  Miller  v.  Clarke,  37  Iowa,  326. 

86.  Scales  ▼.  Scott,  13  Ckl.  76. 


C0NSID£KAT10N« 


335 


fact  that  usiuious  intereet  is  included  in  a  judgment  taken  by  de- 
fault is  of  itself  no  evidence  of  an  intent  to  defraud  creditors.'^ 
But  a  judgment  recovered  by  default  in  an  action  commenced  at 
the  suggestion  of  the  debtor  is  fraudulent  so  far  as  it  includes 
compound  interest,  for  which  there  was  no  yalid  agreement"  A 
pretended  sale  of  property  to  secure  usurious  advances  and  protect 
it  against  the  vendor's  creditors  is  fraudulenty  and  may  be  at- 
tacked by  any  of  them." 

§  32.  Voluntary  conveyances — Effect  of  want  of  considera- 
tion.— ^A  voluntary  conveyance  is  one  without  any  valuable  con- 
sideration and  implies  the  total  want  of  any  substantial  considera- 
tion." A  conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  made  voluntarily 
and  without  a  valuable  consideration  by  a  debtor,  while  insolvent 
or  in  contemplation  of  insolvency,  with  the  actual  intent  to  de- 
fraud either  existing  or  subsequent  creditors,  is  void  as  to  the 
creditors  intended  to  be  defrauded.*^    The  fact  that  the  grantor 


87.  Cahn  ▼.  Fanners'  &  Traders^ 
Bank,  1  S.  D.  237,  46  N.  W.  186. 

88.  PeyBer  y.  Myers,  56  Hun  (IT. 
Y.),  176,  9  N.  Y.  Supp.  229,  rez^g  5 
N.  Y.  Supp.  827. 

80.  Grayier'a  Curator  v.  Carrabj's 
Ex'r,  17  La.  118,  36  Am.  Dec.  608. 
See  also  Chandler  v.  Powers,  9  St. 
Rep.   (N.  Y.)   169. 

90.  Seward  ▼.  Jackson,  8  Cow.  (N*. 
Y.)  430;  Washband  v.  Washband,  27 
Conn.  431. 

01.  Cat.— Nixon  ▼.  Goodwin  (Oal. 
App.  1906),  86  Pae.  169. 

Fla, — ^Ullman  ▼.  Lockhart  (Fla. 
1906),  41  So.  452,  when  the  grantee 
is  a  party  to  the  fraudulent  intent,  it 
is  immaterial  whether  the  grantor 
was  solvent  or  insolvent  at  the  time 
of  the  execution  of  the  conveyance. 

Oa.^Eme8t  v.  Merritt,  107  Oa, 
61,  32  S.  E.  898;  May  v.  Huntington, 
66  6a.  208;  Westmoreland  v.  Powell^ 
59  Ga.  256. 


Ind, — Johnson  v.  Jones,  79  Ind. 
141. 

iro.-.Klauber  v.  Sehloss^  198  Mo. 
502,  95  S.  W.  930. 

Vf,  J. — ^Le  Herisse  ▼.  Hess  (Ch. 
1904),  57  Atl.  808;  Mead  r.  Combs, 
19  N.  J.  Eq.  112. 

On— Marks  r.  Crow^  14  Or.  382,  13 
Pac.  55. 

Tenn.  — Churchill  v.  Wells,  7 
Coldw.  364. 

Ft— Corey  v.  Morrill,  71  Vt  51, 
42  Atl.  976. 

W.  Fa.— Billingsley  v.  adland,  41 
W.  Va,  234,  23  S.  E.  812. 

A  Toliufttar^  ooaTojaiMe  bj  aa 
laaolToiit,  tlio«Bk  withovt  la« 
teat  to  defraudt  is  fraudu- 
lent. James  v.  Mallory  (Ark.  1905), 
89  S.  W.  472. 


dmee*  is  put  in  possession  of  land, 
without  any  promise  of  a  convejranoe, 
and  rents  it,  collecting  the  rents  for 


336 


Fbaudulbnt  Convetanoxs. 


retained  property  sufficient  to  satisfy  his  creditors  is  no  defense 
to  an  attack  made  upon  the  oonveyance  by  creditors  vfhcm  he  in- 
tended to  defraud;  it  is  only  where  a  voluntary  conveyance  is 
made  in  good  faith,  that  it  will  be  upheld  by  proof  that  the  grantor 
retained  an  ample  estate  to  pay  his  debts.^  If  the  conveyance 
were  made  with  intent  to  hinder  or  delay  creditors^  it  should  be 
set  aside^  without  regard  to  the  financial  condition  of  the  fraudu- 
lent transferrer.  A  rich  man  may  make  a  fraudulent  deed  as  well 
as  one  who  is  insolvent^  A  wife  is  within  the  protection  of  the 
statute  against  fraudulent  conveyances,  and  a  voluntary  conveyance 
of  property,  made  with  the  specific  intent  to  defraud  a  future  wife 
of  her  marital  rights^  is  void  to  the  same  extent  as  if  it  was  in- 
tended to  defraud  future  creditors,  allliough  the  grantor  has  not 
at  the  time  of  the  conveyance  selected  any  particulair  person  as 
his  wife,  but  makes  the  conveyance  with  the  general  intention  to 
defraud  any  person  whom  he  might  many  of  her  marital  rights.*^ 

§  33.  Voluntary  conveyances  as  to  existing  creditors. — ^The 
doctrine  wag  maintained  by  the  early  English  cases,*^  by  the  lead- 


his  own  uBe,  but  expends  neither 
labor  nor  money  thereon,  nor  puts 
any  improvements  on  it,  he  cannot 
hold  the  same  as  against  the  creditors 
of  the  insolvent  donor.  Ansell  v.  Gox 
(W.  Va.  1906),  60  S.  E.  806. 

92.  N.  Y.— Fox  V.  Moyer,  64  N.  Y. 
126;  Harding  y.  Elliott,  92  Hun, 
602,  36  N.  Y.  Supp.  648. 

Col.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Maxwell, 
123  CbI.  360,  66  Pac.  980,  69  Am.  St. 
Rep.  64. 

/W.— Phillips  V.  Kesterson,  164  111. 

672,  39  N.  E.  699. 

lfts«.— Edmunds     y.     Mister,     68 

Miss.  766. 

2^e6.— Shreck  y.  Hanlon,  66  Neb. 
461,  92  N.  W.  626;  Mclntyre  y.  Ma- 
lonc,  3  Neb.  (Unoff.)  169,  91  N.  W. 
246. 

17*.— Wilson  Y.  Spear,  68  Vt.  146, 

34  Atl.  429. 


Compare  Flannagan  v.  Donaldson, 
86  Ind.  617. 
93.  Hager  y.  Shindler,  29  Cbil.  47. 

04.  Higgins  y.   Higgins,  21»  HI. 
146,  76  N.  E.  86. 

05.  White  y.  Sansom,  3  Atk.  410, 
26  Eng.  Reprint^  1037;  Fitaer  y.  Pit- 
ser,  2  Atk.  611,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  708; 
Stileman  y.  Ashdown,  2  Atk.  481,  26 
Eng.  Reprint,  688,  Ambl.  13,  27  Eng. 
Reprint,  7;  Russell  y.  Hammond,  1 
Atk.  13,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  9;  Sheara 
Y.  Rogers,  3  B.  &  Ad.  362,  1  L.  J.  K. 
B.  89,  23  E.  C.  L.  164;  Doe  y. 
Martyr,  1  B.  &  P.  N.  R.  332,  2  Rev. 
Rep.  821;  G&rdiner  y.  Painter,  Gas. 
t.  King,  66,  26  Eng.  Reprint^  226; 
Doe  Y.  Manning,  9  East,  69,  9  Rev. 
Rep.  603;  Tonkin  y.  Ennis,  1  Eq.  Gas. 
Abr.  334,  21  Eng.  Reprint,  1084; 
Hill  Y.  Ex^r,  2  Taunt.  69^  11  Rev. 
Rep.  627;  Nunn  ▼.  WihmoTe,  8  T. 


CONSIBESATION. 


887 


ing  American  case,^  and  has  been  followed  by  authorities  in  some 
of  the  states^*^  that  a  voluntary  oonveyance  is^  as  to  existing  cred- 


K.  621y  5  Rev.  Rep.  434;  Ex  parte 
Beny,  19  Ves.  Jr.  218,  34  Eng.  Re- 
print, 499;  Buckle  v.  Mitchell,  18 
Ves.  Jr.  100,  11  Rev.  Rep.  165,  34 
Eng.  Reprint,  255;  Townshend  v. 
Windham,  2  Ves.  1,  28  Eng.  Reprint, 
1;  Beaumont  v.  Thorpe,  1  Ves.  27,  27 
Eng.  Reprint^  869;  Harman  y.  Rich- 
ards, 10  Hare,  81,  22  L.  J.  Ch.  1066, 
44  Eng.  Oh.  78. 

06.  Reade  v.  Livingston,  3  Johns. 
Ch.  (N.  Y.)  481,  8  Am.  Dec.  620. 
This  decision  of  Chancellor  Kent  has 
been  declared  to  be  "the  greatest 
monument  of  legal  acumen  and  wide 
and  varied  erudition  which  New  York 
has  ever  produced/'  and  it  was  also 
asserted  that  "  unless  indications  are 
wholly  delusive  the  learned  Chancel- 
lor was  not  more  than  a  century  in 
advance  of  his  age."  Fraudulent 
Conveyances  to  Bona  Fide  Purchas- 
ers^ etc.,  by  John  Reynolds,  Esq. 
This  case  was  subsequently  over- 
ruled by  Seward  v.  Jackson,  8  Cow. 
(N.  Y.)  406,  and  the  contrary  rule 
is  now  established  by  statute.  Hoi- 
den  v.  Bumham,  63  N.  Y.  74;  Dy- 
gert  V.  Remerschnider,  32  N.  Y.  636. 

97.  17.  8. — ^Hopkirk  v.  Randolph, 
12  Fed.  Cas.  No.  6,698,  2  Brock.  132. 

^to.— Wood  V.  Potts,  140  Ala.  425. 
37  So.  253;  Guyton  v.  Terrell,  132 
Ala.  66,  31  So.  83;  Henderson  v.  Far- 
ley Nat.  Bank,  123  Ala.  547,  26  So. 
226,  82  Am.  St.  Rep.  140;  McClarin 
V.  Anderson,  109  Ala.  671,  19  So. 
«82;  Wooten  v.  Steele,  109  Ala.  563, 
19  So.  972,  56  Am.  St.  Rep.  947; 
Ruse  V.  Bromberg,  88  Ala.  619,  7  So. 
384;  Lockard  v.  Nash,  64  Ala.  385; 
Bibb  V.  Freeman,  69  Ala.  612;  Spen- 
oer  V.  Godwin,  30  Ala.  355;  Gannard 

22 


T.  Enslava,  20  Ala.  732;  Foote  r. 
Cobb,  18  Ala.  585;  High  v.  Nelms>,  14 
Ala.  350,  48  Am.  Dec.  103;  Moore  r. 
Spencer,  6  Ala.  506;  Doe  v.  McKin- 
ney,  5  Ala.  719;  Miller  v.  Thompson^ 
8  Port.  196. 

N.  J.— Kins^  V.  Feller,  64  N.  J. 
£q.  367,  51  AU.  485;  Hancock  v.  El- 
mer, 61  N.  J.  Eq.  558,  49'Atl.  140, 
aifd  63  N.  J.  Eq.  802,  52  Atl.  1131; 
Long  Branch  Banking  Co.  v.  Dennis, 
56  N.  J.  Eq.  549,  39  Atl.  689;  Severs 
v.  Dodson,  53  N.  J.  Eq.  633,  34  Atl. 
7,  61  Am.  St  Rep.  641;  Merchants', 
etc.,  Transp.  Co.  v.  Borland,  53  N.  J. 
Eq.  282,  31  Atl.  272;  Francis  v.  Law- 
rence, 48  N.  J.  Eq.  508,  22  Atl.  259; 
Gardner  v.  Kleinke,  46  N.  J.  Eq.  90, 
18  Atl.  457 ;  Palmer  v.  Martindell,  43 
N.  J.  Eq.  90,  10  Atl.  802;  Aber  v. 
Brant,  36  N.  J.  Eq.  116;  Budd  v. 
Atkinson,  30  N.  J.  Eq.  530;  Randall 
V.  Vroom,  30  N.  J.  Eq.  353;  Kuhl  v. 
Martin,  26  N.  J.  Eq.  60;  Hecht  v. 
Koegal,  25  N.  J.  Eq.  135;  Phelps  v. 
Morrison,  24  N.  J.  Eq.  195;  Annin 
V.  Annin,  24  N.  J.  Eq.  184;  Sayre  v. 
Fredericks,  16  N.  J.  Eq.  205;  Smith 
v.  Vreeland,  16  N.  J.  Eq.  198;  Col^ 
V.  C6ley,  14  N.  J.  Eq.  350;  Cook  v. 
Johnson,  12  N.  J.  Eq.  51,  72  Am.  Dec. 
381. 

8.  C— Woody  r.  Dean^  24  S.  C. 
499;  Hudnall  v.  Teasdall,  1  McCord, 
227,  10  Am.  Dec.  671. 

Tlie  onl7  qualifleatloa  to  the 
seaeral  mle  ia,  that  when  the  in- 
debtedness is  slight,  as  for  the  cur^ 
rent  expenses  of  the  family,  or  the 
debts  inconsiderable  as  compared 
with  the  value  of  the  donor's  estate^ 
and  the  creditor,  by  his  delay  or 
laches  has  allowed  the  resenrvd  ei* 


388 


FrAUBULEKT   CoiffVSTAirCEfl. 


iton  of  the  gnntory  per  $e  fraudalent  and  Toid,  without  regard  to 
the  solvency  of  the  grantor^  the  intention  of  the  parties,  or  the 
value  of  the  property  conveyed.  But  the  rule  is  now  established 
by  the  wei^t  of  authority,  both  Engli^  and  American,  that  a 
voluntary  conveyance  is  not  necessarily,  from  the  mere  want  of 
consideration,  fraudulent  as  to  existing  creditors,  but  raises  only  a 
presumption  of  fraud  in  fact,  which,  however,  is  not  conclusive, 
and  may  be  rebutted.  The  question  of  fraudulent  intent  in  a  con*- 
veyance  is  one  of  fact,  and  not  of  law,  and  the  conveyance  is  not 
to  be  adjudged  fraudulent  as  against  creditors  solely  on  the 
ground  that  it  was  not  founded  on  a  valuable  oonaideration.  but 
the  par^  seeking  to  set  aside  the  conveyance  must  establish,  as  a 
ground  for  the  inference  of  fraud,  some  fact  besides  the  voluntary 
character  of  the  conveyance.  The  amount  of  the  grantor's  in- 
debtedness, the  total  value  of  his  property,  and  the  value  of  the 
part  conveyed  are  to  be  considered  in  determining  whether  a  con- 
veyance is  valid  or  fraudulent,  and  if  it  appears  that  the  grantor 
retained  property  amply  sufficient  to  pay  all  his  debts,  the  convey- 
ance is  not  invalid,  although  voluntary.^     The  validity  of  a 


tate  to  be  wasted,  in  such  eaee  the 
oonveyance  will  be  held  valid.  Rioh- 
ardflon  v.  Rhodus,  14  Rich.  L.  05; 
Hudnal  ▼.  Wilder,  14  McCord,  204, 
17  Am.  Dec  744.  See  also  Stein- 
BMjer  y.  Steinmeyer,  56  S.  C.  9,  33 
8.  B.  16 ;  Blaken^  v.  Kirkley,  2  Nott 
k  M.  644. 

Can, — Irwin  v.  Freeman,  13  Qrant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  466. 

M.  y.  r.— Smith  ▼.  Reid,  134  N. 
Y.  66S,  31  N.  B.  1082;  Genesee  River 
Nat  Bank  v.  Mead,  02  N.  Y.  637; 
Oola  V.  l>ler,  66  N.  Y.  78;  Dunlap 
V.  Hawkins,  69  N.  Y.  346;  Brickaon 
T.  Quinn,  47  N.  Y.  410;  Dygert  ▼. 
Remerschnider,  32  N.  Y.  629;  Van 
Wyka  ▼.  Seward,  6  Paige,  62. 

17.  fif.— Lloyd  V.  Fulton,  91  U.  S- 
479.  23  L.  Ed.  363;  Hinde  v.  Long- 
worth,  11  Wheat.  199,  6  L.  Ed.  464; 
Polk  County  Nat.  Bank  v.  Scott>  132 


Fed.  897,  66  C.  C.  A.  51 ;  Wlswell  v. 
Jarvis,  9  Fed.  84;  Beecher  ▼.  Clarke, 
3  Fed.  Cas.  No.  1AS23,  12  BUtcfaf. 
266,  atf*d  154  U.  S.  631,  14  Sup.  Ct. 
1184,  24  L.  Ed.  705;  Hopkirk  v.  Ran- 
dolph, 12  Fed.  Cas.  No.  6,698,  2 
Brock.  132;  Magniac  ▼.  Thompecm,  16 
Fed.  Ou.  No.  8,956,  Baldw.  344, 
aifd  7  Pet.  348,  8  L.  Ed.  709. 

Ark.—De  Prato  v.  Jester  (1892),. 
20  S.  W.  807;  Chambers  ▼.  Sallie,  29 
Ark.  407;  Bertrand  y.  Elder,  23  Ark. 
494;  Smith  v.  Yell,  8  Ark.  470;  Dood 
y.  McCraw,  8  Ark.  83,  46  Am.  Dec. 
301. 

Colo, — Fox  ▼.  Lipe,  14  Colo.  App. 
258,  59  Pac.  850. 

Conn. — Fishel  ▼.  Motta,  76  Ckmn. 
197,  56  Atl.  558. 

D,  C— Edwards  v.  BntwiaUe^  2 
Mackey,  43;  Offutt  v.  King,  1  Mao- 
Arthur,  312. 


I 


CoifBIDESATION. 


339 


voluntary  tranflfer  is  d<eftermined  largely  by  the  fact  as  to  v^hether 
the  debtor  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance  has  8u£Scient  estate  left 


FUl — Claflin  v.  Ambrose,  37  Fla. 
78,  19  So.  628. 

(7a.— Lytle  v.  Black,  107  Ga.  386, 
33  a  E.  414;  Ernest  v.  Merritt,  107 
Ga.  61,  32  S.  E.  898;  Brown  v. 
Spivcy,  63  Ga.  166;  Weed  ▼.  Davis, 
26  Ga.  684. 

/U.— Harting  v.  Jockers,  136  111. 
627,  27  N.  E.  188,  29  Am.  St.  Rep. 
341;  Higgins  v.  White,  118  111.  619, 
8  N.  E.  808;  Bittenger  v.  Kasten,  111 
111.  260;  Merrell  v.  Johnson,  96  111. 
224;  Mathews  ▼.  Jordan,  88  111.  602; 
Patrick  ▼.  Patrick,  77  111.  666 ;  Grid- 
ley  ▼.  Watson,  63  111.  186;  Morit*  v. 
Hoffman,  35  111.  553;  Smith  ▼.  A.  J. 
Somen  Mfg.  Ck>.,  69  111.  App.  230; 
Sammis  y.  Poole,  89  HI.  App.  118, 
alfd  188  111.  396,  58  N.  E.  934;  Dill- 
man  V.  Nadelhoffer,  56  111.  App.  617; 
Aultman  ▼.  Hudlestun,  31  111.  App. 
556;  Uhre  ▼.  Melum,  17  111.  App. 
182;  Koster  v.  Hiller,  4  111.  App.  21. 

lotoa. — Crary  v.  Kurtz  (1905), 
106  N.  W.  690;  Eighmy  v.  Brock,  126 
Iowa,  535,  102  N.  W.  444;  Cloud  v. 
Malvin,  108  Iowa,  52,  75  N.  W.  645, 
78  N.  W.  791,  45  L.  R.  A.  209; 
Triplett  v.  Graham,  58  Iowa,  135,  12 
N.  W.  143;  Gwyer  ▼.  Figgins,  37 
Iowa,  617;  Stewart  v.  Rogers,  25 
Iowa,  395,  95  Am.  Dec.  794;  Gardi- 
ner V.  Baker,  25  Iowa,  343;  Carson 
▼.  Foley,  1  Iowa,  524. 

Kan. — Chantland  v.  Midland  Nat. 
Bank,  66  Kan.  549,  72  Pac.  230; 
Tootle  ▼.  Caldwell,   30  Kan.   125,   1 

Pac.  329. 

Ife.— Spear  v.  Spear,  97  Me.  454, 
98  Atl.  1106;  Stevens  ▼.  Robinson,  72 
Me.  381;  French  v.  Holmes,  67  Me. 
186;  Grant  ▼.  Ward,  64  Me.  239; 
Neil  V.  Tenney,  42  Me.  322;  Borne- 


man  ▼.  Sidlinger,  15  Me.  429,  33  Am. 
Dec.  626. 

Md. — Chatterton  v.  Mason,  86  Md. 
236^  37  Atl.  960;  Christopher  v. 
Christopher,  64  Md.  583,  3  AtL  296; 
Grover,  etc..  Sewing  Mach.  Co.  v. 
Raddiff,  63  Md.  496;  Warner  ▼. 
Dove,  33  Md.  679;  Ellinger  v.  Crowl, 
17  Md.  361;  Baxter  v.  Sewell,  3  Md. 
334;  Worthington  v.  Shipley,  6  Gill, 
449;  Allein  v.  Sharp,  7  Gill  &  J.  96; 
Atkinson  v.  Phillips,  1  Md.  Ch.  507; 
Kipp  V.  Hanna^  2  Bland,  26;  Hoye  v. 
Penn,  1  Bland,  28. 

Ma98. — ^Matthews  v.  Thompson,  186 
Mass.  14,  71  N.  E.  93,  104  Am.  St. 
Rep.  650,  66  L.  R.  A.  421;  Gray  v. 
Chase,  184  Mass.  444,  68  N.  E.  676; 
Stratton  v.  Edwards,  174  Mass.  374, 

64  N.  E.  886;  Jaquith  v.  Massachu- 
setts Baptist  Convention,  172  Mass. 
439,  52  N.  E.  544;  Clark  ▼.  McMa- 
hon,  170  Mass.  911,  48  N.  E.  939; 
Cook  ▼.  Holbrook,  146  Mass.  66,  14 
N.  E.  943;  Lerow  v.  Wilmarth,  91 
Mass.  382;  Green  v.  Tanner,  49  Mass. 
441. 

Mich. — ^Wooden  v.  Wooden,  72 
Mich.  347,  40  N.  W.  460. 

Minn. — Blake  v.  Boisjoli,  51  Minn. 
296,  53  N.  W.  637 ;  Filley  v.  Register, 
4  Minn.  391,  77  Am.  Dec.  522. 

Miss. — Cowen  v.  Alsop,  51  Miss. 
158;  Pennington  v.  Seal,  49  Miss. 
518;  Wilson  v.  Kohlheim,  46  Miss. 
346;  Warren  ▼.  Brown,  25  Miss.  66, 
67  Am.  Dec.  191. 

ifo.^Fehlig  V.  Busch,  165  Mo.  144, 

65  S.  W.  542;  Lander  ▼.  Ziehr,  150 
Mo.  403,  51  S.  W.  742,  73  Am.  St. 
Rep.  456;  Ridenour-Baker,  etc. 
Grocery  Co.  v.  Monroe,  142  Mo.  166, 
43  S.  W.  633;  Hoffman  v.  Nolte,  127 


340 


Fraudulent  Convetakces. 


to  satisfy  the  daims  of  his  creditors.**  Where  there  is  reasonable 
doubt  as  to  its  sufficiency^  the  conyeyance  will  be  set  aside  as 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors.^    The  property  reserved  must  not  only 


Mo.  120,  29  S.  W.  1006;  Lionberger 
▼.  Baker,  SS  Mo.  447;  Buokner  y. 
Stine,  48  Mo.  407;  Hickey  v,  Ryan, 
15  Mo.  63;  Lane  ▼.  Kingsbury,  11 
Mo.  402;  Vandeventer  y.  Qoss,  116 
Mo.  App.  316,  01  S.  W.  058;  Ameri- 
can Nat.  Bank  y.  Thomburrow,  109 
Mo.  App.  639,  83  S.  W.  771;  Boyle 

•  Y.  Boyle,  6  Mo.  App.  594. 

^     Ve&.^HarYey  y.  Golding    (1906), 

•  109  N.  W.  220;  Light  y.  Kennard,  11 
.Neb.    129,    7   N.   W.    539;    Smith   y. 

Schmita,  10  Neb.  600,  7  N.  W.  329. 

N,  H. — GoYe  Y.  Campbell,  62  N. 
H.  401 ;  Drew  y.  RuBt,  36  N.  H.  335. 

Oh^o, — Crumbaugh  y.  Kngler,  2 
Ohio  St.  373;  Miller  y.  Wilson,  15 
Ohio,  108;  Godell  y.  Taylor,  Wright, 
82;  Johnson  y.  Burnside,  8  Ohio  S.  & 
C.  PI.  Dec.  412,  7  Ohio  N.  P.  74. 

Or. — Seed  y.  Jennings  (1905),  83 
Pac.  872;  Robson  y.  Hamilton,  41  Or. 
239,  69  Pac.  651;  Elfelt  y.  Hinch,  5 
Or.  255. 

Pa.— Appeal  of  Kelly,  77  Pa.  St. 
232;  Updegraff  y.  Rowland,  52  Pa. 
St.  317;  Mullen  y.  Wilson,  44  Pa.  St. 
413,  84  Am.  Dec.  461;  In  re  Green- 
field, 14  Pa.  St.  489,  Forsyth  y. 
Mathewb,  14  Pa.  St.  100,  53  Am.  Dec. 
522;  Mateer  y.  Hissim,  3  Penr.  &  W. 
160;  Thomson  y.  Dougherty,  12  Serg. 
ft  R.  448;  Chambers  y.  Spencer,  5 
Watts,  404 ;  Bankard  y.  Shaw,  23  Pa. 
Co.  Ct.  561. 

Tenfu — ^Walter  y.  Hartman  (1902), 
67  S.  W.  476;  Conway  y.  Brown,  52 
Tenn.  237. 

Tem.—VBJi  Bibber  y.  Mathis,  52 
Tex.  406. 

y^.^Wilson  y.  Spear,  68  Vt.  145, 
84  Atl.  429. 


Wm.— Probert  y.  Sonjn,  110  Wis, 
181,  85  N.  W.  647. 

Eng, — ^In  re  Lane-Fox  (1900),'  2  Q. 
B.  608,  69  L.  J.  Q.  B.  725$,  83  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  176,  7  Manson,  295,  48 
Wkly.  Rep.  650;  Townsend  y.  West- 
oott,  2  BeaY.  340,  4  Jur.  187,  9  L.  J. 
Ch.  241,  17  Eng.  Ch.  340,  48  Eng. 
Reprint,  1212;  Cadogan  y.  Kennett, 
2  Cowp.  432;  Sedgwick  y.  Place,  25 
L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  307,  5  Nat.  Bankr. 
Reg.  168. 

09.  N.  y.— Cole  Y.  Tjrler,  65  N.  Y. 
73;  Spotten  y.  Keeler,  12  St.  Rep. 
385. 

Ill, — ^Marmon  y.  Harwood,  124  111. 
104,  16  N.  E.  236,  7  Am.  St.  Rep. 
345,  the  property  retained  must  be 
actually  and  not  merely  apparently 
sufficient;  Lytle  y.  Scott,  2  111.  App. 
646. 

if0.~>Tose  Y.  Hewitt,  50  Me.  248. 

Minn» — Camp  y.  Thompson,  25 
Minn.  175. 

Neh. — ^Adler,  etc..  Clothing  Co.  y. 
Hellman,  55  Neb.  266,  75  N.  W.  877. 

y,  J7.— Marsh  y.  Fuller,  18  N.  H. 
360;  Abbott  y.  Tenney,  18  N.  H.  109. 

N.  C— Houston  y.  Bogle,  32  N.  C. 
496. 

The  presmiiptiom  of  fimudit- 
lent  intent  arlslmc  from  a  vol- 
iintar^  ooaTeyaaaoo  is  rebrntted* 
where  the  debtor,  subsequent  to  his 
Yoluntary  deed,  pays  all  his  debts. 
Barbour  y,  Connecticut  Mut.  L.  Ins. 
Co.,  61  Conn.  240,  23  Atl.  154; 
LcYering  y.  NorYell,  9  Baxt.  (Tenn.) 
176. 

1.  Ketcham  y.  Hallook,  55  111. 
App.  632;  Williams  y.  Banks,  11  Md. 
198. 


CONSIDSBATION. 


341 


be  ampie,  but  must  be  readily  accessible  to  the  creditors.*  A  vol- 
untary conveyance  by  a  debtor,  who  at  the  time  had  no  other  prop- 
erty subject  to  execution,  may  be  avoided  by  his  creditors  as 
fraudulent'  Where  the  grantor  at  the  time  of  the  conveyance  is 
insolvent  or  practically  so/  or  the  conveyance  includes  all  or  most 
of  tlie  debtor's  available  property,  leaving  him  without  the  means 


8.  Ames  y.  Dorroh,  76  MIbs.  187, 
28  8o.  768,  71  Am.  St  Rep.  522. 

S.  WiUiams  y.  Osborne,  05  Ind. 
347;  lies  v.  Ck>x,  83  Ind.  577. 

4.  y.  y.— Royer  Wheel  Co.  v. 
Fielding,  31  Him,  274;  V^arren  y. 
Wilder,  12  St  Rep.  (N.  Y.)   757. 

Cat. — Gray  ▼.  Brunold,  140  Cal. 
615,  74  Pac.  303,  made  so  by  statute; 
Wolters  y.  Rossi,  126  Cal.  644,  50 
Pac.  143;  Swartz  y.  Haslett,  8  Gal. 
118. 

Conn. — ^Trumbull  v.  Hewitt,  62 
Conn.  448,  26  Atl.  350. 

/*2o.— McKeown  v.  Allen,  37  Fla. 
400,  20  So.  556. 

Ga. — Cothran  y.  Forsyth,  68  Ga. 
560. 

/n.— Ramsey  y.  Nichols,  73  HI. 
App.  643. 

Ind, — Farmers'  Bank  y.  First  Nat. 
Bank,  30  Ind.  App.  520,  66  N.  £.  503. 

Ky, — ^Lowry  y.  Fisher,  65  Ky.  70, 
02  Am.  Dec.  475. 

Ife.— Robinson  y.  Clark,  76  Me. 
403;  StcYens  y.  Robinson,  72  Me.  381, 
overruling  McLean  y.  Weeks,  65  Me. 
611,  and  Westcott  y.  McDonald,  22 
Me.  407;  French  y.  Holmes,  67  Me. 
186. 

If <{.— Myers  y.  King,  42  Md.  65. 

Mass, — Gray  y.  Chase,  184  Mass. 
444,  68  N.  E.  676. 

Ifioii— Beach  y.  White,  Walk.  405. 

Ifinn.— KnatYold  y.  Wilkinson,  83 
Minn.  265,  86  N.  W.  00. 

irMS.--Catching8    y.    ManloYe,    30 
655. 


ifo.^Needles  y.  Ford,  167  Mo.  405, 
67  S.  W.  240;  St  George's  Church 
8oc.  Y.  Branch,  120  Mo.  226,  25  S. 
W.  218;  Bohannon  y.  Combs,  70  Mo. 
305;  VThite  y.  McPheeters,  75  Mo. 
286;  Reppy  y.  Reppy,  46  Mo.  577; 
Gamble  y.  Johnson,  0  Mo.  605. 

N.  H. — ^Pomeroy  y.  Bailey,  43  N. 
H.  118. 

^.  O.^Hallyburton  y.  Slagle,  130 
N.  C.  482,  41  S.  E.  877;  Burton  y. 
Farinholt,  86  N.  C.  260;  Morgan  y. 
McLelland,  14  N.  C.  82. 

OMo.— <3odeU  Y.  Taylor,  Wright, 
82;  Humbert  y.  Cincinnati  M.  E. 
Church,  Wright,  213. 

Pa.— Carl  y.  Smith,  8  Phila.  560. 

Te«.— Van  Bibber  y.  Mathis,  52 
Tex.  406. 

Utah, — Gustin  y.  Mathews,  25 
Utah,  168,  70  Pac.  402;  Ogden  State 
Bank  y.  Barker,  12  Utah,  13,  40  Pac. 
765. 

Va, — Chamberlayne  y.  Temple,  2 
Rand.  384,  14  Am.  Dec.  786. 

Eng, — Taylor  v.  Coenen,  1  Ch.  DIy. 
636,  84  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  18;  Lush  y. 
Wilkinson,  5  Ves.  Jr.  384,  31  Eng. 
Reprint,  642.  Compare  Mitchell  y. 
Adams  (Tenn.  Ch.  App.  1808),  52  S. 
W.  316. 

Aotnal  lasolTeaoj  is  not  aeo- 
essarj  to  render  a  Yoluntary  con- 
Yeyanoe  void,  for  if  a  person  largely 
indebted  makes  a  voluntary  convey- 
anoe,  and  shortly  afterwards  becomes 
insolvent,  that  is  enough  to  set  aside 
the  conveyance  as  fraudulent    Hauk 


342 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


of  paying  his  debts/  the  conveyanoe  ^ill,  as  a  rule,  be  held  to  be 
fraudulent  and  will  be  set  asidie  at  the  instance  of  creditors.  The 
rule  by  which  to  determine  whether  a  voluntary  conveyance  is 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  has  also  been  held  to  be  founded  on.  the 
ability  of  the  grantor  to  withdraw  the  amount  of  the  property  so 
conveyed  from  his  funds^  without  hazarding  his  creditors,  or  in 
any  material  degree  lessening  their  prospects  of  payment;  and 
where  at  the  time  a  voluntary  conveyance  is  made,  taking  into 
consideration  the  value  of  the .  property  transferred,  and  the 
amount  of  the  debtor's  property  left  with  whioh  to  satisfy  his 
indebtedness,  in  comparison  with  the  amount  of  his  indebtedness, 
the  transfer  must  necessarily  operate  so  as  to  hinder,  delay,  or  de- 
fraud  creditors,  then  the  conveyance  is  fraudulent  and  avoidable.* 


T.  Van  Ingen,  196  111.  20,  63  N.  E. 
705,  afTg  97  111.  App.  642;  Morrill  v. 
Kilner,  113  111.  318;  Moritz  v.  Hoff- 
man, 36  111.  563. 

Solyenoy  or  insolToaoj  mmj  be 
judged  by  what  Happene,  where 
the  grantor  was  embarrassed  and  in 
doubtful  circumstances  at  the  time  of 
the  conveyance.  Rose  ▼.  Dunklee,  12 
Colo.  App.  403,  66  Pac.  342;  Brown 
y.  Case,  41  Or.  221,  69  Pac.  43.  See 
also  What  constitutes  insolvency, 
chap.  VII,  S  8,  supra. 

nie  mere  faot  of  rabaeqitent 
InsolTenoy,  if  it  is  not  produced  by 
causes  existing  at  the  time  of  the  con- 
veyance, will  not  affect  it.  Johnson 
V.  Murphy,  180  Mo.  697,  79  S.  W. 
909;  Fehlig  v.  Busch,  166  Mo.  144,  65 
S.  W.  642;  Walsh  v.  Ketchum,  84  Mo. 
427;  American  Nat.  Bank  v.  Thorn- 
burrow,  109  Mo.  App.  639,  83  S.  W. 
771.  See  also  Insolvency  subsequent 
to  transfer,  chap.  VIl,  S  10,  supra. 

5.  V.  iSf.-^Yardley  v.  Torr,  67  Fed. 
867;  Schlesinger  v.  Kansas  City,  etc., 
R.  Co.,  39  Fed.  741;  Alexander  v. 
Todd,  1  Fed.  Cas.  No.  176,  1  Bond. 
175. 


Arh. — ^Dennis  v.  Ball-Warren  Com* 
mission  Co.  (1903),  77  S.  W.  903. 

Ky. — ^Heiatt  v.  Barnes,  5  Dana» 
219. 

Me. — Spear  v.  Spear,  97  Me.  498, 
54  Atl.  1106. 

Mich. — Cicotte  v.  Gagnler,  2  Mich. 
381. 

If o.— Snyder  v.  Free,  114  Mo.  360, 
21  S.  W.  840,  and  the  grantee  is  not 
protected  by  a  recital  of  considera- 
tion in  the  deed;  Woodson  v.  Poole, 
19  Mo.  340;  Farmers',  etc..  Bank  v. 
Price,  41  Mo.  App.  291. 

Or.— Marks  v.  Crow,  14  Or.  382,  IS 
Pac.  56. 

Tex. — ^Donnebaum  v.  Tinsley,  54 
Tex.  362;  Reynolds  v.  Lansford,  16 
Tex.  286. 

Vt. — Farmers'  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Thompson,  74  Vt.  442,  62  Atl.  961; 
Durkee  v.  Mahoney,  1  Aikens,  116. 

^n^.— In  re  Ridler,  22  Ch.  D.  74, 
47  L.  P.  479,  52  L.  J.  Ch.  343,  48  L. 
T.  Rep.  N.  S.  396,  31  Wkly.  Rep.  93. 
See  also  What  constitutes  insolvency, 
chap.  VII,  §  10,  supra. 

6.  17.  8. — Washington  Cent.  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Hume,  128  U.  S.  195,  9  Sup. 


CONSIBEBATION. 


843 


An  actual  intent  to  defraud  is  not  neoeesary  to  render  a  voluntary 
oonvejanice  void  as  to  existing  creditors.^  The  motive  which 
prompts  the  person  to  make  the  gift  is  wholly  immaterial.^  A 
voluntary  conveyance  is  void  as  to  existing  creditors,  though  there 
was  no  fraudulent  in/tent  in  making  it.*    Without  regard  to  the 


Ct  41,  32  L.  Ed.  370;  Kehr  v. 
Smith,  20  Wall.  31,  22  L.  Ed.  213; 
Hinde  ▼.  Longworth,  11  Wheat.  109, 
6  L.  Ed.  454. 

Conn, — ^Abbe  ▼.  Newton,  10  Conn. 
20;  Whittlesey  ▼.  McMahon,  10  Conn, 
137,  26  Am.  Dec.  398;  Salmon  v. 
Bennett,  1  Conn.  625,  7  Am.  Deo.  237. 

III. — ^Emerson  v.  Bemis,  69  111.  537. 

Kan. — ^Miller  ▼.  Wilkerson,  10  ELan. 
App.  576,  62  Pac.  253. 

Me, — Whitehouae  ▼.  Bolster,  95 
Me.  458,  50  Atl.  240. 

Md. — ^Kipp  v.  Hanna,  2  Bland.  26. 

Pa.— Kelly's  Appeal,  77  Pa.  St. 
232;  Townsend  v.  Maynard,  45  Pa. 
St.  198;  Clark  v.  Depew,  25  Pa.  St. 
509,  64  Am.  Dec.  717;  Wilson  v. 
Hawser,  12  Pa.  St.  109. 

Va, — Wilson  v.  Buchanan,  7  Gratt. 
334. 

Eng, — Cornish  v.  Clark,  L.  R.  14 
Eq.  184,  42  L.  J.  Ch.  14,  26  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  494,  20  Wkly.  Rep.  897; 
Denison  v.  Tattersall,  18  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  303 ;  French  v.  French,  25  L.  J. 
Ch.  612,  4  Wkly.  Rep.  139,  55  Eng. 
Ch.  74,  43  Eng.  Reprint,  1166. 

Can. — Goodwin  v.  Williams,  5 
Grant  Ch.   (U.  C.)  539. 

7.  U,  S. — ^Parish  v.  Murphree,  13 
How.  92,  14  L.  Ed.  65. 

Conn. — Quinnipiac  Braning  Co.  ▼. 
Fitzgibbon,  71  Conn.  80,  40  Atl.  913. 

Me. — Whitehouse  v.  Bolster,  95 
Me.  458,  50  Atl.  2. 

Mieh.'-WaXkeT  v.  Cady,  106  Mich. 
21,  63  N.  W.  1005;  Felker  ▼.  Chubb, 
90  Mich.  24,  51  N.  W.  110;  Matson 


V.  Melchor,  42  Mich.  477,  4  N.  W. 
200;  Fellers  y.  Smith,  40  Mich.  689. 

ifo.— McCollum  T.  Grain,  101  Mo. 
App.  522,  74  S.  W.  650;  Headley 
Grocer  Co.  v.  Walker,  69  Mo.  App. 
553;  Loehr  v.  Murphy,  45  Mo.  App. 
519. 

Ohio, — ^Kennedy  v.  Dodge,  19  Ohio 
Cir.  Ct  425,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  360. 

8.  Thompson  v.  Crane,  73  Fed. 
327. 

9.  N,  y.— White's  Bank  v.  Far- 
thing,  10  St.  Rep.  830;  Loeschigk  v. 
Addison,  19  Abb.  Pr.  169. 

Ala, — ^Early  v.  Owens,  68  Ala.  171; 
Anderson  v.  Anderson,  64  Ala.  403; 
McAnally  v.  O'Neal,  56  Ala.  299; 
Crawford  v.  Kirksey,  55  Ala.  282,  27 
Am.  Rep.  704. 

Ark. — ^Hershy  ▼.  Latham,  46  Ark. 
542. 

Del, — ^Russell  ▼.  Thatcher,  2  Del. 
Ch.  320. 

Fla. — ^McKeown  v.  Allen,  37  Fla. 
490,  20  So.  556. 

/22.— Head  v.  Harding,  166  111.  353, 
46  N.  E.  890,  aif'g  62  111.  App.  302; 
Cboteau  v.  Jones,  11  lU.  300,  50  Am. 
Dec.  460. 

Ind. — Heaton  v.  Shanklin,  115  Ind. 
695,  18  N.  £.  172. 

JSTy.— Ward  v.  Thomas,  81  Ky. 
452;  Miller  v.  Desha,  66  Ky.  212; 
Mitchell  V.  Berry,  58  Ky.  602; 
Enders  v.  Williams,  58  Ky.  346; 
Hanson  v.  Buckner,  34  Ky.  251,  29 
Am.  Dec.  401. 

Me, — Emery  v.  Vinall,  26  Me.  205. 

Md, — Goodman    v.    Wineland,     61 


344 


Fbaudulbnt  Convetanoes. 


intent  of  the  parties^  and  even  where  there  is  no  fraudulent  intent, 
a  conveyance  bj  a  grantor  who  wa6  greadj  indebted  or  financially 
embarraaeed  at  the  time,  or  where  the  nature  of  the  gift  was  un* 
reasonable,  considering  the  grantor's  circumstances  and  condition 
in  life,  disproportioned  to  his  property,  and  left  property  insuffi- 
cient for  the  pajmient  of  his  debts,  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to 
creditors.^ 


Md.  449;  Dorn  ▼.  Bayer,  16  Md.  144. 

JfoM.— Blake  v.  Sawin»  02  Mara. 
340. 

ifM«.— Young  V.  White,  25  Miss. 
146;   Sway2ey.MeCroeBin,21  Miss.  317 

Mo, — ^Bohannon  v.  Combs,  70  Mo. 
305;  Payne  ▼.  Stanton,  50  Mo.  158; 
Patten  v.  Casey,  57  Mo.  118;  Far- 
mers', etc..  Bank  v.  Price,  41  Mo. 
App.  201. 

Veh. — Smith  ▼.  Schmitz,  10  Neb. 
600,  7  N.  W.  320. 

v.  J. — ^Bouquet  ▼.  Heyman,  50  N. 
J.  Eq.  114,  24  AU.  266;  City  Nat 
Bank  ▼.  Hamilton,  34  N.  J.  Eq.  158; 
Haston  ▼.  Castner,  31  N.  J.  Eq.  607; 
Morris  Canal,  etc.,  Co.  ▼.  Steams,  23 
N.  J.  Eq.  414. 

Tf.  C— Lassiter  ▼.  Davis,  64  N.  C. 
408;  Green  v.  Komegay,  40  N.  C.  66, 
67  Am.  Dec.  261. 

R,  I, — ^McKenna  ▼.  Crowley,  16  R. 
I.  364,  17  Atl.  364. 

B.  (7. — ^Backham  v.  Secrest,  2  Rich 
Eq.  54;  Blake  ▼.  Jones,  1  Bailey  Eq. 
141,  21  Am.  Dec.  530. 

W,  Va, — ^Lockhard  v.  Beckley,  10 
W.  Va.  87. 

10.  v.  r.— Holmes  v.  Clark,  48 
Barb.  237. 

17.  8, — ^Hinde  v.  Longworth,  11 
Wheat.  100,  6  L.  Ed.  454. 

ArX;.— Wright  v.  Campbell,  27  Ark. 
637;  Smith  ▼.  Tell,  8  Ark.  470;  Dodd 
V.  McCraw,  8  Ark.  83,  46  Am.  Dec. 
301. 


Gown, — Salmon  v.  Bennett,  1  Conn* 
525,  7  Am.  Dec.  237. 

III. — Stevens  ▼.  Dillman,  86  IlL 
233;  Austin  ▼.  First  Nat  Bank,  47 
HI.  App.  224;  Russell  ▼.  Fanning,  2 
111.  App.  632. 

/nd.— Burtch  v.  Elliott,  3  Ind.  00. 

/otoa. — Gameet  ▼.  Simmons,  103 
Iowa,  163,  72  N.  W.  444. 

Ky. — ^Trimble  v.  Ratdiff,  0  B.  Men. 
511;  Adams  v.  Branch,  3  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
178. 

Ife.— Wheelden  ▼.  Wilson,  44  Me. 
11. 

Md, — Benson  v.  Benson,  70  Md* 
253,  16  Atl.  657;  Biddinger  v. 
WUand,  67  Md.  350,  10  Atl.  202; 
Richards  v.  Swan,  7  Gill,  366. 

Mo, — Snyder  ▼.  Free,  114  Mo.  360, 
21  S.  W.  847;  Donovan  v.  Dunning, 
60  Mo.  436;  Dunlap  ▼.  MitcheU,  80 
Mo.  App.  303. 

V,  J, — ^Den  V.  lippenoott,  6  N.  J» 
L.  473. 

N.  C— Burton  ▼.  Farinholt,  86  N. 
C.  260;  Black  ▼.  Coldwell,  40  N.  C. 
150. 

Ohio. — ^Humbert  v.  Cincinnati  M. 
E.  Church,  Wright,  213. 

Pa.— Kern's  Estate,  4  Pa.  Dist  73. 

Teniu — Carpenter  v.  Scales  (Ch. 
App.  1807),  48  S.  W.  240. 

7eff.— Van  Bibber  ▼.  Mathis,  52 
Tex.  406. 

Va. — Coleman  v.  Cocke,  6  Rand. 
618,  18  Am.  Dec  757. 


CONSIBEBATION.  345 

§  34«  Convejrance  in  accordance  with  prior  parol  gifL — ^A 
parol  gift  of  lazid^  made  by  a  parait  to  his  cliildy  is  void  and 
confers  no  right  that  can  be  enforced  either  at  law  or  in  equity. 
If  subsequently,  a  deed  be  executed  in  consummation  of  the 
gift,  it  is  yolumtary;  it  takes  effect  from  the  time  of  its  execu- 
tion, and  cannot  prejudice  the  rights  of  existing  creditors.^^  A 
voluntary  conveyance  by  a  grantor  to  his  children,  made  when 
indebted,  is  not  valid,  though  in  compliance  with  a  previous 
verbal  promise  made  when  unembarrassed.^'  Where,  however,  a 
father,  in  solvent  circumstances,  made  an  oral  gift  of  land  to  a 
son,  and  the  son  entered  into  possession  and  made  valuable  im- 
provements, it  was  held  that  the  son's  title  in  equity  was  para- 
mount to  that  of  the  father's  subsequent  creditors.^'  And  the 
removal  of  a  son  to  certain  land,  on  the  faith  of  a  promise  by 
his  father  to  give  him  the  land,  the  father  being  at  that  time  sol- 
vent, and  the  parting  with  that  land  afterwards  by  the  son  for 
the  purpose  of  effecting  an  exchange,  was  held  to  be  a  valuable 
consideration  to  support  a  conveyanoe  by  the  father  to  the  son 
of  other  lands,  even  though  at  the  time  of  the  latter  conveyance 
the  father  had  become  insolvent.*^ 

§  35.  Statutory  rule. — In  some  jurisdictions  the  statute  pre- 
scribes that  the  fraudulent  intent  to  hinder,  delay  and  defraud 
creditors  by  a  conveyance  of  property  shall  be  deemed  a  question 
of  fact  and  not  of  law,  and  that  no  conveyance  shall  be  ad- 
judged fraudulent  as  against  creditors  solely  upon  the  ground 
that  it  was  voluntary  or  not  founded  upon  a  valuable  considera- 
tion.^^    In  other  jurisdictions  the  statute  provides  that  every 

11.  Hubbard  ▼.  Abell,  50  Ala.  283.      ment    setting    aside    the    deed    was 

12.  Rucker   ▼.   AbeU,   8   B.   Mon.      proper. 

(Ky.)  566.  14.  Rumbold  ▼.  Parr,  51  Mo.  592. 

13.  Dozior  ▼.  Matson,  94  Mo.  328,  15.  N,  T.— 4Smith  v.  Reid,  134  N. 
7  S.  W.  268,  4  Am.  St.  Rep.  388;  Y.  568,  31  N.  E.  1082;  Kain  v. 
Layton  v.  Bank  of  Calhoun,  22  Ky.  Larkin,  131  N.  Y.  300,  30  N.  E.  106; 
L.  Rep.  872,  59  S.  W.  322,  on  failure  Fuller  Electrical  Co.  v.  Lewis,  101  N. 
to  prove  the  parol  agreement,  a  judg-  Y.  674,  6  N.  E.  37 ;   Genesee  River 


346 


Fbaudulsnt  Conveyances. 


oonvejance  made  by  a  debtor  of  any  of  his  estate  without  valu- 
able consideration  therefor  shall  be  void  as  to  all  his  then  exist- 
ing creditors.^*  Under  the  latter  statute  the  fact  that  at  the  time 
of  the  oonvejanoe  the   debtor  had  other  property  subject  to 


Nat.  Bank  t.  Mead,  92  N.  Y.  637; 
Carr  ▼.  Breese,  81  N.  Y.  684;  Cole  v. 
Tyler,  06  N.  Y.  73;  Holden  v.  Hum- 
ham,  63  N.  Y.  74;  Dunlap  ▼. 
Hawkins,  69  K.  Y.  342;  Erickaon  ▼. 
Quinn,  47  N.  Y.  410;  Dygert  v. 
Remerschnider,  32  N.  Y.  629;  Bab- 
cock  ▼.  Eckler,  24  N.  Y.  623;  Car- 
penter ▼.  Roe,  10  N.  Y.  227;  Mults  ▼. 
Price,  82  App.  Div.  339,  81  N.  Y. 
Supp.  931 ;  Saugerties  Bank  ▼.  Mack, 
34  App.  Div.  494,  64  N.  Y.  Supp.  360; 
Royer  Wheel  Co.  v.  Fielding,  31  Hun, 
274;  Emmerich  v.  Hefferan,  63  N.  Y< 
Super.  Ct.  98;  White's  Bank  v.  Far- 
thing, 10  St.  Rep.  830. 

CaZ.— Cook  V.  Cockina,  117  Cal. 
140,  48  Pac.  1026;  Knox  v.  Moaei, 
104  Cal.  602,  38  Pac.  318;  Threlkel 
V.  Scott  (1893),  34  Pac.  861;  Mc- 
Fadden  ▼.  Mitchell,  64  Cal.  628; 
Thornton  v.  Hook,  36  Cal.  223; 
Swartz  T.  Haslett,  8  Cal.  118;  Gillan 
V.  Metcalf,  7  Cal.  137. 

Colo. — ^Wells  V.  Schuster-Hax  Nat. 
Bank,  23  Colo.  634,  48  Pac.  809; 
Burdsall  v.  Waggoner,  4  Colo.  266; 
Thomas  ▼.  Mackey,  3  Colo.  390. 

Ind, — ^Emerson  v.  Opp,  139  Ind.  27, 
38  N.  £.  330;  Heaton  v.  Shanklin, 
116  Ind.  695,  18  N.  E.  172;  Cava- 
naugh  v.  Smith,  84  Ind.  380;  Bishop 
V.  State,  83  Ind.  67;  Dunn  v.  Dunn, 
82  Ind.  42;  Wooters  v.  Osbom,  77 
Ind.  613;  Hardy  v.  Mitchell,  67  Ind. 
485;  Pence  v.  Croan,  61  Ind.  336; 
Parton  v.  Pates,  41  Ind.  466;  Frank 
V.  Kessler,  30  Ind.  8;  Hubbs  v.  Ban- 
croft, 4  Ind.  388. 

y.  C.— Mitchell  ▼.  Eure,  126  N.  C. 


77,  35  S.  E.  190;  Woodruff  v.  Bowles, 
104  N.  C.  197,  10  8.  £.  482;  Taylor 
▼.  Eatman,  92  N.  C.  601;  Worthy  v. 
Brady,  91  N.  C.  266. 

TF«.— Hyde  v.  Chapman,  33  Wis. 
391. 

16.  JTy.— CKane  v.  Vinnedge,  lOS 
Ky.  34,  66  S.  W.  711,  21  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
1661 ;  Yankee  v.  Sweeney,  86  Ky.  65, 
8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  944,  2  S.  W.  669; 
Ward  ▼.  Thomas,  81  Ky.  462;  Stokes 
▼.  Coffee,  71  Ky.  523;  Miller  v. 
Desha,  66  Ky.  212;  Lowry  v.  Fisher, 
65  Ky.  70,  92  Am.  Dec.  475;  Todd  ▼. 
Hartley,  69  Ky.  206;  Mitchell  v. 
Berry,  68  Ky.  602;  Enders  ▼.  Wil- 
liams, 68  Ky.  346;  Rucker  v.  Abell, 
47  Ky.  666,  48  Am.  Dec.  406;  Han- 
son ▼.  Buckner,  34  Ky.  251,  29  Am. 
Dec.  401;  Beatty  ▼.  Thompson,  23 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  1850,  66  S.  W.  384; 
Hamilton  v.  Combs,  22  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
1263,  60  S.  W.  371;  Porter  v.  Green, 
10  Ky.  L.  Rep.  484,  9  S.  W.  401; 
Marcum  ▼.  Powers,  10  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
380,  9  S.  W.  266;  Dougherty  v.  Hal- 
loran,  9  Ky.  L.  Rep.  768,  6  S.  W.  718; 
McElrath  v.  Spillman,  7  Ky.L.R.308; 
Leayell  v.  Leavell,  4  Ky.  L.  R.  489. 

Va, — ^Davis  v.  Anderson,  99  Va. 
620,  39  S.  E.  688;  Norris  ▼.  Jones,  93 
Va.  176,  24  S.  E.  911;  Bickle  ▼. 
Chrisman,  76  Va.  678;  Fink  t. 
Denny,  76  Va.  663. 

W.  Fo.— Wick  ▼.  Dawson,  42  W. 
Va.  43,  24  S.  E.  687;  McCue  ▼.  Mc- 
Cue,  41  W.  Va.  161,  23  S.  E.  689; 
Humphrey  v.  Spencer,  36  W.  Va.  Il» 
14  S.  E.  410;  Rogers  t.  Verlander, 
30  W.  Va.  619,  6  S.  E.  847. 


CoNSmSBATIOlf. 


847 


eoracution,  more  than  sufficient  U>  pay  his  debts,  canAtitutes  no 
defenoe.^^  But  in  West  Virginia  a  husband  may  make  a  dona- 
tion to  his  wife,  or  return  her  a  loan  of  money  augmented  by  a 
portion  of  the  profits  of  a  business  conducted  by  him,  if  he  re- 
tains an  amount  of  tangible  property  largely  in  escess  of  his 
just  indebtedness,  notwithstanding  the  statute.^ 


%  36.  Voluntary  conveyances  as  to  subsequent 

A  voluntary  conveyance  is  not  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  a  subse- 
quent creditor  of  the  grantor,  unless  actual  fraud  is  shown. 
Subsequent  creditors  can  impeach  a  voluntary  conveyance  only 
by  proving  the  existence  of  an  actual  intent  in  the  minds  of  the 
parties  at  the  time  of  the  execution  of  the  conveyance  to  hinder, 
delay,  or  defraud  oreditors  by  means  thereof."     In  some  juris- 


17.  Townsend  v.  Wilson,  114  Ky. 
504,  24  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1276,  71  S.  W. 
440. 

18.  Hume  &  W.  Co.  ▼.  Condon,  44 
W.  Va.  553,  30  S.  E.  556;  Adams  v. 
Irwin,  44  W.  Va.  740,  30  S.  E.  59. 

19.  N.  Y.— Phoenix  Bank  v.  Staf- 
ford, 89  N.  Y.  405;  Shand  ▼.  Hanley, 
71  N.  Y.  319;  Phillips  ▼.  Wooster,  36 
N.  Y.  412;  Ebbitt  v.  Dunham,  26 
Misc.  Rep.  232,  55  N.  Y.  Supp.  78; 
Lormore  v.  Campbell,  60  Barb.  62; 
Loeschigk  t.  Addison,  4  Abb.  Pr.  N. 
S.  210,  19  Abb.  Pr.  169;  Bamum  v. 
Farthing,  40  How.  Pr.  25. 

U.  8. — Graham  ▼.  LaCrosse,  etc., 
R.  Co.,  102  U.  S.  148,  26  L.  Ed.  106; 
Hinde  v.  Longworth,  11  Wheat.  190, 
6  L.  Ed.  454;  Sexton  ▼.  Wheaton,  8 
Wheat.  229,  5  L.  Ed.  603;  Metropoli- 
tan Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Rogers,  47  Fed. 
148;  Burdick  t.  Gill,  7  Fed.  668,  2 
McCrary,  486;  Herring  v.  Richards, 
3  Fed.  439,  1  McCrary,  570;  Sedg- 
wick ▼.  Place,  21  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
12,621,  12  Blatchf.  163. 

Ala.— Allen  ▼.  Caldwell,  Ward  & 


Co.  (1906),  42  So.  855;  Wilson  t. 
Stevens,  129  Ala.  630,  29  So.  678,  87 
Am.  St.  Rep.  86 ;  Elyton  Land  Co.  ▼. 
Iron  City  Steam  Bottling  Works,  109 
Ala.  602,  20  So.  61;  Seals  ▼.  Robin- 
son, 75  Ala.  363;  Lockard  ▼.  Nash, 
64  Ala.  385;  Kirksey  ▼.  Snedecor,  60 
Ala.  192;  Davidson  v.  Lanier,  51  Ala. 
318;  Stiles  t.  Lightfoot,  26  Ala.  443; 
Randall  v.  Lang,  23  Ala.  751; 
Thomas  v.  Degraffenreid,  17  Ala.  602. 

Ark. — Crampton  v.  Schaap,  56 
Ark.  253,  19  S.  W.  669;  Rudy  ▼. 
Austin,  56  Ark.  73,  19  S.  W.  Ill,  35 
Am.  St.  Rep.  85. 

Cal, — Buch,  etc.,  Co.  t.  Helbing, 
134  Cal.  676,  66  Pac.  967;  Kane  ▼. 
Desmond,  63  Cal.  464;  Wells  v. 
Stout,  9  Cal.  479. 

CoU), — Wilcoxen  v.  Morgan,  2  Colo, 
473. 

Conn, — ^Whiting  v.  Ralph,  75  Conn. 
41,  52  Atl.  406;  Smith  v.  Gaylord,  47 
Conn.  380;  Converse  v.  Hartley,  31 
Conn.  372;  Benton  v.  Jones,  8  Conn. 
186.  Compare  State  t.  Martin,  77 
Conn.  142,  58  Atl.  745;   Barbour  v. 


348 


FkAUDULENT   CoifVETANCES. 


dictions  it  is  held  that  where  a  voluntary  conveyance  is  made  and 


Connecticut    Mut.    L.    Ins.    Co.,    61 
Conn.  240,  23  Atl.  154. 

^to.— Florida  L.  &  T.  Co.  ▼.  Crabb 
(1903),  33  So.  523. 

Oa. — ^Horn  v.  Robs,  20  Ga.  210,  65 
Am.  Dec  621. 

III. — ^Higley  ▼.  American  Exch. 
Nat.  Bank,  185  111.  565,  57  N.  E.  436; 
Faloon  v.  Mclntyie,  118  111.  292,  8 
N.  E.  315;  Durand  v.  Weightman,  108 
111.  489;  Lucas  v.  Lucas,  103  111.  121; 
Jackson  v.  Miner,  101  111.  550;  Tun- 
ison  ▼.  Chamblin,  88  III.  378;  Lincoln 
V.  McLaughlin,  74  El.  11;  Bridgford 
V.  Riddell,  55  111.  261;  Mixell  t. 
LutE,  34  III.  382;  Carter  ▼.  Lewis, 
29  III.  500;  Lamont  v.  Regan,  96  111. 
App.  359;  Hunt  v,  Connor,  74  111. 
App.  298;  Racine  Wagon,  etc.,  Co.  ▼. 
Roberts,  54  111.  App.  515;  Sweet  v. 
Dean,  43  111.  App.  650;  Edgerly  v. 
First  Nat.  Bank,  30  111.  App.  425. 
But  see  Morrill  v.  Kilner,  113  111. 
318. 

Ind, — Stumph  v.  Bniner,  89  Ind. 
556. 

Iowa, — ^King  v.  Wella^  106  Iowa, 
649,  .77  N.  W.  338;  Carbiener  ▼.  Mont- 
gomery, 97  Iowa,  659,  66  N.  W.  900; 
Hoc*  V.  Mowre,  17  Iowa,  195. 

Kan. — ^Voorhis  ▼,  Michaelis,  45 
Kan.  255,  25  Pac.  592. 

JTy.— Place  v.  Rhem,  70  Ky,  585; 
Duhme  ▼.  Young,  66  Ky.  343;  Hurdt 
V.  Courtenay,  61  Ky.  139;  Enders  ▼. 
Williams,  58  Ky.  346;  Hanson  v. 
Buckner,  34  Ky.  251,  29  Am.  Dec. 
401;  Cosby  v.  Ross,  26  Ky.  290,  20 
Am.  Dec.  140;  Hunt  v.  Nance,  28  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  1188,  92  S.  W.  6;  Rose  v. 
Campbell,  26  Ky.  L.  Rep.  885,  1263, 
76  S.  W.  505,  77  S.  W.  707;  Little  v. 
Ragan,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep.  391;  Fletdier 
r.  Harl,  3  Ky.  L.  Rep.  335. 


I^.— Hopkins  v.  Buck,  6  La.  Ann. 
487;  Brunet  v.  Duvergis,  5  La.  124; 
Morgan  v.  Davis,  4  La.  141;  Henry 
V.  Hyde,  5  Mart.  N.  S.  633;  Hesser  v. 
Black,  5  Mart.  N.  S.  96. 

If «.— Davis  V.  Herrick,  37  Me.  397 ; 
Howe  V.  Ward,  4  Me.  195. 

If <!.— Miller  v.  Johnson,  27  Md.  6; 
Ward  V.  Hollins,  14  Md.  158;  Bohn 
T.  Headley,  7  Harr.  &  J.  257. 

Jf«bJ^— Barkworth  v.  Palmer,  118 
Mich.  50,  76  N.  W.  151;  Cole  v. 
Brown,  114  Mich.  396,  72  N.  W.  247, 
68  Am.  St.  Rep.  491. 

if«S9.— -Pennington  v.  Seal,  49  Miss. 
518. 

Ifo.— Welch  V.  Mann,  193  Mo.  304, 
92  S.  W.  98;  Krueger  v.  Vorhauer, 
164  Mo.  156,  63  S.  W.  1098;  Caldwell 
▼.  Smith,  88  Mo.  44;  Payne  v.  Stan- 
ton^ 59  Mo.  158;  Pepper  v.  Carter,  11 
Mo.  540;  Baker  v.  Welch,  4  Mo.  484; 
Ix)y  V.  Rorick,  100  Mo.  App.  105,  71 
S.  W.  842;  Bracken  t.  Milner,  99  Mo. 
App.  187,  73  S.  W.  225;  Bauer  Gro- 
cery Co.  V.  Smith,  74  Mo.  App.  419; 
Boatman's  Sav.  Bank  v.  Overall,  16 
Mo.  App.  510;  Mittelburg  v.  Harri- 
son, 11  Mo.  App.  136;  Mutual  L.  Ins. 
Co.  V.  Sandfelder,  9  Mo.  App.  285. 

2^«6.— Jayne  v.  Hymer,  66  Neb. 
785,  92  N.  W.  1019;  Ayers  v.  Wol- 
cott,  66  Neb.  712,  92  N.  W.  1036; 
Racek  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  62  Neb. 
669,  87  N.  W.  542;  Wake  v.  GriflSn^  9 
N«*.  47,  2  N.  W.  461. 

y.  i?.— Coolidge  V.  Melvin,  42  N. 
H.  510;  Smyth  v.  Carlisle,  16  N.  H. 
464;  Carlisle  v.  Rich,  8  N.  H.  44. 

N.  J.— Kinsey  v.  Feller,  64  N.  J. 
Eq.  367,  51  Atl.  485;  Minisesheimer  v. 
Doolittle,  56  N.  J.  Eq.  206,  39  AtL 
386;  Long  Branch  Banking  Co.  ▼. 
Dennis,  56  N.  J.  Eq.  549,  39  Atl.  689; 


CoNSIDEBATION. 


340 


received  with  actaal  intent  to  defraud  then  ATiatiyig  creditors  of 
the  grantor^  it  is  not  a  hona  fide  conveyance  which  can  protect  the 


Bouquet  ▼.  Heyman,  60  N.  J.  Eq.  114, 
24  Atl.  266;  Burne  ▼.  Kunzman  (Gh. 
1900),  19  Atl.  667;  Campbell  ▼. 
Tompkins,  32  N.  J.  Eq.  170;  Carpen- 
ter v.  Carpenter,  27  N.  J.  Eq.  502. 

y,  C— Clement  ▼.  Cozart,  109  N. 
C.  173,  13  S.  E.  S62. 

N.  Z).~Red  River  Valley  Nat.  Bank 
▼.  Barnes,  8  N,  D.  432,  79  N.  W. 
880. 

Ohio, — Creed  ▼.  Lancaster  Bank,  1 
Ohio  St.  1;  Robinson  ▼.  Von  Dolcke^ 
3  Ohio  8.  &  C.  PI.  Dec.  107,  1  Ohio 
N.  P.  429. 

On— Seed  v.  Jennings  (1906),  83 
Pac.  872;  Morton  v.  Denham,  39  Or. 
227,  64  Pac.  384. 

Pa.— Best  ▼.  Smith,  193  Pa.  St. 
89,  44  Atl.  329,  74  Am.  St.  Rep.  676; 
Reese  v.  Reese,  157  Pa.  St.  200,  27 
Atl.  703;  Staller  ▼.  Kirkpatrick,  1 
Mona.  486;  Lieber  ▼.  Lieber,  17  Mont. 
Co.  Rep.  34;  Tatham  v.  Crawford,  2 
Wkly.  Notes  Cas.  366. 

8.  C. — Gentry  ▼.  Lanneau,  54  S.  C. 
514,  32  S.  E.  523,  71  Am.  St.  Rep. 
814;  Jackson  v.  Phyler,  38  S.  C.  496, 
17  S.  E.  256,  37  Am.  St.  Rep.  782; 
Walker  v.  BoUman,  22  S.  C.  512; 
Richardson  v.  Rhodus,  14  Rich.  95; 
Footman  t.  Pendergrass,  3  Rich.  Eq. 
33;  Brock  ▼.  Bowman,  Rich.  Eq.  Cas. 
185;  King  v.  Clarke,  2  Hill  Eq.  611; 
Blake  v.  Jones,  Bailey  Eq.  141,  21  Am. 
Dec.  530;  Henderson  v.  Dodd,  Bailey 
Eq.  138;  Smith  ▼.  Lit  tie  John,  2  Mc- 
Cord,  362. 

fif.  D. — Aldous  V.  Olverson,  17  S.  D. 
190,  95  N.  W.  917. 

Tenn, — ^Nelson  v.  Venden,  99  Tenn. 
224,  42  S.  W.  6;  Hickman  v.  Perrin, 
46  Tenn.  135;  Nicholas  v.  Ward,  38 
Tenn.  323,  73  Am.  Dec.  177;  Dillard 


T.  Dillard,  22  Tenn.  41;  Hamilton  v. 
Bradley,  5  Hayw.  127.  Compare  Trez- 
evant  v.  Terrell,  96  Tenn.  528,  33  S. 
W.  109;  Hester  v.  Wilkinson,  25  Tenn. 
215,  44  Am.  Deo.  303. 

Tew. — ^Moulton  ▼.  Sturgis  Nat. 
Bank  (Civ.  App^  1901),  65  S.  W. 
1114;  O'Neal  v.  Clymer  (Civ.  App. 
1900),  61  S.  W.  545;  Heath  v.  First 
Nat.  Bank,  19  Tex.  CSv.  App.  63,  46 
S.  W.  123. 

Vt. — Fair  Haven  Marble,  etc.,  Co. 
V.  Owens,  69  Vt.  246,  37  Atl.  749;  Mc- 
Lane  v.  Johnson,  43  Vt.  48;  Church 
v.  Chapin,  35  Vt.  223. 

Va, — ^New  South  Bldg.,  etc.,  Assoc. 
▼.  Reed,  96  Va.  345,  31  S.  E.  514,  70 
Am.  St.  Rep.  858;  Johnston  v.  Zane, 
11  Gratt.  552;  Davis  v.  Payne,  4 
Rand.  332. 

W.  Fa.— Enslow  v.  Sliger,  51  W. 
Va.  405,  41  S.  E.  173;  Bronson  v. 
Vaughn,  44  W.  Va.  406,  29  S.  E.  1022 ; 
Green  v.  O'Brien,  36  W.  Va.  277,  16 
S.  E.  74;  McClaugherty  v.  Morgan, 
36  W.  Va.  191,  14  S.  E.  992;  Rogers 
V.  Verlander,  30  W.  Va.  619,  5  S.  E. 
847;  Rose  v.  Brown,  11  W.  Va.  122; 
Lockhard  v.  Beckl^,  10  W.  Va.  87. 

Wis, — Wheeler,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  v. 
Monahan,  63  Wis.  198,  23  S.  W.  127. 

Eng, — ^Russel  v.  Hammond,  1  Atk. 
13,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  9;  Holmes  v. 
Penny,  3  Jur.  N.  S.  80,  3  Kay.  &  J. 
90,  26  L.  J.  Ch.  179,  5  Wkly.  Rep. 
132;  Spirett  v.  Willows,  10  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  450;  Holloway  v.  Millard, 
1  Madd.  414,  56  Eng.  Reprint,  152; 
Battersbee  v.  Farrington,  1  Swanst. 
106,  .36  Eng.  Reprint,  317,  1  Wils. 
Ch.  88,  18  Rev.  Rep.  32,  37  Eng.  Re- 
print, 40;  Greorge  v.  Milbanks,  9 
Ves.   Jr.   190,  7  Rev.   Rep.   157,  32 


350 


Fbaudui^nt  Convbtanobs. 


grantee  against  claims  of  subsequeat  creditors.^  In  other  juris- 
dictions the  contrary  rule  is  maintained.^  A  voluntary  convey- 
ance,  made  by  a  debtor  with  the  actual  intent  to  defraud  subse- 
quent creditors^  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  them."    To  render  a 


£ng.  Reprint^  676;  Townshend  t. 
Windham,  2  Ves.  1,  28  Eng.  Reprint, 
1 ;  Meggison  v.  Forster,  7  Jur.  646,  12 
L.  J.  Ch.  416,  2  Y.  &  GoU.  336,  21 
Eng.  Ch.  336. 

8iibseqii«0D.t  pvvohMer. — A  vol- 
untary o(>ny€S7anoe,  nude  in  good 
faith  by  a  person  not  indebted  at 
the  time,  to  his  child,  is  valid  as 
against  a  subsequent  purchaser  from 
the  grantor  with  notice  of  the  oonvey- 
ance.  Verplank  v.  Sterry;,  12  Johns. 
(N.  Y.)  636,  7  Am.  Dec.  348. 

20.  N,  F.—King  v.  Wiloox,  11 
Paige,  689;  Partridge  v.  Stokes,  66 
Barb.  686. 

AZa.— Heintz  v.  White,  106  Ala. 
670,  17  So.  186;  Huggins  v.  P«rrine, 
30  Ahi.  396,  68  Am.  Dec.  131. 

Ark. — ^Aiay  v.  State  Nat.  Bank,  69 
Ark.  614,  28  S.  W.  431 ;  Toney  v.  Mc- 
Gehee,  38  Ark.  419;  Dodd  v.  Mc- 
Craw,  8  Ark.  83,  46  Am.  Dec.  301. 

Conn. — State  v.  Martin,  77  Conn. 
142,  68  Atl.  746;  Barbour  v.  Ck>nnec- 
ticut  Mut.  L.  Ins.  Co.,  61  Oonn.  240, 
23  Atl.  164. 

Me, — ^Marston  v.  Marston,  64  Hfe. 
476. 

Mass, — ^Brooks  v.  Dalrymplo,  12 
Allen,  102;  Thacher  v.  Phinney,  7 
Allen,  146. 

Tenn. — Nelson  v.  Vanden,  99  Tenn. 
224,  42  S.  W.  6. 

21.  17.  fif.— Schreyer  v.  Piatt,  134 
U.  S.  406,  10  Sup.  Ct.  679,  33  L.  Ed. 
966. 

Misa, — Simmons  v.  Ingram,  60 
Hiss.  886,  overruling  Vertner  v. 
Humphreys,  22  Miss.  130;  Henry  v. 
Fullerton,  21  Miss.  631. 


Jfo.— Welch  V.  Mann,  193  Mo.  304, 
92  S.  W.  98;  Davidson  v.  Dockeiy» 
179  Mo.  687,  78  S.  W.  624. 

^«6.— estate  Bank  v.  Frey.  3  Neb. 
(Unofif.)  83,  91  N.  W.  239. 

Pa.— Kimble  v.  Smith,  96  Pa.  St. 
69;  Harlan  v.  Maglaughlin,  90  Pa. 
St  293. 

Fa. — New  South  Bldg.,  etc.,  Assoc. 
V.  Reed,  96  Va.  346,  31  S.  £.  614,  70 
Am.  St.  Rep.  868. 

The  Texas  statute  provides  that  a 
voluntary  conv^ranoe  shall  not  be 
void  as  to  subsequent  creditors  merely 
because  it  is  void  as  to  prior  credi- 
tors. Lewis  V.  Simon,  72  Tex.  470,. 
10  S.  W.  664. 

22.  U.  £r.>-Horbach  v.  Hill,  112  U. 
S.  144,  6  Sup.  Gt.  81,  28  L.  Ed.  670; 
Burdick  v.  Gill,  7  Fed.  668,  2  Me- 
Crary,  486;  United  States  v.  Stiner, 
28  Fed.  Cas.  No.  16,404,  8  BUtchf. 
644. 

ArA:.— May  v.  State  Nat.  Bank,  69 
Ark.  614,  28  S.  W.  431. 

Cal, — ^Bush,  etc.,  Oo.  v.  Helbing» 
134  Cal.  676,  66  Pac.  967. 

Z).  C. — ^Holladay  v.  Towers,  20  D. 
C.  677;  Walter  v.  Lane,  1  MacAr- 
thur,  276. 

Ind. — Petree  v.  Brotherton,  133 
Ind.  692,  32  N.  E.  300;  Barrow  v. 
Barrow,  108  Ind.  346,  9  N.  E.  371. 

Kan, — ^Mcpherson  v.  Kingsbaker, 
22  Kan.  646. 

Me, — ^Laughton  v.  Harden,  68  Me. 
208;  Marston  ▼.  Marston,  64  Me. 
476;  Pullen  v.  Hutchinson,  26  Me. 
249. 

ir({.--Matthai  v.  Heather,  67  Md. 
483. 


CoNBIDBBATIOlf. 


351 


voluntary  conveyance  fraudulent  as  to  subsequent  creditors^  it 
must  appear  tliat  it  was  made  by  the  grantor  in  contemplation 
of  future  indebtedness,  with  the  intent  to  contract  and  continue 
future  indebtedness,  and  to  avoid  payment  of  his  debts  by  placing 
his  property  beyond  the  reach  of  those  who  should  give  him  such 
future  credit,"  or  that  there  was  intentional  fraud  contemplated 
by  the  grantor  in  the  creation  of  future  debts.'*  A  voluntary 
conveyance^  made  when  the  grantor  is  about  to  enter  upon  a  new 
and  hazardous  business,  or  with  a  view  to  incurring  liabilities, 
which  are  contracted  soon  after  the  conveyance,  is  presumed  to 


Jfm.— Wyime  ▼.  Mawm,  72  Miaa. 
424,  18  So.  422;  SummerB  ▼.  Roos, 
42  Miss.  749,  2  Am.  Rep.  663;  Bullitt 
▼.  Taylor,  34  Miss.  70S,  69  Am.  Dec 
412. 

Mo. — ^Boatmen's  Sav.  Bank  v.  Over- 
all, 90  Mo.  410,  3  S.  W.  64,  afTg  16 
Mo.  App.  610. 

2^.  H.— Carlisle  v.  Ridi,  8  N.  H. 
44. 

O^iio.— Evans  ▼.  Lewis,  30  Ohio  St. 
11;  BowluB  V.  Shanabarger,  10  Ohio 
Cir.  Ct.  137,  10  Ohio  Civ.  Dec.  167. 

Pa.— Haal^s  Appeal,  100  Pa.  Si. 
59;  Murphy  v.  Solens,  6  Pa.  Ck>.  Ot 
264;  Andress  v.  Lewis,  1  Pa.  Co.  Ct. 
293,  17  Wkly.  N.  Cas.  270;  Connellys 
Estate,  13  Phila.  393. 

Tenn.— ChurchiH  v.  WeUs,  47 
Tenn.  364. 

Tern. — ^Rives  v.  Stephens  (Civ.  Appw 
1894),  28  S.  W.  707. 

W.  Fa.— Billingsley  v.  aelland,  41 
W.  Va.  234,  23  S.  E.  812.  See  also 
eases  cited  in  note  10,  supra, 

23.  y.  y.— Savage  v.  Murphy,  34 
N.  Y.  508,  90  Am.  Dec.  733,  affg  8 
Bosw.  75. 

U,  fif.— Smith  V.  Vodges,  92  U.  & 
183,  23  L.  Ed.  481. 

A  <a.— Echols  v.  Orr,  106  Ala.  287, 

17  So.  677. 


Colo.— Amett  v.  Coffey,  1  Colo. 
App.  34,  27  Pac.  614. 

/».— Morrill  V.  Kilner,  113  Dl. 
318;  Bridgford  v.  Riddell,  65  lU. 
261;  Bay  v.  Co<^,  31  111.  336;  Cra- 
mer V.  Bode,  24  111.  App.  219. 

Kan, — ^First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Jaffray, 
41  Kan.  604;  21  Pac.  242. 
•  JTy.— Haskell  v.  Bakewell,  49  Ky .  206. 

ifo.— Kinealy  v.  Macklin,  89  Mo. 
433,  14  S.  W.  507;  Fisher  v.  Lewis, 
69  Mo.  629. 

N.  J.— City  Nat  Bank  v.  Hamll- 
ton,  34  N.  J.  £q.  168;  Carpenter  v. 
Carpenter,  25  N.  J.  Eq.  194;  Cramer 
V.  Reford,  17  N.  J.  Eq.  367,  90  Am. 
Dec.  694 ;  Bedanan  v.  Montgomery,  14 
N.  J.  Eq.  106,  80  Am.  Dec  229. 

Pa.— Buckley  v.  Duff,  114  Pa.  St. 
696,  8  Atl.  188;  Haak's  Appeal,  100 
Pa.  St.  69;  Bonalou^  v.  Bonslough, 
68  Pa.  St.  495;  Waterson  v.  Wilson, 
1  Grant  Cas.  74;  In  re  Greenfield's 
Estate,  14  Pa.  St.  489. 

8,  C. — Cohen  v.  Meyer,  19  S.  C. 
190;  Kidd  v.  Mitchell,  1  Nott  &  M. 
334,  9  Am.  Dec.  702. 

Tenn. — Churchill  v.  Wells,  47  Teon. 
364;  Hickman  v.  Perrin,  46  Tenn. 
135;  Russell  v.  Stinson,  4  Tenn.  1. 

1^4.  Walker  v.  Lane,  1  MaeArthur 
(D.  C),  276. 


352 


EbAUDULENT   CoUfVEYAKGEB. 


be  made  with  intent  to  defraud  subsequent  creditors  and  may  be 
set  aside  by  them  as  fraudulent.^  But  unless  a  voluntary  cour 
veyance  was  made  with  the  intent  to  defraud  such  subsequent 
creditors ;  or  there  was  secrecy  in  the  transaction  by  which  knowl- 
edge of  it  was  withheld  from  such  creditors  who  dealt  with  the 
grantor  upon  the  faith  of  his  owning  the  property  transferred; 
or  the  transfer  was  made  with  the  view  of  entering  into  soma 
new  and  hazardous  business,  the  risk  of  which  the  grantor  in- 
tended should  be  cast  upon  the  parties  having  dealings  with  him 
in  a  new  business,  such  a  conveyance  is  good  as  against  subse- 
quent creditors.**  A  voluntary  conveyance  is  valid  as  against 
subsequent  creditors,  when  it  does  not  appear,  as  one  step  in  a 
fraudulent  design,  that  it  was  made  with  the  deliberate  purpose 
to  put  the  property  beyond  the  reach  of  debts  which  the  grantor 
then  intended  to  contract;"  or  where  although  it  was  the  intent 
of  the  grantor  to  enter  into  a  hazardous  business,  he  did  not  in 
fact  enter  kuto  such  business.**  A  mere  expectation  of  future 
indebtedness,  or  an  intent  to  contract  debts,  not  coupled  with  a 
purpose  to  convey  the  property  to  keep  it  from  the  reach  of 
creditors,  it  not  within,  the  letter  or  spirit  of  the  statutes,  and 
will  not  avoid  the  conveyance  as  against  subsequent  creditors.** 

§  37.  Insufficiency  or  inadequacy  of  consideration. — Were 
inadequacy  of  price  or  consideration  unattended  by  other  circum- 


25.  N,  T.— Case  v.  Phelps,  39  N. 
Y.  164;  CJarr  ▼.  Breeee,  18  Hun,  134. 

U,  fif.— Ridgeway  ▼.  Underwood,  20 
..  Fed.  CaB.  No.  11,815,  4  Wash.  129. 

Ifo.— Fisher  ▼.  Lewis,  69  Mo.  629. 
:     Neh.--Ajen  v.   Wolcott,   62  Neb. 
806,  87  N.  W.  906. 

-  y.  J.— Hildebrand  v.  WiUig,  64  N. 
J.  Eq.  249,  53  Atl.  1035;  City  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Hamilton,  34  N.  J.  Eq. 
158. 

Pa.— Buckley  v.  Duflf,  114  Pa.  St. 
956,  8  Atl.  188;  Monroe  v.  Smith,  79 
Pa.  St.  459;  Appeal  of  Woolston,  51 
Pa.  St.  462;  Mullen  v.  Wilson,  44  Pa. 


Si.  413,  84  Am.  Dee.  461 ;  Snyder  t. 
Christ,  39  Pa.  St.  499;  Thomson  ▼. 
Dougherty,  12  Serg.  &  R.  448. 

26.  Neuberger  v.  Klein,  134  N.  Y. 
35,  31  N.  E.  268,  affg  53  Hun,  60,  5 
N.  Y.  Supp.  94;  Todd  v.  Nelson,  109 
N.  Y.  316,  16  N.  E.  360;  Sehreyer  ▼. 
Seott,  134  U.  S.  411. 

27.  Hilton  ▼.  Morse,  75  Me.  258. 

28.  Williams  ▼.  Davis,  69  Pa.  St. 
21. 

29.  Snyder  ▼.  Christ,  39  Pa.  St. 
499;  In  re  Connell's  Estate,  13  PhiU. 
(Pa.)  393,  fraud  intended  against 
the  creditor  must  be  shown. 


CoNBIDEBATIOK. 


353 


stances  casting  suspicion  upon  the  fairness  of  the  transaction, 
is  not  sufficient  proof  to  establish  fraud  in  a  sale  or  convey ance, 
as  against  creditors.*^  A  debtor  may  sell  his  property  to  pay 
his  debts  for  such  consideration  as  he  may  agree  to  accept^  and, 
if  there  is  nothing  illegal  in  the  transaction  and  no  fraudulent 
purpose  involved  it  will  be  good  as  against  creditora"  Inade- 
quacy of  consideration  is  a  badge  and  evidence  of  fraud.**  Where 


30.  y.  r.^Jaeger  v.  Kelley,  52  N. 
Y.  274;  O'Connor  v.  Dooen,  60  App. 
Div.  610,  64  N.  Y.  Supp.  206;  An- 
dreae  y.  Bourke,  33  App.  Div.  638,  63 
N.  Y.  Supp.  886;  Hardt  v.  Deutsch, 
22  MiBC.  Rep.  66,  48  N.  Y.  Supp.  564. 

U.  8. — ^Kempner  v.  Churchill,  8 
Wall.  362,  19  L.  Ed.  461. 

Conn, — Washhand  v.  Washband,  27 
Conn.  424. 

Z>.  C. — Clark  v.  Krause,  2  Maekey, 
569. 

6^--Sharp  v.  HickB,  94  Ga.  624,  21 
S.  E.  208.  , 

/II. — ^Klemm  ▼.  Bishop,  66  III.  App. 
613. 

Iowa, — ^Rusie  ▼.  JamMon,  62  Iowa, 
52,  17  N.  W.  103. 

JTy.— Tklbott  V.  Hooaer,  12  Bush, 
408. 

La. — Montgomery  y.  Wilaon^  31  La. 
Ann.  196;  Keller  y.  Blanchard,  19  La. 
Ann.  63. 

Ifd.— Feigley  y.  Feigley,  7  Md.  537, 
61  Am.  Dec.  376.  But  see  Worthing- 
ton  y.  Bullitt,  6  Md.  172. 

IftM.— Foeter  y.  Pugh,  20  Miss. 
416. 

Mo, — ^Lionberger  y.  Baker,  88  Mo. 
447;  Nelson  Distilling  Co.  y.  Vosa- 
m^er,  26  Mo.  App.  678;  Demuth  y. 
Boehler,  11  Mo.  App.  688. 

Mont. — ^Mueller  y.  Benkes  (1904), 
77  Pac  612;  Maloy  y.  Berkin,  11 
Mont.  138,  27  Pac.  442. 

N.  J.^Hudnit  y.  Tomson,  26  N.  J. 
Kq.  239. 

23 


N.  C, — ^Waehonia  Loan,  etc.,  Co.  y. 
Forbes,  120  N.  C.  366,  27  S.  E.  43. 

Ohio, — Jones  y.  Leeds,  10  Ohio,  S. 
&  C.  PI.  Dec.  173,  7  Ohio  N.  P.  480. 

Or, — ^Brown  y.  Case,  41  Oreg.  221, 
69  Pac.  43. 

Pa.— <^k>ddard  y.  Weil,  165  Pa.  St. 
419,  30  Atl.  1000,  36  Wkly.  N.  Cas. 
98;  Shatz  y.  Kirker,  1  Pa.  Gas.  332, 
2  Atl.  93. 

8.  C, — ^McPherson  y.  MePherson,  21 
S.  C.  261. 

Tew, — Moore  y.  Lowery,  27  Tex- 
541. 

Fa.— Sutherlin  y.  March,  76  Va. 
223;  Moore  y.  Triplett  (1886),  23  8. 
E.  69. 

W,  Fa.— Bieme  y.  Ray,  37  W.  Va. 
671,  16  S.  E.  804. 

Bng, — ^Blount  y.  Blount,  3  Atk. 
481,  26  Eng.  Reprint,  1076. 

ai.  Lowery  y.  Howard,  36  Ind. 
170,  9  Am.  Rep.  676;  Frank  y.  Pteters, 
9  Ind.  343;  Hubbs  y.  Bancroft,  4  Ind. 
388;  Rosenheimer  y.  Krenn,  126  Wis. 
617,  106  N.  W.  20.  Compare  Far- 
mers' Bank  of  Virginia  v.  Douglass, 
11  Sm.  &M.  (Miss.)  469. 

32.  N,  r.— First  Nat.  Bank  of 
Amsterdam  y.  Miller,  163  N.  Y.  164, 
67  N.  E.  308;  Maasch  y.  Grauer,  68 
App.  Diy.  660,  69  N.  Y.  Supp.  187; 
Andreae  y.  Bourke,  33  App.  Diy.  638, 
53  N.  Y.  Supp.  885;  Delaware  y.  En- 
sign, 21  Barb.  86;  Stoddard  y.  But- 
ler, 20  Wend.  607;  Osgord  y.  Frank- 
lin, 2  Johns.  Ch.  1,  7  Am.  Dee.  513. 


354 


Fraudulent  Convetancbs. 


a  sale  is  made  for  oonsidesrablj  less  than  the  actual  value^  it  is 
such  evidence  of  fraud  as  requires  explanation^  and  may^  when 
coupled  with  other  facts^  be  controlling  proof  of  dishonesty  and 
fraud."  Great  inadequacy  of  price  is  a  strong  badge  and  evi- 
dence of  fraud,  and  in  many  cases  will  render  a  sale  void;  but 
it  may  be  explained.^     Gross  inadequacy  of  price  is  a  strong 


U.  fif.— Hudgini  ▼.  Kemp,  20  How. ' 
46,  15  L.  Ed.  853;  BartleB  v.  Gibeon, 
17  Fed.  293;  Wright  ▼.  Stanard,  30 
Fed.  Gas.  No.  18,094,  2  Brock.  311. 
But  mere  inadequacy  in  honest 
family  settlements  is  not  a  badge  of 
fraud.  Voorhees  ▼.  Blanton,  83  Fed. 
234. 

Ala. — ^McCaskle  ▼.  Amarine,  12 
Ala.  17;  fieamans  ▼.  White,  8  Ala. 
656. 

CoIo.--«Ro8e  V.  Dunklee,  12  Colo. 
App.  403,  56  Pac.  342. 

Fla, — ^Barrow  v.  Bailey,  5  Fla.  9. 

Oa. — Hawkinsville  Bank,  etc.,  Co. 
V.  Walker,  09  Ga.  242,  25  S.  E.  205. 

/R— Mathews  v.  Reinhardt,  149 
111.  635,  37  N.  E.  85,  affg  43  HI. 
App,  109;  McArtee  ▼.  Engart,  13  111. 
242. 

Ind. — ^Hubbs  v.  Bancroft,  4  Ind. 
388.  Compare  Milbum  v.  Phillips, 
136  Ind.  680,  34  N.  E.  983,  36  N.  E. 
360;  Cagney  t.  Cuson,  77  Ind.  494. 

Iowa. — ^Urdangen  v.  Doner,  122 
Iowa,  533,  98  N.  W.  317;  Cathcart  v. 
Grieve,  104  Iowa,  330,  73  N.  W.  835, 
inadequacy  is  not  material  where  a 
deed  was  intended  as  a  mortgage. 

Ky. — Easum  v.  Pirtle,  81  Ky.  561, 
5  Ky.  L.  Rep.  572;  Diamond  Coal  Co. 
V.  Carter  Dry  Goods  Co.,  20  Ky.  L. 
Bep.  1444,  49  S.  W.  438. 

ird.~^ity  of  Baltimore  v.  Wil- 
liams, 6  Md.  235. 

Ma88. — Schaefer  Brewing  Co.  t. 
Moebs,  187  Mass.  571,  73  N.  E.  858. 

ifo.^State  T.  MaaoD,  112  Mo.  8749 


20  S.  W.  629,  34  Am.  Rep.  390;  Rob- 
inson V.  Robards,  15  Mo.  459. 

N.  i?.— Claflin  ▼.  Batehelder,  65  K. 
H.  29,  17  Atl.  1060. 

N.  J. — Gnitchel  v.  JeweU  (Ch. 
1888),  41  Atl.  227. 

Or.— Brown  ▼.  Case,  41  Or.  221,  69 
Pac.  43. 

Pa.— Rhoads  v.  Blatt,  84  Pa.  St. 
31. 

Tea. — ^Moore  ▼.  Loweiy,  27  Tex. 
541 ;  Mills  ▼.  Waller,  Dall.  Dig.  416^ 
the  inadequacy  must  be  shown  to 
have  existed  at  the  time  of  the  sale. 

Fa.— Tebbs  ▼.  Lee,  76  Va.  744. 

W«.— Fisher  ▼.  Shelver,  53  Wis. 
498,  10  N.  W.  681. 

Can. — Carradice  v.  Currie,  19 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  108;  Crawford  v. 
Meldrum,  3  Grant  Err.  &  App.  (U. 
C.)   101. 

33.  Dodson  v.  Cooper,  50  Kan. 
680,  32  Pac.  370. 

34.  U.  fif.— Byers  v.  Surget,  60  U. 
8.  303,  15  L.  Ed.  670,  affg  Surget  ▼. 
Byers,  24  Fed.  Cas.  No.  13,629, 
Hempst.  715. 

Ala.- Fairfield  Packing  Co.  v.  Ken- 
tucky Jeans  Clothing  Co.,  110  Ala. 
536,  20  So.  63;  Gordon  ▼.  Tweedy,  71 
Ala.  202;  Bozman  v.  Draugluui,  3 
Stew.  243. 

Ar*r.— Galbreath  ▼.  Cook,  30  Ark. 
417;  Beebe  v.  DeBaun,  8  Ark.  510. 

Flo.— Gainer  ▼.  Russ,  20  Fla.  157. 

/«.— Jewett  V.  Cook,  81  111.  260; 
Monell  ▼.  Schenick,  54  111.  269;  Bay 
▼.  Cook,  31  lU.  386. 


CONSIDEBATION. 


355 


though  not  conclusive  badge  of  fraud;  but,  coupled  with  other 
circumstancee  tending  to  prove  frauds  it  becomes  conclusive."^ 
Where  the  disparity  between  the  true  value  of  the  property 
transferred  and  the  price  paid  or  agred  to  be  paid  was  so  great 
as  to  strike  the  understanding  with  the  conviction  of  unfair 
dealing  or  fraud,  or  that  the  transaction  waa  not  bona  fide^  or 


Ky. — Cincinnati  Tobacco  Ware- 
house Co.  V.  Matthews,  24  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  2446,  74  S.  W.  242;  Carter  ▼. 
Richardson,  22  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1204,  SO 
a  W.  897. 

La.— Shultz  ▼.  Morgan,  27  La. 
Ann.  616. 

Me, — Jones  ▼.  Light,  86  Me.  437, 
30  Atl.  71 ;  Wyman  ▼.  Brown,  60  Me. 
139. 

iftcA.— Shay  v.  Wheeler,  69  Mich. 
264,  37  N.  W.  210. 

Minn, — Carson  v.  Hawley,  28 
Minn.  204,  84  K.  W.  746. 

lf«««.— Foster  ▼.  Pugh,  20  Miss. 
416;  Taylor  ▼.  Eckford,  19  Miss.  21. 

Ifo.— State  ▼.  Mason,  112  Mo.  374, 
20  S.  W.  629,  34  Am.  St.  Rep.  390; 
Ames  V.  Gilmore,  69  Mo.  637. 

2^.  0.— Shober  ▼.  Wheeler,  113  N. 
C.  370,  18  S.  E.  328. 

Pa. — ^Haniet  ▼.  Dundass,  4  Pa.  St. 
178;  Bossart's  Estate,  11  Pa.  Super. 
Ct.  100,  the  transaction  is  not  fraud- 
ulent if  the  parties  mistakenly  be- 
lieve the  price  is  a  fair  one.' 

Tew. — ^Bryant  v.  Kelton,  1  Tex. 
416. 

W.  Fo.— Livesay  v.  Beard,  22  W- 
Va.  686. 

Can. — ^Toronto  Bank  ▼.  Irwin,  28 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  397. 

J^fi^.— Strong  ▼.  Strong,  18  Beav* 
408,  62  Eng.  Reprint,  161. 

35.  Boyd  ▼.  Ellis,  11  Iowa,  97. 

36.  V.  7.— Morris  ▼.  Morris,  71 
Hun,  46,  24  K.  Y.  Supp.  679. 


17.  B. — Jenkins  v.  Einstein,  13  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  7,266,  3  Biss.  128. 

Ala, — Gramble  ▼.  C.  Aultman,  126 
Ala.  372,  28  So.  30;  Prosser  v.  Hen- 
derson, 11  Ala.  484;  Borland  t. 
Mayo,  8  Ala.  104;  Pope  ▼.  Brandon, 
2  Stew.  401,  20  Am.  Dec  49. 

/mf. — Oagney  v,  Cuson,  77'  Ind.  494. 

jficA.— Noble  ▼.  Laidlaw  (1904), 
100  N.  W.  179,  11  Det.  L.  N.  199. 

if  o.— Wells  ▼.  Thomas,  10  Mo.  237. 

3^0^.— Knight  V.  Darby,  55  Neb. 
16,  76  N.  W.  48. 

Ohio. — Citizens'  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Wehrle,  18  Ohio  Cir.  Ct  636,  9  Ohio 
Cir.  Dec.  330;  Hamill  y.  Wright,  8 
Ohio  S.  &  C.  PI.  Dec.  467,  6  Ohio  N. 
P.  9. 

R,  /.—Sweet's  Petition,  20  R.  I. 
667,  40  Atl.  602. 

Tenn. — ^McTeer  ▼.  Huntsman  (Ch. 
App.  1898),  49  S.  W.  57;  Merriman 
▼.  Lacefleld,  4  Heisk.  209. 

Tew. — ^Numsen  v.  Ellis,  3  Tex.  App. 
Civ.  Cas.,  §  134,  but  the  sale  will  not 
be  invalidated  where  the  purchase 
money  has  been  applied  to  the  pay- 
ment of  the  debts. 

y«.— Church  V.  Chapin,  36  Vt.  223. 

W,  Ya. — Wood  ▼.  Harmison,  41  \\\ 
Va.  376,  23  S.  E.  660;  Douglass  v. 
Douglass,  41  W.  Va.  13,  23  S.  E.  671, 
but  the  fact  that  a  larger  price  could 
have  been  obtained,  had  the  debtor 
sold  on  credit  instead  of  for  cash,  is 
no  ground  for  setting  the  oonveyaaoe 
aside. 


356 


FsAUDULElfT   CoWETAffCKS. 


80  great  as  to  shock  the  oonscieiioe  or  a  correct  mindy'  it  will  be 
sufficient  to  avoid  the  sale. 

f  38.  Transactioiis  between  husband  and  wife;  natnie» 
adequacy,  and  sufficiency  of  consideration.^ — ^A  conveyance  or 
transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  to  his  wife  in  o(»isideration  of 
natural  love  and  effection,"  or  for  a  merely  n<Mmnal  amount,'*  or 
for  a  consideration  which  is  fictitious  and  fraudulent,^  is  not 
made  on  a  valuable  conBideration  sufficient  to  sustain  it  as  against 
creditors.  The  general  rules  as  to  the  nature,  adequacy,  and 
sufficiency  of  consideration  for  conveyances  or  transfers  of  prop- 
erty made  by  a  debtor,  as  discussed  in  the  preceding  seotions  of 
this  duqpter,  apply  to  such  transactions,  between  husband  and 
wife  in  determining  the  validity  or  invalidity  thereof,  as  against 
creditors.^^    An  agreement  by  a  wife  to  go  from  a  ^tj  to  the 


Wis. — Crocker  v.  Himtzicker,  113 
Wii.  181,  88  N.  W.  232. 

Wyo. — Stirling  ▼.  Wagner,  4  Wyo- 
5,  31  Pac.  1032,  32  Pac.  1128. 

37.  McGhee  v.  Wells,  67  S.  C.  280, 
36  8.  E.  629,  76  Am.  St.  Rep.  567; 
Flook  V.  Armentrout's  Adm'r,  100 
Va.  638,  42  S.  E.  686;  Harbottle  v. 
Rawlins,  11  Hawaii,  106. 

38.  HouBton  v.  Blackman,  66  Ala. 
669,  41  Am.  Rep.  766;  Baker  y.  Hol- 
lis,  84  Iowa,  682,  61  N.  W.  78;  Sliaw 
▼.  Manchester,  84  Iowa,  246,  60  N. 
W.  986;  Baldwin  ▼.  Tuttle,  23  Iowa, 
66;  MilhoUand  ▼.  Tiffany,  64  Md. 
466. 

39.  Houston  ▼.  Blackman,  supra; 
Shaw  ▼.  Manchester,  supra. 

40.  Smith  v.  Perrine,  40  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  606,  1  N.  Y.  Supp.  496;  Hodges 
V.  Hickey,  67  Miss.  715,  7  So.  404; 
Robert  ▼.  Hodges,  16  N.  J.  Eq.  299. 

41.  y.  y. — Sandman  v.  Seaman, 
84  Hun,  337,  32  K.  Y.  Supp.  338. 

Comi.— Paulk  v.  Cooke,  39  Conn. 
666. 


/«.— Pox  ▼.  Pteck,  161  ni.  226,  37 
K.  E.  873,  alfg  46  lU.  App.  239. 

Ind. — Gable  v.  Columbus  Cigar 
Co.,  140  Ind.  663,  38  N.  E.  474; 
Seoor  V.  Souder,  96  Ind.  96;  Schaef- 
fer  v.  Fithian,  17  Ind.  463. 

Iowa. — Cox  v.  Collis,  109  Iowa, 
270,  80  N.  W.  343;  Davis  v.  Garrison, 
86  Iowa,  447,  62  N.  W.  369. 

Ky. — Ray  v.  Life  Assoc,  of 
America,  6  Ky.  L.  Rep.  614. 

La.— Preslar  &  Tier  t.  Walker,  116 
La.  661,  40  So.  1033. 

Mich. — Otis  ▼.  Sprague,  118  Mich. 
61,  76  N.  W.  164. 

Mi88. — ^Wynne  v.  Mason,  72  Miss. 
424,  18  So.  422. 

N.  J. — Faitoute  v.  Sayer  (Ch. 
1894),  28  Atl.  711;  Aber  v.  Brant» 
36  N.  J.  Eq.  116. 

2^.  (7.— Walton  v.  Parish,  96  N.  C.  269. 

Ohio. — German  Nat.  Bank  t.  Gun- 
ther,  3  Ohio  S.  k  C.  PI.  Dec.  686,  3 
Ohio  N.  P.  311, 

Pa. — Duffy  V.  Mechanics',  etc.,  Ins. 
Co.,  8  Watts  &  S.  413. 


Consideration. 


857 


cooDitiy,  and  live  with  her  husband,  is  not  a  sufficient  oonsidera- 
tion  to  support  a  oonvejyanoe  from  her  husband,  as  against  credi- 
tors.^ Maintenance  for  the  wife  and  children  of  the  marriage 
is  a  sufficient  ocmsideration  to  support  a  settlement  by  a  husband 
from  whmn  the  wife  has  separated  because  of  his  having  lived 
in  a  state  of  adultery.^  A  oonveyanoe  bj  a  husband  to  his  wife 
of  all  his  property,  without  consideration  other  than  the  pur- 
ported release  of  the  obligation  of  the  husband  thereafter  to 
support  his  wife,  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  ^sting  at  the 
time  of  the  making  thereof/^  A  conveyance  by  a  land  owner  to 
his  wife,  in  order  to  prevait  him  from  dissipating  the  property 
and  making  bad  sales,  is  subject  to  any  judgments  which  may  be 
reooveired  against  him  on  existing  demands.^  A  wife.  Las  a 
ri^t  to  purxdkase  at  a  foreclosure  sale  against  her  husband,  and 
a  deed  to  her  in  pursuance  of  such  sale  and  a  deed  from  her  to 
a  third  person  are  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  in  the  absence 
of  actual  fraud.^  A  husband  when  free  from  debt,  may  convey 
property  to  his  wife  without  consideration,  if  the  conveyance  is 
not  in  contemplation  of  the  contracting  of  future  indebtedness 
and  to  place  the  same  beyond  the  reach  of  his  future  creditors.^ 


§  89.  Release  of  wife's  dower  right — ^The  relinquishment  by 
a  wife  of  her  inchoate  interest  or  right  of  dower  in  the  lands 


42.  Radley  v.  Riker,  80  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  363,  30  N.  Y.  Supp.  130. 

43.  Hobbs  V.  Hull,  1  Cox  Ch.  446, 
20  Eng.  Reprint,  1242. 

44.  Auburgh  ▼.  Lydston,  117  111. 
App.  674,  appeal  dismissed,  216  111. 
210,  74  N.  E.  796. 

45.  Tanner  ▼.  Eckbardt,  107  App. 
Div.  (N.Y.)  79,94  N.  Y.  Supp.  1013. 

46.  Hesseltine  v.  Hodges,  188  Mass. 
247,  74  N.  E.  319. 

47.  Clark  v.  Else  (S.  D.  1906), 
110  N.  W.  88. 

Whfloa  wuKwvjmm^m  mot  Tolom- 
tary^ — ^Where  a  wife,  baving  com- 
menoed    divorce   proceedings    against 


ber  busband  and  obtained  an  injunc- 
tion against  bi»  disposing  of  bis  prop- 
erty, enters  into  a  contract  witb  bim 
wbereby  be  agrees  to  cease  drinking 
and  to  properly  support  ber,  and  to 
execute  to  ber  a  deed  to  be  placed  in 
escrow,  to  be  delivered  to  ber  on  bis 
breaking  bis  agreement^  sbe  agree- 
ing to  continue  ber  suit  and  live  witb 
bim,  sucb  deed  is  not  voluntary  to 
any  extent,  as  regards  tbe  question  of 
fraudulent  conveyance,  tbougb  tbe 
property  conveyed  was  wortb  more 
tban  sbe  could  bave  recovered  as  ali- 
mony. Pipi»n  v.  Tapia  (Ala.  1906), 
42  So.  646. 


358 


Fbaudulsnt  Cokveyakcss. 


of  her  husbaixd  is  a  valuable  and  sufficient  consideration  to  sup* 
port  a  oonvejance  or  transfer  bj  him^  or  procured  bj  him,  to 
her,  of  a  part  of  his  lands  or  other  property,  or  for  a  settlement 
on  her  from  the  husband's  property,  and  such  a  oonveyance  ia 
valid  as  against  creditors  of  the  husband.^    AUli/«igh.  the  value 


48.  V.  fif.— Mattoon  ▼.  McOrew,  112 
U.  S.  713,  5  Sup.  Ct  369,  28  L.  Ed. 
824;  HitK  T.  National  Metropolitan 
Bank,  111  U.  S.  722,  4  Sup.  Gt.  613, 
28  L.  Ed.  677. 

ii  la.— Keel  ▼.  Larkin,  83  Ala.  142, 
3  So.  296,  3  Am.  St  Rep.  702;  Gor- 
don ▼.  Tweedy,  71  Ala.  202. 

ArA;.— Davis  v.  Yonge  (1905),  85 
8.  W.  90;  Hershy  v.  Latham,  46  Ark. 
642. 

Fla, — Pettit  v.  Coachman  (1906), 
41  So.  401;  Nalle  ▼.  Lively,  15  Fla. 
130. 

/n.— Payne  v.  Miller,  103  111.  442. 
But  see  McCaffrey  v.  Dustin,  43  111. 
App.  34. 

/fuf.— Baldwin  ▼.  Heil,  156  Ind. 
682,  68  N.  E.  200;  Citizens'  Bank  v. 
Bolen,  121  Ind.  301,  23  N.  E.  146; 
Sedgwick  v.  Tucker,  90  Ind.  271; 
Brown  v.  Rawlings,  72  Ind.  505;  Hoi* 
lowell  V.  Simonson,  21  Ind.  398. 

JTy.— Potter  v.  Skiles,  114  Ky.  132^ 
70  S.  W.  301,  71  S.  W.  627,  24  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  910,  1457;  Harrow  v.  John- 
son, 60  Ky.  678;  Marshall  ▼.  Hutchi- 
son, 44  Ky.  208;  Darling  t.  Haanks 
(1897),  42  S.  W.  1130;  Jones  ▼.  Ba- 
sham  (1891),  16  S.  W.  88;  Green 
▼.  Green,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep.  250. 

if  d.— Unger  ▼.  Price,  9  Md.  652. 

Jf<M«. — ^Mathews  ▼.  Thompson,  186 
Mass.  14,  71  N.  E.  93,  104  Am.  St. 
Rep.  650,  66  L.  R.  A.  421 ;  Holmes  v. 
Winchester,  133  Mass.  140;  BuUard 
V.  Briggs,  24  Mass.  533,  19  Am.  Deo. 
292. 

Mich,  —  German-American    Semi- 


nary v.  Saeoger,  66  Mich.  249,  33  N. 
W.  301. 

?re6.— Adler,  eta.  Clothing  Co.  v. 
Hellman,  55  Neb.  266,  75  N.  W.  877. 

y.  H.— Rundlett  v.  Ladd,  59  N.  H. 
15. 

Ohio, — Singree  v.  Welch,  32  Ohio 
SL  320;  WiUiams  ▼.  WilUams,  2 
Ohio  D«c.  467,  3  West.  L.  Month. 
157. 

Fo.--Runkle  ▼.  Runkle,  98  Va.  663, 
37  S.  E.  279;  Ficklin's  AdmV  ▼. 
Rixey,  89  Va.  832,  17  S.  E.  325,  37 
Am.  St.  Rep.  891;  Strayer  t.  Long, 
86  Va.  567,  10  S.  E.  674;  Keagy  v. 
Trout,  85  Va.  390,  7  S.  E.  329;  Bur- 
well's  Ex'r  v.  Lumsden,  24  Gratt.  443, 
18  Am.  Rep.  648;  Taylor  v.  Moore,  2 
Rand.  563;  Lewis  y.  Caperton,  8 
Gratt.  148;  Harrison  ▼.  Carroll,  11 
Leigh,  476;  Harvey  v.  Alexander,  1 
Rand.  219,  10  Am.  Dec.  519;  Blanton 
V.  Taylor,  Gilm.  209;  Quarlee  v.  Lacy, 
4  Munf.  251. 

W.  Va, — Glascock  v.  Brandon,  35 
W.  Va.  84,  12  S.  E.  1102. 

^n^.— Mills  T.  Ed^n,  10  Mod.  487. 
Compare  In  re  Oonlan,  L.  R.  29,  Ir. 
199. 

Can, — ^Morris  v.  Martin,  19  Ont. 
564;  Beavis  v.  Maguire,  7  Ont.  App. 
704;  Forrest  v.  Laycock,  18  Grant  Ch. 
(U.  C.)  611;  Patulo  v.  Boyington,  4 
U.  C.  C.  P.  125. 

Contra.— Sharff  v.  Hayes  (1906), 
110  N.  W.  24;  Haynes  v.  Kline,  64 
Iowa,  308,  20  N.  W.  453;  Le  Saulnier 
V.  Krueger,  85  Wis.  214,  54  N.  W. 
774. 


CONSIDESATIOK* 


859 


of  the  wife's  right  of  dower  is  much  less  than,  the  value  of 
land  conveyed  or  property  transferred  to  her,  yet  such  convey- 
ance or  transfer  is  not  absolutely  void,  but  in  a  court  of  law 
must  be  adjudged  valid.^  In  equity,  however,  such  a  convey- 
ance or  transfer  will  be  considered  as  valid  only  to  the  extent  of 
the  value  of  the  dower  right  released  by  the  wife.^  Where  the 
value  of  the  dower  right  relinquished  is  too  inadequate  a  con- 
sideration to  support  the  conveyance  as  against  creditors,  it  will 
render  the  conveyance  constructivdy  fraudulent  and  invalid  as 
to  creditors.^^  The  foregoing  rules  are  applicable  both  where 
the  release  of  dower  was  made  at  the  same  time  as  the  con- 
veyance or  transfer,"  and  where  it  was  made  in  pursuance  of  an 
agreement  preceding  the  conveyance  or  transfer."  A  convey- 
amoe  in  consideration  of  a  previous  assignment  of  the  right  of 
dower  would  be  voluntary  as  to  existing  creditors.^  A  mere 
joinder  by  the  wife  for  the  purpose  of  conveying  her  inchoate 
interest,  in  a  fraudulent  conveyance  of  real  property  by  the 
husband,  through  a  trustee,  to  himself  and  his  wife,  to  hold  by 
entireties,  does  not  form  such  a  consideration  as  will  support  the 
conveyance."  Nor  is  the  joinder  of  the  grantor's  wife  in  the 
conveyance  of  property  encumbered  to  its  full  value  a  sufficient 


40.  Smith  ▼.  Seiberling,  35  Fed. 
677;  Wright  v.  Stanard,  30  Fed.  Cas. 
No.  18,094,  2  Brock.  311;  Hoot  ▼.  Sor- 
rell,  11  Ala.  386;  Peaslee  v.  Collier, 
83  Mich.  649,  47  N.  W.  353. 

50.  y.  y. — Smart  v.  Haring,  14 
Hmi,  276,  modifying  62  How.  Pr.  605. 

U.  flf.— Wright  V.  Stanard,  mpra. 

jTy.— .Ward  v.  Crotty,  61  Ky.  69; 
Darling  v.  Hanks  (1897).  42  S.  W. 
1130. 

yc^.— Adler,  etc.,  Clothing  Co.  v. 
Hellman,  supra. 

Vd.-— Johnston  ▼.  GiU,  27  Gratt. 
687;  Davis  ▼.  Davis,  25  Gratt.  587; 
Taylor  v.  Moore,  2  Rand.  563;  Blan- 
ton  ▼.  Taylor,  Gilm.  209. 


51.  Gordon  v.  Tweedy,  71  Ala.  202; 
Garvey  ▼.  Moore,  12  Ky.  L,  Rep.  732, 
15  8.  W.  136;  Clinton  Bank  v.  Cum- 
mins, 38  N.  J.  Eq.  191;  Black  v. 
Fountain,  23  Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)   174. 

52.  Gordon  v.  Tweedy,  71  Ala.  202. 

53.  United  States  Bank  ▼.  Lee,  13 
Pet.  (U.  S.)  107,  10  L.  Ed.  81,  afg 
2  Fed.  Cas.  No.  922,  5  Cranch  C.  C. 
319;  Gordon  v.  Tweedy,  71  Ala.  202; 
Payne  v.  Hutcheson,  32  Gratt.  (Va.) 
812.  Compare  Harrison  ▼.  CarroU,  11 
Leigh  (Va.),476. 

54.  Woodson  v.  Pool,  19  Mo.  340. 

55.  Phillips  ▼.  Kennedy,  139  Ind. 
419,  38  N.  £.  410,  39  N.  E.  147. 


360 


Fbaudu^snt  Cohvsyanoes. 


consideratioii,  as  againjst  creditors,  for  the  oonveyance  of  otber 
property  by  him  to  her.** 

§  40.  Release  of  homestead  rights — ^The  retinquishment  of 
homestead  rights  by  a.  wife,  like  the  release  of  dower  rights^  is 
a  sufficient  eansideration  to  support  a  oonveyance  or  transfer 
of  property  to  her  by  her  husband,  or  a  reasonable  settlement 
upon  her  out  of  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  the  property,  as  against 
the  husband's  creditors,  althou^  the  husband  was  in  failing 
circumstances  or  insolvent." 

§  41.  Property  vested  in  husband  by  marriage. — ^The  fact 
that  by  virtue  of  the  marriage  a  husband  acquired  property  of 
his  wife  is  not  sufficient  to  support,  as  against  creditors,  a  con- 
veyance to  her  or  for  her  use  made  by  the  husband.  Such  a 
conveyance  must  be  considered  as  a  voluntary  conveyance."*    But 


56.  Ck>mmonwealth  Title  Ins.,  etc., 
Co.  V.  Brown,  166  Pa.  St.  477,  31  Atl. 
205,  36  Wkly.  N.  Gas.  190. 

57.  ArA:.— Davis  v.  Yonge  (lOOS), 
86  S.  W.  90. 

iZI.— Payne  ▼.  Miller,  103  111.  442, 
such  a  coDTeyance  will  be  sustained 
to  the  extent  of  the  consideration. 

Mich. — Sullivan  v.  Parkinson,  12S 
Mich.  627,  87  N.  W.  639,  where  the 
wife's  claim  for  money  invested  in  the 
property  and  her  homestead  interest 
exceeded  the  value  of  the  property 
conveyed  to  her,  no  part  of  the  prop- 
erty was  subject  to  the  husband's 
debts. 

if o.— Novelty  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Pratt,  21 
Mo.  App.  171,  the  conv^ance  is  good 
in  law  for  the  whole  property  con- 
veyed, and  in  equity  to  the  value  of 
the  wife's  interest  in  the  homestead. 

Tea. — ^Bumham  v.  McMichael,  6 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  496,  26  S.  W.  887. 

Wm.— Allen  v.  Perry,  66  Wis.  178, 
14  N.  W.  3. 


Tlitt  UM  of  pgoceedg  of  » 
caco  oa  a  Homeotead  staadlaiir  te 
tlio  wife's  Bame»  in  paying  lor  a 
machine  purchased  by  the  husband, 
constitutes  a  sufficient  consideration, 
as  against  creditors,  for  a  bill  of  sale 
executed  by  the  husband  transferring 
the  machine  to  his  wife.  Farmers' 
Trust  Co.  V.  Linn,  103  Iowa,  169,  72 
N.  W.  496. 

58.  U.  flf.— Lee  v.  HoHister,  5  Fed. 
762. 

Ala. — Jaffrey  v.  McGougfa,  83  Ala. 
202,  3  So.  594.  But  see  Bradford  v. 
Goldsborough,  15  Ala.  31 1,  holding  that 
a  deed  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  of  alt 
his  interest  in  her  distributive  share 
of  the  estate  of  her  deceased  father 
may  be  enforced  in  equity  against  an 
execution  creditor  of  the  husband, 
who  brought  suit  to  subject  the  prop- 
erty to  the  satisfaction  of  his  debt 
after  the  wife  had  taken  possession. 

/tt.— Bridgford  v.  Riddell,  55  Uh 
261. 


CoHSmEBATIOir. 


861 


such  a  oonvejazioe  is  valid  if  the  husband  was  solvent  at  the 
tame^  and  it  was  not  made  with  intent  to  defraud  subsequent 
creditors.*^ 

§  42.  Effect  of  failure  to  reduce  property  to  possession. — 
Where  the  husband  does  not  assert  his  marital  rights  to  the  per> 
sonal  property  of  his  wife  by  reducLng  it  into  his  possessiou, 
but  borrows  money  from  her  agreeing  to  repay  it^  the  agreement 
is  for  a  good  consideration,  and  inposes  an  equitable  obligation 
upon  the  husband  to  repay  it^  Lands  purchased  by  the  wife 
or  for  her  use  with  funds  belonging  to  her  which  have  not  been 
reduced  to  possession  by  the  husband,  cannot  be  subjected  to 
the  payment  of  the  husband's  debts  so  as  to  defeat  the  equity  of 
the  wife.** 


JTy. — ^Andereon  ▼.  Anderson,  80  Ky. 
SaS;  Hurdt  ▼.  Oourtenay,  61  Ey.  130; 
L^M  V.  Bank  of  Kentucky,  28  Ky. 
645;  Darling  v.  Hanks,  21  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  145,  147,  42  S.  W.  1130,  51  S.  W. 
792;  Tapp  v.  Todd,  16  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
382,  28  S.  W.  147;  Davis  Ex'ra  y. 
Justice,  14  Ky.  L.  Rep.  741,  21  S. 
W.  529;  Garv^  ▼.  Moore,  12  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  732,  15  S.  W.  136. 

if<i..Wylie  V.  Basil,  4  Md.  Oh. 
327. 

M<us. — ^Pierce  ▼.  Thompson,  34 
Mass.  391. 

Mo, — ^Vandeyenter  y.  Goes,  116  Mo. 
App.  316,  91  S.  W.  958;  Columbia 
Say.  Bank  y.  Winn,  132  Mo.  80,  33 
8.  W.  457;  Hart  y.  Leete,  104  Mo. 
315,  15  S.  W.  976;  Benne  y.  Sdmecko, 
100  Mo.  250,  13  S.  W.  80. 

N.  ./.—Taylor  y.  Dawes  (Ch.  1888), 
13  Atl.  593;  Smock  y.  Jones  (Ch. 
1887),  U  Atl.  497. 

y.  C— Allen  V.  Allen,  41  N.  C.  293. 

Pa, — Gicker's  Adm'rs  y.  Martin,  50 
Pa.  St.  138. 

8,  C— Suber  y.  Chandler,  36  S.  C. 
344,  15  8.  £.  426;  Irby  y.  Henzy,  16 


8.  C.  617;  Sibley  y.  Tutt^  1  MeMnL 
£q.  320. 

Tenn.— Joiner  y.  Franklin,  80  Tenn. 
420. 

1^«.— Warren  y.  Ranney,  50  Vt.  653. 

Fa.— Rixey^a  Adm'r  y.  Detrick,  85 
Va.  42,  6  8.  £.  615;  Poindexter  y. 
Jeffries,  15  Grat  363;  Harvey  y.  Alex- 
ander, 1  Rand.  219,  10  Am.  Dec.  519. 

W.  Fo.— Clarke  y.  King,  34  W.  Va. 
631,  12  8.  E.  775. 

Wt*.— Howe  y.  Colby,  19  Wis.  583. 

Contra. — Comer  y.  Allen,  72  Ga.  1; 
Sperry  y.  Haslam,  57  Ga.  412,  prop- 
erty of  the  wife,  reduced  to  his  pos- 
session for  his  wife,  and  as  her  es- 
tate, affords  a  good  and  sufficient  con- 
sideration for  a  conveyance  by  the 
husband  to  the  wife. 

59.  Dick  y.  Hamilton,  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
3,890,  Deady,  322. 

60.  Jaycox  v.  Caldwell,  61  N.  Y. 
395,  aff'g  37  How.  Pr.  (N.  Y.)  240; 
Woodworth  y.  Sweet,  51  N.  Y.  8, 
alfg  44  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  268;  Drury  y. 
Briscoe,  42  Md.  154. 

61.  Bank  of  United  States  y. 
Brown,  Riley  Eq.  (8.  C.)  131,  2  Hill 


316 


Fraudulent  Conveyangbs. 


veyance  is  greatly  in  exoees  of  the  debt  secured  a  presumptioii  of 
fraud  may  be  raised,^*  but  fraud  will  not  be  indisputably  presumed 
from  the  mere  taking  of  excessive  security,  althou^  it  is  a  cir- 
cumstamce  to  be  considered  by  the  court  or  jury  in  determining 
whether  a  transaction  waa  in  fraud  of  creditors.^ 

§  20.  Amount  secured  in  excess  of  actual  debt — ^The  mere 
fact  that  a  montgage  or  other  conveyance,  given  by  an  insolvent 


Warner  ▼.  littleflddy  S9  Mich.  329» 
50  N,  W.  721. 

if iM.— Taylor  v.  Walkina  (1893), 
13  So.  811. 

^e&.— Kilpatrick-Koeli  Dry  Goods 
Go.  y.  Strauss,  46  Neb.  793,  64  N.  W.  .. 
223;  Grand  Island  Banking  Co.  v. ' 
OosteUo,  45  Neb.  119,  63  N.  W.  376; 
Sherwin  ▼.  Gaghagen,  39  N^.  238,  57 
N.  W.  1005;  Grimes  ▼.  Farrington,  19 
Neb.  44,  26  N.  W.  618. 

y.  C7.— Burgin  v.  Burgin,  23  N.  G. 
453. 

Tenn, — ^Roane  v.  Bank  of  Nashville, 
38  Tenn.  626. 

TTi^.-— Cunningham  y.  Eagan,  102 
Wis.  272,78N.W.402;  Menzesheimer 
y.  Kennedy,  75  Wis.  411,  44  N.  W. 
608. 

Stipvlatloa  to  dolaj  f ovooloo- 
vre4 — A  mortgage  of  nearly  all  the 
debtor's  estate  to  a  principal  credi- 
tor, fifty  per  cent,  more  in  yalue  than 
the  debt  secured,  with  a  stipulation 
for  two  years'  delay  in  its  foreclosure, 
is  yoid.  Reynolds  v.  Welch,  47  Ala. 
200. 

Mortffase  Held  to  be  aa  laralid 
asaisiuiient. — A  finding  that  a  mort- 
gage of  land  was  as  invalid  assign- 
ment by  the  mortgagor  of  his  prop- 
erty to  one  creditor  to  the  exclusion 
of  other  creditors,  will  not  be  dis- 
turbed where  it  appears  that  the 
mortgage  covered  all  the  mortgagor's 


land,  and,  with  other  mortgages  on 
the  land,  amounted  to  over  seven- 
eighths  of  its  value,  and  there  was 
no  other  property  out  of  which  credi- 
tors could  collect  their  claims. 
MitcheU  v.  Mitchell,  42  S.  C.  475,  20 
S.  E.  405. 

SoToiml  ohattel  mortn^aKoa  eze« 
entod  daraltaaieovaly  to  soeiire 
d«1ita»  the  aggregate  of  which  is  not 
unreasonably  less  than  the  property 
mortgaged,  are  not  void  because  no 
one  of  such  debts  is  in  itself  suffi- 
cient to  justify  so  great  a  security. 
Jones  y.  Loree,  37  Neb.  816,  56  N.  W. 
390. 

19.  Williams  v.  Stowell,  5  Kan. 
App.  880,  48  Pac.  894;  Crosby  v. 
Huston,  1  Tex.  203.  Compare  Blade 
Hills  Mercantile  Co.  v.  Gardner,  5 
S.  D.  246,  68  N.  W.  557. 

20.  Tackaberry  v.  Gihnore,  67 
Neb.  450,  78  N.  W.  32;  Dayt<m  Spice 
Mills  V.  Sloan,  49  Neb.  622,  68  N.  W. 
1040;  Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Go. 
V.  Strauss,  45  Neb.  793,  64  N.  W.  223 
{diatingiUahMtff  Thompson  v.  Richard- 
son Drug  C6.,  33  Neb.  714,  60  N.  W. 
948,  29  Am.  St.  Rep.  505;  Brown  v. 
W<H-k,  30  Neb.  800,  47  N.  W.  192; 
Morse  v.  Steinrod,  29  Neb.  108,  46 
N.  W.  922);  Grand  IsUnd  Banking 
Co.  V.  Costello,  45  Neb.  119,  63  N.  W. 
376;  Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Co. 
v.  Bremers,  44  Neb.  868,  62  N.  W. 


CONSIDSIKATION. 


363 


huflband  to  the  wife,  as  against  his  creditore.  A  oontract  be- 
tween a  husband  and  wife^  by  which  the  latter  is  to  be  paid 
for  her  services  rendered  in  the  household,  is  void  as  against 
creditors  of  the  husband;  and,  if  his  estate  is  transferred  lo  the 
wife  in  a  payment  of  such  services  and  in  performance  of 
such  a  contract)  the  transfer  is  void  as  against  the 
creditors  of  the  husband,  and  the  property  so  trans- 
ferred or  purchased  with  the  avails  of  such  a  oonAract  may  be 
reached  by  his  creditors." 


*§  44.  Consideratioii  paid  by  hustMnd  for  piopeily  purchased 
in  name  of  wife. — ^Where  a  husband  purchases  property  with  his 
own  funds,  taking  the  title  in  the  name  of  his  wife,  the  con- 
veyance or  transfer  to  her  is  without  oonsidenution,  and  is  fraud- 
ulent and  void  as  against  his  existing  creditors.**    Where  prop- 


68.  Conger  ▼.  Corey,  39  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)  241,  67  N.  Y.  Supp.  236, 
eiiing  In  re  CaUister,  153  N.  Y.  294, 
4T  N.  £.  268;  Porter  v.  Dunn,  131  N. 
Y.  314,  30  N.  E.  122;  Blaeehinska  v. 
Howard  Mission,  130  N.  Y.  497,  29  N. 
£.  755;  Coleman  ▼.  Burr,  93  N.  Y. 
17;  Talcott  v.  Thomas,  21  N.  Y. 
Supp.  1064. 

69.  y.  Y, — Stokes  y.  Ammerman, 
56  Hun,  606,  7  N.  Y.  Supp.  733; 
Tappan  ▼.  Butler,  20  N.  Y.  Super.  Ct 
480,  but  it  is  not  necessarily  fraudu- 
lent and  void  as  to  subsequent  cred- 
itors. 

Ala.— Stouts  V.  Huger,  107  Ala. 
248,  18  So.  126;  Peeirey  v.  Cabaniss, 
70  Ala.  263. 

ArAs.— Stiz  ▼.  Chaytor,  56  Ark. 
116,  17  S.  W.  707;  Baldwin  t.  John- 
ston, 8  Ark.  260. 

Colo.— Phillips  ▼.  Rhodes,  2  Colo. 
App.  70,  29  Pae.  1011. 

CoiMi.— Trumbull  v.  Hewitt,  62 
Conn.  448,  26  AtL  350. 


O.  C— Thyson  v.  Fol^,  1  App.  D. 
C.  182. 

Flo.— Reel  ▼.  Livingston,  34  Fla. 
377,  16  So.  284,  43  Am.  St.  Rep.  202 ; 
Alston  ▼.  Rowles,  13  Fla.  117;  Craig 
▼.  Ghunble,  6  Fla.  430. 

711.— Bowman  ▼.  Ash,  143  111.  649, 
32  N.  E.  486,  alfg  36  111.  App.  115; 
New  ▼.  Oldfield,  110  lU.  138;  Pratt 
V.  Myers,  56  111.  23.  Compare  Can- 
non ▼.  Castleman,  164  Ind.  343,  73 
N.  £.  689. 

/fMi.— Laird  ▼.  Davidson,  124  Ind. 
412,  25  N.  E.  7;  Wilds  v.  Bogan,  56 
Ind.  331;  Mendenhall  v.  Treadway, 
44  Ind.  131. 

/oifxi. — ^Peckenhaugh  v.  Cook,  61 
Iowa,  477,  16  N.  W.  630;  Gear  v. 
Schrei,  57  Iowa,  666,  11  N.  W.  625. 
See  also  Van  Hoesen  v.  Teachout,  88 
Iowa,  468,  65  N.  W.  486. 

Ky, — ^Dickinson  v.  Johnson,  110 
Ky.  236,  61  S.  W.  267,  22  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
1686,  96  Am.  St.  Rep.  434,  54  L.  R. 
A.  566;  Adams  v.  CRear,  80  Ky.  129, 


364 


F&AUDULElfT   CONVBYANOBS* 


erty  is  alleged  to  have  been  porohased  by  a  wife,  or  a  convejauce 
of  property  is  made  to  her  during  coverture,  the  presumption 
is  that  her  husband  furnished  the  means  to  pay  for  it,  and  the 
burden  is  on  her  to  prove  affirmatively  that  it  was  paid  for  with 
her  own  separate  estate.^  Property  oonveyed  to  a  wife,  but 
paid  for  by  the  husbaxid,  is  prima  facie  a  gift  by  him  to  her; 
and,  where  it  does  not  appear  that  he  was  indebted  at  the  time, 
or  intended  to  defraud  his  subsequent  creditors,  the  proceeds  of 
such  gift  belong  to  her,  free  from  daims  by  ham  or  his  credi- 
tors.^ In  the  absence  of  fraud,  such  a  conveyance  is  valid 
against  all  but  the  existing  creditors  of  the  husband.^  But 
where  an  actual  fraudulent  intent  is  showm^  the  conveyance  is 


3  Ky.  L.  Rep.  (H)5;  Hearn  v.  Lander, 
74  Ky.  669;  Fink  ▼.  Nolan,  21  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  1305,  54  S.  W.  948;  Straus 
V.  Head,  14  Ky.  L.  Rep.  740,  21  S.  W. 
537;  McBride  v.  McLaughUn,  5  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  174;  Yatea  v.  Fiaher,  4  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  721.  Compare  MoChord  ▼. 
Noe,  8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  344,  1  S.  W.  644. 

ife.— Berry  v.  Berry,  84  Me.  541, 
24  Atl.  957;  Call  v.  Perkins,  65  Me. 
439. 

Mia8. — ^Bemheim  y.  Beer,  56  Misa. 
149. 

Mo. — Oabome  ▼.  Evans,  185  Mo. 
509,  84  S.  W.  867;  MiUer  v.  Leeper, 
120  Mo.  466,  26  S.  W.  378 ;  Rinefaart 
▼.  Long,  95  Mo.  396,  8  S.  W.  559; 
Reppy  V.  Reppy,  46  Mo.  571. 

N.  0.— Markham  ▼.  Whitehurst, 
109  N.  C.  307,  13  a  £.  904,  disttn- 
guiaking  Oabome  v.  Wilkea,  108  N. 
C.  651,  13  S.  £.  285. 

Ofcio.— Parish  ▼.  Rhodes,  Wright, 
339. 

Pa.r— See  Bncher  t.  Ream,  68  Pa. 
St.  421. 

S.  D.— Watt  ▼.  Morrow  (1905), 
103  N.  W.  45. 

Va  — Qiurles  v.  Lacy,  4  Mvnf.  251. 


W.  Va.— Rose  v.  Brown,  11  W.  Va. 
122. 

TTm.— Hoxie  ▼.  Prioe,  31  Wis.  82. 
See  also  Purchase  of  property  in 
name  of  third  person — Husband  and 
wife,  chap.  II,  S  6,  supra, 

70.  Bowman  y.  Ash,  143  IlL  649, 
32  N.  E.  486,  affg  36  lU.  App.  115; 
Burt  V.  Timmons,  29  W.  Va.  441,  2 
S.  £.  780^  6  Am.  St.  Rep.  664;  Me- 
Masters  v.  Edgar,  22  W.  Va.  673. 
See  also  Purchase  of  property  in 
name  of  third  person — ^Husband  and 
wife,  chap.  II,  S  6,  supra. 

In  Mliuaasotay  the  statute  im- 
putes a  fraudulent  intent  to  a  debtor 
who  pays  the  purchase  money  of 
lands  granted  to  his  wife,  and,  tiiere- 
fore,  a  finding  that  there  is  no  evi- 
dence of  fraudulent  intent,  and  that 
the  debtor  was  solvent,  cannot  defeat 
the  creditor's  right  to  subject  the 
land  to  his  debt.  Wolford  ▼.  Fam- 
ham,  42  Minn.  159,  46  N.  W.  295; 
Mathews  v.  Torinus,  22  Minn.  132. 

71.  Pitkin  ▼.  Mott,  56  Mo.  App. 
401. 

78.  Irriaa  t.  Qnt/fer,  27  W.  Va. 
206. 


CONSIDEBATION. 


365 


fraudulent  and  void  as  to  subsequeat^  as  wsUl  as  existmgy  credi- 
tx>rs  of  the  husband.^ 


%  45.  Assumption  of  husband's  debts. — ^The  assumption  by 
a  wife  of  the  debts  of  her  husbamd  is  a  valid  oonsiderationy  as 
against  his  creditors,  for  a  convejanjoe  by  him  to  her,  at  least 
to  the  amount  of  the  debts  assumed.^^  But  a  oonveyanoe  from 
a  husband  of  all  his  property  to  his  wif e,  in  consideration  of  her 
assuming  certain  preferred  debts,  the  property  being  worth  more 
than  the  debts  secured,  is  void  as  against  unsecured  creditors.^^ 
Aind  the  fact  that  the  wife,  on  receipt  of  a  deed  from  her  hus- 
band, promises  to  pay  all  his  debts,  does  not  preclude  a  finding 
that  it  is  in  fraud  of  his  creditors,  since  it  may  have  been 
intended  to  give  her  an  advantage  as  to  the  time  of  payment.^ 


§  46.  Payment  of  pre-existing  debts  in  general. — ^Where  a 
husband,  in.  good  faith,  transfers  property  to  his  wife,  in  pay- 
ment of,  or  as  security  for,  a  bona  fide  debt  due  by  him  to  her, 
the  consideration  is  a  valuable  one  and  the  transfer  or  convey- 
ance is  valid,  as  against  other  existing  creditors.''^    The  rule  is 


73.  Marshall  v.  Whitney,  43  Fed. 
343;  Holmes  ▼.  Harshberger,  31  W. 
Va.  516,  7  8.  E.  452;  Core  ▼.  Cun- 
ningham, 27  W.  Va.  206. 

74.  Ind, — ^Huffman  v.  Copeland,  86 
Ind.  224. 

Neb. — Farmers'  k  Merchants'  Irr. 
Ck>.  V.  Brumbaugh  (1906),  110  N.  W. 
663. 

8.  C. — Ferguson  y.  Harrison,  41  8. 
C.  340,  10  8.  E.  619;  McAfee  v.  Mc- 
Afee, 28  8.  C.  188,  6  8.  E.  480,  al- 
though the  note  given  by  the  wife  in 
satisfaction  of  the  husband's  debts  is 
not  paid,  and  part  of  the  debts  were 
barred  by  limitation  when  she  gave 
the  note. 

Fa.— Barton  y.  Brent,  87  Va.  3SS 
15  Va.  li.  J.  267.  13  8.  E.  29. 


W.  VOw— Wood  V.  Harmlson,  41  W. 
Va.  376,  23  8.  E.  660. 

8ee  also  Assumption  of  liability, 
chap.  VIII,  S  14,  supra, 

75.  Park  v.  Battey,  80  Ga.  863,  6 
8.  E.  492. 

76.  Threlkel  y.  8oott  (Gal.  1893), 
34  Pac.  851. 

77.  N.  y.— Lassiter  y.  Hoes,  11 
Misc.  Rep.  1,  31  N.  T.  8upp.  850; 
Ocean  Nat.  Bank  y.  Hodges,  9  Hun, 
161;  Schaffner  y.  Renter,  37  Barb. 
44;  Flannigan  y.  Barter,  12  St.  Rep. 
(N.  Y.)  554.  Compare  Blumenthal 
y.  Michel,  33  App.  Div.  636,  54  N.  Y. 
Supp.  81. 

U.  H.— Metsker  y.  Bonebrake,  108 
U.  8.  66,  2  8up.  Ct.  351,  27  L.  Ed. 
654;  Bean  y.  Patterson,  12  Fed.  739, 


366 


Fbaudulbnt  Convsyahoes. 


the  same  if,  with  fraud  on  the  part  of  the  husbajid,  but  with- 
out knowledge  thereof  or  partioipation  therein  by  the  wife,  he 


4  McCrary,  179;  Lee  ▼.  HoUister,  6 
Fed.  752. 

Ala.—Fint  Nat  Bank  v.  Smith,  93 
Ala.  97,  9  So.  548;  Lyne  ▼.  Wann,  72 
Ala.  43;  Warren  ▼.  Jones,  68  Ala. 
449;  Barclay  ▼.  Plant,  60  Ala.  509. 
Compare  Robinson  ▼•  Moseley,  93  Ala. 
70,  9  So.  372. 

Cat. — Greenwalt  v.  Mueller,  126 
Cal.  636,  59  Pac  137. 

Dek — J<Nie8  y.  Cannon,  8  Houst.  1, 
31  Atl.  521;  Hood  v.  Jones,  5  Del. 
Ch.  77. 

Gfa.— Booher  v.  Worrill,  67  Ga.  235. 

iU.— Thomas  v.  Mueller,  106  III. 
36;  Dean  v.  Plane,  96  111.  App.  428, 
Qlfd  195  m.  495,  63  N.  £.  274. 

Ind. — Jones  ▼.  Snyder,  117  Ind. 
229,  20  N.  £.  140;  Cornell  v.  Gibson, 
114  Ind.  144,  16  N.  E.  130,  5  Am.  St. 
Rep.  605;  Schreeder  v.  Werry  (App. 
1905),  73  N.  £.  832.  Compare  Bunch 
V.  Hart,  138  Ind.  1,  37  N.  E.  537. 

Iowa. — ^Meyer  v.  Houck,  85  Iowa, 
319,  52  N.  W.  235;  Neighbor  v.  Hob- 
litoel,  84  Iowa,  598,  51  N.  W.  53; 
Peck  V.  Lincoln,  76  Iowa,  424,  41  N. 
W.  61;  McFarland  v.  Elliott,  71 
Iowa,  756,  36  N.  W.  418;  Jones  v. 
Brandt,  59  Iowa,  332,  10  N.  W.  854, 
13  N.  W.  310. 

Ky. — ^Noel  ▼.  Gaines,  23  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  2093,  66  S.  W.  625.  Compare 
Clay  v.  Trimble,  13  Ky.  L.  Rep.  61, 
16  S.  W.  83. 

IficA.—- Ullman  v.  Thomas,  126 
Mich.  61,  85  N.  W.  246;  Parker  v. 
BarkenowitE,  116  Mich.  58,  74  N.  W. 
290;  Strauss  v.  Parshall,  91  Mich. 
475,  51  N.  W.  1117;  Meigs  v.  Dibble, 
73  Mich.  101,  40  N.  W.  935;  Hyde  y. 
Powell,  47  Mich.  166,  10  N.  W.  181 ; 


First  Nat  Bank  ▼.  McAllister,  46 
Mich.  397,  9  N.  W.  446. 

Miss, — Graham  v.  Morgan,  S3 
Miss.  601,  35  So.  874;  Rogers  ▼. 
Mayer,  59  Miss.  524. 

ifo.— Hart  V.  Leete,  104  Mb.  315, 
15  S.  W.  976. 

N.  J. — ^Knickerbocker  Trust  Co.  ▼. 
Carhart  (Ch.  1906),  64  Ail.  766; 
Berla  v.  Meisel  (Ch.  1902),  52  AU. 
899;  Dresser  v.  Zabriskie  (Ch.  1898), 

39  Atl.  1066;  Rue  v.  Scott  {Ch. 
1891),  2L  AU.  1048;  Cole  v.  Lee,  46 
N.  J.  £q.  779,  18  Atl.  854;  Hager- 
man  v.  Buchanan,  45  N.  J.  Eq.  292, 
17  Atl.  946,  14  Am.  St.  Rep.  732; 
Jones  ▼.  Davenport,  44  N.  J.  Eq.  88, 
13  Atl.  652. 

Ohio. — ^Hitesman     v.     Donnel,     40 
Ohio  St.  287. 
Pa.— Rine  v.  Hall,  187  Pa.  St.  264, 

40  Atl.  1088;  Grabill  ▼.  Moyer,  46 
Pa.  St.  530. 

8.  C. — ^McElwee  ▼.  ILennedy,  56  S. 
C.  164,  34  S.  E.  86;  McGee  v.  Wells, 
52  S.  C.  472,  30  S.  E.  602;  Gerald  v. 
Gerald,  28  S.  C.  442,  6  S.  £.  290. 

Tenn. — ^Rosenbaum  ▼.  Davis  (Ch. 
App.  1898),  48  S.  W.  706;  Blackmore 
V.  Crutcher  (Ch.  App.  1898),  46  S. 
W.  310;  Sanford  v.  Allen  (Ch.  App. 
1897),  42  8.  W.  183. 

Tea. — Cooper  v.  Sawyer,  31  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  620,  73  S.  W.  992;  Bonds 
▼.  Eagle,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co.  (Civ.  App. 
1898),  44  S.  W.  539. 

Fi.— Drew  v.  Corliss,  65  Vt.  650, 
27  Atl.  613. 

Fa. — ^Robinson  ▼.  Bass,  100  Va. 
190,  40  S.  E.  660;  McConville  ▼. 
National  Valley  Bank,  98  Va.  9,  94 
8.  E.  891;  Spenoe  v.  Repass  (1897), 


CoHSIDEBATION. 


367] 


makes  such  transfer.^  A  husband  indebted  to  his  wife  is  en- 
titled to  prefer  her  to  his  other  creditors.^  Claims  against  the 
husband  purchased  by  the  wife  with  her  separate  estate  are 
sufficient  cooisideration  for  a  conveyance  from  him  to  her.^  An 
advancement  of  money  by  a  wife  to  her  husband,  without  any 
agreement  for  repayment,  or  money  given  by  a  wife  to  her 
husband  to  be  employed  in  his  business,  or  money  of  the  wife 
which  the  husband  has  collected  and  used  with  her  knowledge 
and  consent,  and  without  any  promise  of  repayment,  or  money 
advanced  under  any  other  circumstances  not  sufficient  in  law  to 
create  the  relation  of  debtor  and  creditor  between  them,  is  not 
a  valid  consideration  for  a  subsequent  conveyance  or  transfer 
of  property  by  the  husband  to  the  wife,  as  against  his  creditors.'^ 


27  S.  E.  688.  Compare  Perry  v. 
Ruby,  81  Va.  317. 

Compare  Stockslager  v.  Mechanics' 
Loan,  etc,  Inst.,  87  Md.  232,  39  Atl. 
742;  Hoagland  v.  Wilson,  15  Neb. 
320,  18  N.  W.  78. 

If  tlie  eoasideratloa  be  inade- 
^iiate  for  a  conveyance  of  property 
by  a  husband  to  his  wife  in  payment 
of  an  indebtedness  to  her,  it  will  be 
construed  as  a  mortgage.  (Serman 
Nat  Bank  ▼.  Gunther,  3  Ohio  8.  &  C. 
PI.  Dec.  686,  3  Ohio  N.  P.  311. 

78.  Riley  v.  Vaughn,  116  Mo.  169, 
22  8.  W.  707,  38  Am.  8t.  Rep.  586; 
Williams  v.  Harris,  4  8.  D.  22,  64  N. 
W.  926,  46  Am.  St  Rep.  753.  See 
also  Effect  of  want  of  knowledge  or 
notice  of  grantee,  chap.  XIII,  S  4, 
eupra. 

79.  Schreder  v.  Werry  (Ind.  App. 
1905),  73  N.  E.  832. 

80.  Strong  v.  Skinner,  4  Barb.  (N. 
Y. ) ,  546 ;  Wingerd  t. Fallon,05  Pa.  184. 

The  f aet  tbat  a  wife  dastroyed 
a  mote  (iTem  Her  by  Her  f  atHer, 
which  had  been  given  him  by  her  hus- 
band for  money  advanced  Mm  by  her 


father  to  pay  for  certain  lands,  does 
not  create  such  an  indebtedness  from 
her  husband  to  her  as  to  justify  his 
conveying  the  land  to  her,  as  against 
his  creditors.  Meredith  v.  Citizens' 
^iat.  Bank,  92  Ind.  343. 

81.  N.  F.— Clift  V.  Moses,  76  Hun, 
517,  27  N.  Y.  Supp.  728. 

Ark. — Waters  v.  Merrit  Pants  Co. 
(1905),  88  S.  W.  879;  Reeves  v. 
Slade,  71  Ark.  611,  77  S.  W.  54. 

/«.— Victor  V.  Swisky,  200  111.  257, 
65  N.  E.  625,  reffg  87  HI.  App.  583 ; 
Coale  V.  Moline  Plow  Co.,  134  111. 
350,  25  N.  E.  1016. 

Ind. — ^Hoffman  v.  Henderson,  145 
Ind.  613,  44  N.  E.  629. 

lotoa. — ^Woods  V.  Allen,  109  Iowa, 
484,  80  N.  W.  540;  Dunham  v.  Bent- 
ley,  103  Iowa,  136,  72  N.  W.  437; 
Iseminger  v.  Criswell,  98  Iowa,  382, 
67  N.  W.  289;  Carbiener  v.  Mont- 
gomery, 97  Iowa,  659,  66  N.  W.  900; 
Tyler  v.  Budd,  96  Iowa,  29,  64  N.  W. 
679;  Peninsular  Stove  Co.  v.  Roark, 
94  Iowa,  560,  63  N.  W.  326;  Porter 
V.  Goble,  88  Iowa,  565,  55  N.  W.  530; 
Hanson  v.  Mauley,  72  Iowa,  48,  33  N. 


368 


FbAUDUUSNT  CoVYXTAirCES. 


Tliou^  the  law  mil  not  imply  the  relation  of  debtor  and  creditor 
between  husband  and  wife  from  the  mere  transfer  of  her  oeparate 
property  to  him,  such  relation  may  nevertheless  be  established^ 
as  sgainst  other  creditors  of  the  husband,  by  evidaioe  that  such 
was  the  int^itiooi  of  the  parties  at  the  time  of  the  transfer.** 
To  establish  the  relation  of  debtor  and  creditor  between  husband 
and  wife  an  express  promise  to  repay  need  not  be  shown,  bat 
where  the  wife  advances  money  to  her  husband  and  the  drcum* 
stances  attending  the  receipt  of  the  money  are  such  as  to  show 
that  they  dealt  with  each  other  as  debtor  and  creditor,  a  convey- 
ance or  traoisf  er  to  her  to  pay  or  secure  the  indebtedness  is  valid 
as  against  creditors."    The  general  rules  as  to  a  pre-existing  debt 


W.  357;  Moore  v.  Orm&n,  66  lows, 
39,  8  N.  W.  699. 

Kan. — ^Bailey  v.  Kansas  Mfg.  Co., 
32  Kan.  73,  3  Pac.  766. 

ifci.— DiggB  V.  McCuUough,  69  Md. 
692,  16  Ail.  453 ;  Grover,  etc.,  Sewing 
Mach.  Co.  V.  Raddiff,  63  Md.  496; 
Kuhn  Y.  Stansfield,  28  Md.  210,  92 
Am.  Deo.  681. 

IficA.— Sykea  v.  City  Sav.  Bank, 
115  Mich.  321,  73  N.  W.  369,  69  Am. 
St.  Rep.  562. 

2^e5.— Wake  v.  Griflftn,  9  Neb.  47,  2 
N.  W.  461. 

N,  J.— Cole  V.  Lee,  45  N.  J.  Eq. 
779,  18  Atl.  864;  Luers  v.  Brunjes, 
34  N.  J.  Eq.  19,  561 ;  Post  v.  Stiger, 
29  N.  J.  £q.  664,  a  claim  by  a  wife 
against  her  husband,  first  put  in 
writing  when  his  liabilities  began  to 
jeopardize,  will  be  regarded  with 
suspicion  and  rejected,  unless  clearly 
proved,  when  attempted  to  be  en- 
forced as  against  the  husband's  cred- 
itors. 

2^.  If  .—First  Nat.  Bank  v.  McQel- 
lan,  9  N.  M.  636,  58  Pac.  347. 

Pa.— Grabill  v.  Moyer,  45  Pa.  St. 
530. 

yo.— New  South  Bldg,  etc,  Assoc. 


▼.  Reed,  96  Va.  345,  31  S.  E.  514,  7 
Am.  St.  Rep.  858;  Flynn  ▼.  Jackson, 
93  Va.  341,  25  S.  E.  1. 

W.  Fd.— Bennett  ▼.  Bennett,  37  W. 
Va.  396,  16  S.  E.  638,  38  Am.  St. 
Rep.  47;  Maxwell  v.  Hanshaw,  24  W. 
Va.  405;  McGinnis  ▼.  Curry,  13  W. 
Va.  29. 

Wis, — he  Saulner  v.  Krueger,  85 
Wis.  214,  54  N.  W.  774. 

Pvomiae  of  TepmymMatt  mot  iai- 
plied. — ^Where  a  wife  delivers  mon^ 
or  property  of  her  own  to  her  hus- 
band, which  he  uses  in  his  business, 
the  presumption  is  that  such  deliyeiy 
was  intended  as  a  gift;  and  in  order 
to  constitute  such  delivery  a  loan,  as 
against  the  creditors  of  the  husband, 
the  wife  must  prove  an  ezprees 
promise  of  the  husband  to  repay,  or 
establish  by  the  circumstances  that 
it  was  a  loan,  and  not  a  gift.  Zinn 
V.  Law,  32  W.  Va.  447,  9  a  E.  871 ; 
Grover,  etc..  Sewing  Mach.  Co.  v.  Rad- 
diff, 63  Md.  496. 

82.  Willis  V.  Willis,  79  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)  9,  79  N.  Y.  Supp.  1028. 

83.  Bailey  v.  Kansas  Mfg.  Co.,  32 
Kan.  73,  3  Pac.  756;  Sykes  v.  CSiy 
Sav.  Bank,  115  Mich.  321,  73  N.  W. 


I  C0KSID1£RATX0K. 


869 


as  oonsideratioii  for  a  oanveyanoe  are  applicaUe  to  transactions 
between  husband  and  wif  e.^ 


;§  47.  Repasrment  of  money  loaned  by  wife.— «A  oonveyance 
by  the  husband  to  his  wif e^  in  oonsideration  of  money  loaned  by 
the  wife  to  him  out  of  her  separate  estate,  and  not  made  to 
hinder,  delay,  and  defraud  his  creditors,  the  amount  of  which 
bears  a  reasonable  proportion  to  the  property  conveyed,  is  valid 
as  against  Ihe  creditors  of  the  husband."  But  where  the  loan 
was  used  for  the  benefit  of  the  wife's  separate  estate,  a  subse- 
quent transfer  of  property  by  the  husband  in  trust  for  the  wife's 
benefit  is  without  consideration.^     A  judgment  honestly  con- 


369,  69  Am.  8t  Rep.  562;  Steadman 
V.  Wnbur,  7  R.  I.  4S1. 

84.  See  cases  cited  in  note  77;  and 
Pre-existing  debt,  chap.  VIII,  9  18, 
supra. 

as.  y.  r.— Savage  ▼.  CNeil,  44  N. 
Y.  298,  rev'g  42  Barb.  374;  Brooklyn 
▼.  Lamon,  56  Hun,  647,  9  N.  Y.  Supp. 
849,  although  the  loan  was  made 
prior  to  the  passage  of  the  married 
woman's  acts,  the  wife  had  an  equit- 
able right  to  its  repayment  sufficient 
to  support  a  conveyance  for  the  pur- 
pose, which  would  not  be  defeated  by 
mere  lapse  of  time. 

U.  iSr.— Vansickle  v.  Wells,  106  Fed. 
16. 

Oa» — Robinson  v.  Stevens,  93  Ga. 
535,  21  S.  E.  96,  and  it  is  not  ren- 
dered fraudulent  by  the  fact  that  the 
wife  failed  to  disclose  to  her  hus- 
band's creditors  that  she  had  loaned 
him  money,  no  inquiry  having  been 
made. 

Ill, — ^McQuown  V.  Law,  18  111.  App. 
34. 

Ind, — Fulp  V.  Beaver,  136  Ind.  319, 
36  N.  £.  250;  Dillen  v.  Johnson,  132 
Ind«  75,  30  K.  E.  786;  Hogan  v.  Rob- 

24 


inson,  94  Ind.  138;  Kyger  v.  F.  HuU 
Skirt  Co.,  34  Ind.  249. 

Iowa. — ^Mahaska  County  v.  Whitsel 
(1907),  110  N.  W.  614;  Muir  v.  Mil- 
ler,  103  Iowa,  127,  72  N.  W.  409;  Citi- 
aens'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Webster,  76  Iowa, 
281,  41  N.  W.  47;  Rockford  Boot, 
etc.,  Mfg.  Ck>.  v.  Mastin,  75  Iowa,  112, 
39  N.  W.  219.  See  also  Payne  v. 
Wilson,  76  Iowa,  377,  41  N.  W.  46. 

Kan, — ^Monroe  v.  May,  9  Kan.  466. 

JTy.— Latimer  v.  Glenn,  65  Ky.  535. 
See  Ahlering's  Ex'r  v.  Speckman 
(1907),  99  S.  W.  973. 

if e.— Randall  v.  Lunt,  51  Me.  246. 

if (W9.— Atlantic  Nat.  Bank  v.  Tave- 
ner,  130  Mass.  407. 

^^66.— Weis  V.  Farley  (1907),  110 
N.  W.  656;  Lipscomb  v.  Lyon,  9  Neb. 
511,  27  N.  W.  731. 

Pa. — ^In  re  Jamison,  183  Pa.  St.  219, 
38  Atl.  604;  Mancil  v.  Mancil,  2  Del. 
Co.  R.  531. 

Tew, — Shryock  v.  Latimer,.  57  Tex. 
674. 

W.  Fa.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Par- 
sons, 42  W.  Va.  137,  24  S.  E.  554. 

86.  Grevils  v.  Smith,  29  Tex.  Civ. 
App.  150,  68  &.  W.  291. 


370 


Fbauduusnt  Cohtstances. 


feesed  by  an  insolvent  man  in  favor  of  his  wif^  to  seeore  her 
for  money  loaned  to  him  by  her  ont  of  her  separate  estate,  is  not 
frandnleDt  as  against  creditors,  merely  because  it  includes  inr 
terest  on  the  loan,  when  there  was  in  fact  no  agreement  that  the 
sum  loaned  should  bear  interest** 

§  48.  Appropriation  of  wife's  separate  estate. — ^A  bona  fide 
conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  by  a  husband  to  his  wife^ 
or  for  her  beuefity  in  payment  of  or  as  security  for  a  debt 
arising  out  of  the  husband's  appropriation  and  conversion  of  his 
wife's  separate  estate  to  his  own  use,  is  valid  as  against  the 
husband's  creditors,  thou^  he  was  insolvent  at  the  time  of  the 
execution  of  the  conveyance."*  A  bill  of  sale,  executed  by  the 
husband  to  secure  his  wife  a  sum  of  money  belonging  to  her  in 
her  own  right,  but  received  by  him  and  invested  in  his  business 
with  her  knowledge  and  acquiescence,  is  void  as  to  prior  credi- 
tors, where  there  was  no  agreement  by  the  husband  to  repay 
the  money,  and  the  creditors  are  without  other  security  for 
their  demands.** 


^  49.  Rents  and  profits  of  wife's  separate  estate. — TVliere, 
by  direction  of  a  wife,  the  rents  of  her  separate  estate  are  paid 
to  her  husband  with  the  understanding  that  he  will  invest  them 
for  her  benefit,  this  creates  a  debt  sufficient  to  constitute  a  valid 
consideration  for  a  subsequent  deed  from  him  to  her.**  But  where, 
under  a  statute,  the  husband,  as  trustee  of  the  statutory  separate 


87.  Hawley  ▼.  Griffith,  187  Pa.  St. 
306,  41  Atl.  30;  Appeal  of  Meekley, 
102  Pa.  St.  636. 

88.  Alo.— Vincent  v.  State,  74  Ala. 
274;  Northington  ▼.  Faber,  62  Ala. 
46;  Rowland  t.  Plummer,  60  Ala. 
1S2. 

/nd.— Lenard  v.  Barnett,  70  Ind. 
367;  Thompson  v.  Mills,  39  Ind.  628. 

Jowa. — Dunham  v.  Bentley,  103 
Iowa,  136,  72  N.  W.  437. 


8.  C— Taylor  ▼.  Heriot's  Ex'r,  4 
Desans.  227. 

TetB, — ^McKamey  ▼.  Thorp,  61  Tex. 
648,  But  see  Allen  v.  Merriwether 
(Ky.),  9  S.  W.  807.  See  also  Con- 
veyances by  husband  to  or  for  wife, 
chap.  IV,  §  33,  supra. 

89.  Kuhn  v.  Stansfield,  28  Md.  210, 
92  Am.  Dec.  681. 

00.  Tarsney  v.  Turner,  48  Fed. 
818.  See  Conveyance  by  husband  to 
or  for  wife,  chap.  IV,  S  33,  tupra. 


CoNBIDEBATION. 


371 


estate  of  his  wife,  lias  the  right  to  control  it^  without  liability  to 
account  to  the  <wife  for  the  rents^  inoomoy  and  profits^  a  convey- 
ance of  property  by  him  to  his  wife^  in  consideration  of  such 
rents  and  profits,  is  voluntary  aaod  fn;udulent  as  to  the  husband's 
creditors.** 


§  50.  Satisfaction  of  wife's  paraphernal  rights. — The  trans- 
fer of  property  by  a  husband  to  bis  wife  in  payment  of  an  in- 
debtedness on  account  of  paraphernal  property  or  rights,  pro- 
portionate in  value  to  his  indebtedness  to  her,  is  founded  upon 
a  sufficiesut  consideration,  and  is  valid  as  against  creditors  of 
the  husband.**  The  essentials  to  the  validity  of  a  datian  en 
paiement  by  the  husband  to  the  wife,  in  satisfaction  of  her 
paraphernal  rights,  are  the  just  and  honest  daim  of  the  wife 
against  the  husband,  the  just  proportion  of  the  value  of  the 
thing  given  to  the  amount  of  the  wife's  daim,  and  the  delivery 
to  the  wife  of  that  which  is  the  subject  of  the  dation.^ 

§  51.  Property  in  excess  of  debt. — A  conv^ance  or  transfer 
made  by  a  husbaaod  to  his  wife,  in  oonsideration  of  a  valid  pre- 
existing debt,  is  subject  to  the  general  rules  as  to  transfers  in 
consideration  of  pre-existing  debts,  as  stated  in  previous  sections 


91.  O'Neal  ▼.  Seixa«,  85  Ala.  80, 
4  So.  745;  Gilkey  v.  Pollock,  82  Ala. 
503,  3  So.  99;  Wing  v.  RoBwald,  74 
Ala.  346;  Early  v.  Owens,  68  Ala. 
171,  w>erry»Mng  Brevard's  Ex'r  ▼. 
Jones,  50  Ala.  221 ;  Boiling  v.  Jones, 
67  Ala.  508.  See  also  Long  v.  Efurd, 
86  Ala.  267,  5  So.  482,  the  statute 
providing  that  such  rents,  etc.,  shall 
not  he  subject  to  the  husband's 
debts,  land  purchased  in  the  name  of 
his  wife  with  such  rents  can  not  be 
subjected  to  the  husband's  d^ts. 

92.  Ardis  v.  Theus,  47  La.  Ann. 
1436,  17  So.  865;  Hewitt  v.  Wil- 
liams, 48  La.  Ann.  686,  19  So.  604; 
Freiburg  v.  Langfelder,  46  La.  Ann. 


1417,  16  So.  677;  Hyman  v.  Schlen- 
ker,  44  La.  Ann.  108,  10  So.  623 ;  Ren- 
shaw  ▼.  Dowty,  39  La.  Ann.  608,  2 
So.  58;  Bums  v.  Thompson,  89  La. 
Ann.  377,  1  So.  913;  Chaffe  v.  Scheen, 
34  La.  Ann.  684;  Payne  v.  Kemp,  33 
La.  Ann.  818;  Levi  v.  Morgan,  33  La. 
Ann.  632;  Lehman  v.  Levy,  30  La. 
Ann.  745;  Bams  v.  Bidwell,  23  La. 
Ann.  163;  Murrison  v.  Seller,  22  La. 
Ann.  327;  Judice  v.  Neda,  8  La.  Ann. 
484;  Spurlock  v.  Mainer,  1  La.  Ann. 
301. 

9i3.  Colvin  v.  Johnston,.  104  La. 
Ann.  655,  29  So.  274.  See  also  Pres- 
lor  &  l^er  v.  Walker,  116  La.  661,  40 
So.  1033. 


372  Fraudulent  Convxtances. 

of  this  chapter.**  The  value  of  the  property  conveyed  or  secured 
should  be  reasonably  proportionate  to  the  amount  of  the  debt 
paid  or  secured;*^  the  indebtedness  should  not  be  so  much  less 
than  the  value  of  the  property  oonveyed  as  to  make  the  con- 
sideration grossly  inadequate  ;••  and  there  should  not  be  such 
a  disparity  in  value  between  the  debt  and  the  property  trans- 
ferred as  to  affect  the  grantee  with  notice  of  a  fraudulent  intent 
in  the  transfer,  ^  in  order  to  render  such  a  conveyance  valid  as 
againet  creditors.  It  has  been  held  that  the  value  of  the  prop- 
erty conveyed  is  what  it  would  sell  for  in  cash,  in  the  ordinary 
course  of  trade,  in  the  manner  in  which  property  is  ordinarily 
sold  in  the  market  >at  the  place  where  the  property  is  located.*^ 
A  judgment  confessed  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  for  an  amount 
in  excess  of  that  actually  due  her  will  not  be  set  aside  at  the 
infitanoe  of  creditors  of  the  husband,  where  it  appears  that  there 
was  an  honest  mistake  on  the  part  of  the  wife  as  to  the  amount 
due." 

§  52.  Liaches  of  wife  in  asserting  claim. — ^Where  the  money 
or  estate  of  a  married  woman,  which  she  might  have  secured  to 
her  own  use,  is,  with  her  knowledge  and  consent,  received  and 
used  by  her  husband,  or  allowed  to  go  into  the  business  of  her 
husband,  be  mixed  with  his  property,  and  applied  to  the  pur- 
chase of  real  estate,  or  otherwise  invested,  for  his  advantage,  or 
for  the  purpose  of  giving  him  credit  in  business,  and  is  thus 
used  for  a  series  of  years,  being  dealt  with  by  the  husband  as  his 
own  and  debts  contracted  on  the  faith  of  such  ownership,  no 

94.  See    chap.    VIII,    §S     18-24,      eron,   73   Tex.   583,    11   S.   W.   840; 
aupra.  Webb  v.  Ingham,  29  W.  Va.  880,  I 

95.  McQuown  ▼.  Law,  18  HI.  App.      S.  E.  816. 

34;   Brigham  v.  Hubbard,   115   Ind.         97.  DePrato  ▼.  Jester  (Ark.  1892), 

474,    17   N.  E.   920;    Columbia   Sav.      20  S.  W.  807. 

Bank  v.  Winn,  132  Mo.  80,  33  S.  W.  '      ' 

4gy  98.  Torrey  ▼.  Cameron,    73    Ter. 

96.  Paulk  V.  Cooke,  39  Conn.  566;      ^®^'  ^^  ^' ^'  ®^^- 

Case  Mfg.  Co.  t.  Perkins,  106  Mich.         99.  Falkman  ▼.  Bedillion,  131  Pa. 
349,  64  N.  W.  201;  Torrey  v.  Cam-      St.  386,  18  Atl.  922. 


•1 


Consideration. 


373 


ev^idenoe  of  indebtedness  being  given  'when  the  loan  was  made 
or  afterwards^  and  no  claim  being  asserted  thereto  nor  any  in- 
tOTest  or  principal  paid  thereon  during  many  years,  a  oonveyance 
or  transfer  of  property  by  the  husband  to  the  wife,  or  for  her 
benefiti  will  not  be  sustained,  but  will  be  held  as  fraudulent 
and  void  as  against  creditors,  especially  where  it  is  made  upon 
the  occurrence  of  his  financial  embarrassment,  insolvency  or 
bankruptcy.^  A  quiet  acquiescence  on  the  part  of  the  wife  that 
her  husband  should  use  her  estate  as  his  own,  mingling  it  indis- 
criminately with  his  own  in  business,  for  a  period  of  many 
years,  without  the  recognition  of  its  separate  existeoce  by  even 
a  written  receipt,  memorandum,  or  separate  investment,  and 
without  any  accounting  during  that  period  for  principal  or  in- 
terest, or  without  its  even  being  talked  about  imtil  the  bona  fide 
creditors  were  about  to  call  for  it,  constitutes  such  a  trust  or 
settlement  as  could  not  be  allowed  by  any  rule  of  law  or  equity 
to  stand  against  the  righta  of  antecedent  credit(»rs.' 

§  53.  Conveyance  in  execution  of  prior  agreement— «A  con- 
veyanoe  or  transfer  of  property  made  by  a  husband  to  his  wife 


1.  U.  8, — ^Humes  v.  Scruggs,  94  U. 
S.  22,  24  L.  Ed.  51. 

Ala.'—Wood  V.  Riley,  121  Ala.  100, 
26  So.  723;  Evans  v.  CoTington,  70 
Ala.  440. 

Oa.— NoUis  V.  Rodgers,  106  Ga.  13, 
31  S.  C.  783. 

/».— Hauk  V.  Van  Ingen,  196  111. 
20,  63  N.  E.  705,  aff'g  97  lU.  App. 
642;  Dillman  v.  Nadelh(^er,  56  111. 
App.  517,  aifd  162  111.  625,  45  N.  E. 
680;  Schuberth  ▼.  Schillo,  76  III.  App. 
356,  afd  177  111.  346,  52  N.  E.  319; 
Miller  ▼.  Payne,  4  111.  App.  112. 

Ind, — Brookville  Nat.  Bank  v.  Kim- 
ble, 76  Ind.  195. 

/otra.— Williams  t.  Snyder  (1903), 
94  N.  W.  845;  McCreary  y.  Skinner, 
S3  Iowa,  362,  49  N.  W.  986. 

Kp, — ^Allen  v.  Meriwether,  10  Ey. 


L.  Rep.  600,  9  S.  W.  807;  Floyd  v. 
Martin,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep.  891 ;  Anderson 
▼.  Anderson,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep.  679. 

Ifo.— Balz  V.  Nelson,  171  Mo.  682, 
72  S.  W.  527. 

yeb, — ^Brownell  v.  Stoddard,  42 
Neb.  177,  60  N.  W.  380. 

N,  J,— Lee  r.  C!ole,  44  N.  J.  Eq. 
318,  15  Atl.  531;  Leathwhite  v.  Ben- 
net  (Ch.  1887),  11  Atl.  29;  Hubbard 
V.  Uttle  (Ch.  1887),  10  Atl.  839; 
Jackson  v.  Beach  (CJh.  1887),  9  Atl. 
380;  Borden  v.  Doughty,  42  N.  J. 
Eq.  314,  3  Atl.  352;  Watson  v.  Cum- 
mins, 40  N.  J.  Eq.  483,  4  Atl.  629. 

W,  Fo.— Kanawha  Valley  Bank  v. 
Atkinson,  32  W.  Va.  203,  9  S.  E.  175, 
25  Am.  St.  Rep.  806. 

2.  Briggs  V.  Mitchell,  66  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  288. 


374 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


or  by  a  wife  to  her  husband,  in  puTBuance  of  a  previous  valid 
agreement  between  them  based  upon  a  suffici^it  consideration, 
is  founded  on  a  valuable  and  adequa;te  consideration,  and  is  not 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  of  the  grantor.' 

§  54.  Conveyances  to  confirm  prior  convejrance. — iWhero  a 
deed  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  was  made  before  the  passage  of 
a  statute  authorizing  conveyances  betSween  husband  and  wife 
direct,  while  the  graator  was  not  indebted,  and  without  intent 
to  defraud,  a  subsequent  deed  of  the  same  premises  by  a  hus- 
band to  the  wife  is  valid,  and  vests  the  legal  title  in  her,  as  against 
creditors  of  the  husband  whose  claims  accrued  after  the  first  deed 
and  before  the  second  deed.  The  first  deed  having  effectually 
divested  the  husband  of  the  equitable  and  beneficial  ownership 
of  the  premises,  and  having  transferred  it  to  the  wife,  the  subse- 
quent conveyance  of  a  naked  legal  title  to  the  same  property, 
though  it  may  have  been  without  substantial  consideration,  can 
in  no  sense  be  deemed  fraudulent  as  against  creditors  of  the 
grantor/  But,  although  a  statute  authorizes  transfers  from  a 
husband  to  his  wife  foimded  oni  love  and  affection,  where  a  deed 
of  gift  made  while  the  husbamd  is  solvent  is  withheld  from 
record  because  he  believes  it  is  ineffectual  and  inoperative^  a 
subsequent  conveyance,  made  in  contemplation  of  inaolveacy,  to 
a  third  person  who  conveys  the  land  to  the  wife^  is  fraudulent  as 
to  creditors,  though  made  to  effectuate  the  first  conveyance.^ 


8.  y.  y.— Odell  ▼.  MylinB,  53  How.- 
Pr.  250. 

Conn. — Clarke  v.  Black,  78  Conn. 
467,  62  Ail.  757. 

/fkJ. — Summen  v.  Hoover,  42  Ind. 
153.  Compare  Cannon  ▼•  Castleman, 
164  Ind.  343,  73  N.  E.  689. 

Kan, — Sproul  t.  Atcbison  Nat. 
Bank,  22  Kan.  336. 

JTy. — Craig  v.  Conorer,  24  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1682,  72  8.  W.  2;  Hackworth  r. 
Johns,  10  Ky.  L.  Rep^  568,  0  S.  W. 
656.      Compare  Chinn  v.  Curtis,  24 


•Ky.  L.  Rep.  1563,  71  S.  W.  923. 

Jfd.— Stockett  V.  Holliday,  9  Md. 
480. 

Mich. — ^Popendick  v.  Frdbenius,  66 
Michs  317,  33  N.  W.  887. 

yeh, — ^Van  Duzen  v.  Peaoodc,  11 
Neb.  245,  9  N.  W.  90. 

Tenn. — ^Ready  v.  Bragg,  38  Tenn. 
511. 

4.  Fitzpatrick  v.  Burchill,  7 
Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)  463,  28  N.  Y. 
Bnpp.  389. 

5.  Talcott  ▼.  Levy,  20  N.  Y.  Svpp. 


CONSIBEBATION. 


375 


I  55.  BfiFect  of  want  or  insufficiency  of  consideration. — A 
conveyance  from  the  husband  to  the  wif e,  without  consideration^ 
or  a  voluntary  convqrance,  is  a  fraud  upon  the  creditors  of  the 
husband  and  void  as  against  them,  irrespective  of  his  want  of 
intemtion  to  commit  a  fraud,*  and  even  in  the  absence  of  an 
actual  fraudulent  intention^  A  voluntary  conveyanioe  by  an 
insolvent  debtor  to  his  wife  is  good  as  against  subsequent  credi- 
torsy  unless  made  with  intent  to  defraud.^  In  general,  the  general 
rules  as  to  the  effect  of  the  want,  or  inadequacy,  or  insufficiency 
of  consideration  already  set  forth  in  this  chapter,^  are  applied 
by  the  courts  to  transactions  between  husband  and  wife.^^ 


440,  29  Abb.  N.  Cas.  3,  a/fd  without 
opinion  3  Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)  616,  23 
N.  Y.  Supp.  H62. 

6.  U.  fif.— WiBweU  V.  Jarvis,  9  Fed. 
S4;  Beecher  v.  Clark,  3  Fed.  Gas.  No. 
1,223,  12  BlatcM.  256,  modified 
aark  T.  Beecher,  164  U.  S.  631,  14 
Sup.  Ct.  1184,  24  L.  Ed.  706. 

CaL— ThreUcel  v.  Scott  (1893),  34 
Pac.  861. 

lU, — Smith  T.  J.  A.  Sommers  Mfg. 
Co.,  69  lU.  App.  230. 

Iowa, — Oardner  v.  Baker,  26  Iowa, 
343;  Sargent  v.  Ghubbuck,  19  Iowa, 
37. 

Me. — Robinson  r.  Clark,  76  Me. 
493. 

If d.— Myers  ▼.  King,  42  Md.  66. 

if«cA.— Fallows  T.  Smith,  40  Mich. 
689. 

AfM«.—- Warren  t.  Brown,  26  Miss. 
66,  67  Am.  Dec.  191. 

Mo. — Reppy  v.  Reppy,  46  Mo.  671 ; 
Woodson  T.  Pool,  19  Mo.  340. 

If,  J, — ^Phelps  Y.  Morrison,  24  N. 
J.  Eq.  196;  Annin  v.  Annin,  24  N.  J. 
Eq.  184. 

Or.— Elfelt  V.  Hinch,  5  Or.  266. 
Pa.— Carl  v.  Smith,  8  Phila.  669. 
W.  Ya. — ^Humphrey  v.  Spencer,  36 


W.  Va.  11,  14  S.  E.  410;  C6re  t.  Cun- 
ningham, 27  W.  Va.  206. 

7.  y.  P.— Smart  ▼.  Barring,  62 
How.  Pr.  606. 

Colo.— Phillips  V.  Rhodes,  21  Colo. 
217,  40  Pac.  463,  affg  2  C6lo.  App. 
70,  29  Pac.  1011. 

/ml.— Spinner  v.  Weick,  60  Ind* 
213. 

Iowa. — ^Watson  v.  Riskamire,  45 
Iowa,  231. 

Ohio. — ^Fowler  v.  Trebein,  16  Ohio 
St.  493,  91  Am.  Dec.  96. 

8.  tf.  P.- Phillips  V.  Wooeter,  36 
N.  Y.  412. 

Ala. — Davidson  v.  Lanier,  61  Ala. 
318. 

CoJ.— Wells  V.  Stout,  9  Cal.  479. 

lU. — ^Lucas  V.  Lucas,  103  HI.  121. 

Ky. — Duhme  y.  Young,  66  Ky.  343. 

Md. — ^Miller  v.  Johnson,  27  Md.  6. 

Mo, — ^Boatmen's  Sav.  Bank  v.  Over- 
all, 16  Mo.  App.  610. 

Pa.— Tatham  v.  Crawford,  2  Wkly. 
Notes  Cas.  366. 

W.  Ya. — McClaugherly  v.  Morgan, 
36  W.  Va.  191,  14  S.  E.  992. 

9.  See  chap  Vin,  §§  32-37. 

10.  y.  7. — ^Holden  v.  Burnham,  63 
N.    Y.    74;    Bennett   v.   McOuire,    5 


876 


Fbaudulekt  Conveyances. 


§  56.  Transactions  between  parent  and  child;  nature^ 
adequacy,  and  sufficiency  of  consideration. — ^A  parent^  'who  is 
perfectly  solyent,  or  who,  although  in  debt,  is  zkot  embarrassed 
in  his  circumstanoes,  may  make  a  valid  oonveyacce  to  his  chil* 
dren,  and  it  cannot  be  impeached  for  want  of  coossideration. 
iN'atural  love  and  affection  is  a  good  and  valid  ooneideratioii 
in  a  conveyance  from  a  parent  to  a  child.^    A  voluntary  oon* 


Lans.  183;  Cropaey  ▼.  McKinney,  30 
Barb.  47. 

XJ,  8. — Biittain  r.  Crowther,  54 
F«d.  295,  4  C.  C.  A.  841;  Wilson  r. 
Jordan,  30  Fed.  Cas.  No.  17,814,  3 
Woods,  642;  Caller  r.  McNabb,  4  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  2,322. 

Oa, — Hawkineville  Bank,  ete..  Go. 
V.  Walker,  99  Ga.  242,  25  S.  E.  205. 

/a— Hauk  V.  Van  Ingen,  196  Lll. 
20,  63  N.  E.  705,  afTg  97  HI.  App. 
642;  Ready  v.  White,  168  Dl.  76,  48 
N.  E.  314,  modifying  69  111.  App.  405; 
McCaffrey  v.*  Dustin,  43  HI.  App.  84. 

Iowa. — ^Langford  v.  Thurlt^,  60 
Iowa,  105,  14  N.  W.  135;  Boulton  y. 
Habn,  58  Iowa,  518,  12  N.  W.  560. 

Ky, — ^Plant  ▼.  Granger,  22  Ky.  L. 
Bep.  1475,  60  S.  W.  520;  Qarkson  V. 
Clarkson,  4  Ky.  L.  Bep.  901. 

Ife.— Motley  ▼.  Sawyer,  38  Me.  68. 

ira««.— Williams  r.  Thomson,  30 
Mass.  298. 

Mich.—lBdggA  y.  Whitaker,  130 
Mich.  327,  89  N.  W.  954;  Palmer  y. 
Smith,  126  Mich.  352,  85  N.  W.  870; 
Blue  y.  Schurtc,  115  Mich.  690,  74  N, 
W.  178. 

If o.— Jordan  y.  Bnschmeyer,  97  Mo. 
94,  10  S.  W.  616;  State  y.  Jones,  83 
Mo.  App.  151. 

yeh.—mU  y.  Smuck,  65  Neb.  173, 
90  N.  W.  928. 

N.  17.— Claflin  y.  Batehelder,  65  N. 
H.  29,  17  Atl.  1060. 

y,  0.— Woodruff  y.  Bowles,  104  N. 
C.  197, 10  S.  E.  482. 


Pa.— In  re  McKown,  198  P*.  St.  96^ 
47  Atl.  nil;  Henderson  y.  Hender- 
son, 133  Pa.  St.  399,  19  Atl.  424,  19 
Ant  St.  Rep.  650;  Stickney  y.  Bor- 
man,  2  Pa.  St  67. 

Tenn. — Gribble  y.  Ford  (Ch.  App. 
1898),  52  S.  W.  1007. 

Te0.— Castro  y.  lUies^  22  Tez.  479, 
73  Am.  Dec.  277. 

ZZtoA.— Qustin  y.  Mathews,  2fr 
Utah,  168,  70  Pac.  402. 

Vt, — Farmers's  Nat.  Bank  y.  Thom- 
son, 74  Vt.  442,  52  Atl.  961. 

Fa.— Tebbs  y.  Lee,  76  Va.  744. 

Wath, — ^Kloeterman  y.  Harrington, 
11  Wash.  138,  39  Pac.  376. 

W.  Fa.— Wick  y.  Dawson,  42  W. 
Va.  43,  24  S.  E.  587. 

Wis, — ^Bloodgood  y.  Meissner,  84 
Wis.  452,  54  N.  W.  772;  Wheeler,  etc., 
Mfg.  Co.  y.  Monaban,  63  Wis.  198, 
23  N.  W.  127;  Fisher  y.  Shelter,  63 
Wis.  498,  10  N.  W.  681;  Horton  y. 
Dewey,  53  Wis.  410,  10  N.  W.  599. 

11.  y,  r. — ^Brown  y.  Austen,  35 
Barb.  341. 

U.  8. — ^King  y.  Thompson,  34  U.  S. 
204,  9  L.  Ed.  102. 

D.  C— Offutt  y.  King,  1  MaeAr- 
thur,  312. 

III. — ^Dayis  y.  Kennedy,  105  HI.  800» 

£f.  C— Smithy.  Smith, 24  S.  C.  304. 

F*.— Brackett  y.  Waite,  4  Vt.  389- 

Fa. — Charlton  y.  Gardner,  11 
Leigh,  281. 

Contra, — ^Folmar  y.  T>>hmfMi  Dorr 
Co.  (Ala.),  41  So.  760. 


CoNSIBESATION. 


877, 


▼eyaonoe  of  a  parent  to  a  child,  in  consideration  ot  love  and 
affection,  is  not  per  se  fraudulent  and  void,  as  to  existing  credi- 
tors;" but  a  conveyance  by  a  debtor  to  his  child  of  all  his 
property,  baaed  on  love  and  affection  only,  is  voluntary  and 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors."  Where  the  effect  of  a  conveyance 
by  a  parent  to  a  child,  for  a  consideration  of  love  and  affection, 
is  to  hinder  and  delay  creditors,  such  conveyance  is  voluntary  and 
void  as  to  such  creditors.^^  And  where  the  couBideration  for  a 
conveyanee  from  a  parent  to  a  child  is  so  grossly  inadequate  as 
to  raise  .a  presumption  of  fraudulent  intent,  the  conveyanee  will 
be  set  aside  as  fraudulent  as  to  creditors."  The  general  rules 
on  the  subject  of  the  nature,  source,  adequacy,  and  sufficiency  of 
oonaideraiion,  set  forth  in  preceding  sections  of  this  chapter," 
are  in  the  main  applicable  to  transactioos  between  parent  and 
child.^^    Where  a  mother  received  certain  funds  to  be  used  for 


12.  y.  7. — Seward  v.  Jackson^  8 
Cow.  406. 

17.  £f.— Hinde  v.  Longworth,  24  U. 
S.  199,  6  L.  Ed.  464. 

Conn. — Salmon  r.  Bennett,  1  Conn. 
625,  7  Am.  Dec  237. 

Jf({.— Worthington  v.  Shipley,  6 
GUI.  499. 

if<i««.— Lerow  v.  Wilmarth,  91 
Mass.  382. 

iftM.— Wilson  V.  Kohlbeim,  46 
Miss.  346. 

But  see  Campbell  v.  Campbell 
(Iowa,  1906),  105  N.  W.  583,  hold- 
ing such  a  conveyance  constructively 
fraudulent  as  to  existing  creditors, 
unless  the  grantor  has  remaining  af- 
ter the  ooDveyance  sufficient  property 
to  satisfy  his  creditors. 

13.  y.  T.— Holmes  v.  Clark,  48 
Barb.  237. 

/{{.—Russell  T.  Fanning,  2  lU.  App. 
632. 

ifo.-^Snyder  v.  Free,  114  Mo.  360, 
21  S.  W.  8<7. 

y.  J. — ^Laurence  v.  Lippenoott,  6  N. 


J.  L.  473;  Lockyer  v.  DeHart^  6  N.  J. 
L.  450. 

P©.— Ill  re  Kern's  Estate,  4  Pa. 
Dist.  R.  73. 

14.  Yankee  v.  Sweeney,  85  Ky.  55, 
2  S.  W.  669,  8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  944; 
Franklin  v.  Cooper,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
1976,  44  S.  W.  976;  Dunlap  v.  Mit- 
chell, 80  Mo.  App.  303,  2  Mo.  App. 
Rep.  600;  Hayes  v.  Moore,  5  Ohio 
S.  A  C.  PI.  Bee.  520,  5  Ohio  N.  P. 
220. 

16.  Johnston  Harvester  Co.  v. 
Cibula,  62  Iowa,  697,  13  K  W.  418; 
First  Nat  Bank  v.  Cummins,  38  N. 
J.  £q.  191.  See  also  chap.  9,  SS-  29- 
37,  supra, 

16.  See  chap.  VIII,  {(  1-37, 
BuprOr, 

17.  N,  y.— Hyde  v.  Houston,  77 
Hun,  609,  29  N.  Y.  Snpp.  818;  Law- 
renoeville  Cement  Co.  v.  Paricer,  60 
Hun,  686,  16  N.  Y.  Supp.  677,  21  Civ. 
Proc.  R.  263. 

Ala. — ^Abn^  v.  Kingsland,  10  Ala. 
356,  44  Am.  Dee.  491. 


378 


FltAUDULBNT   CONVEYANCES. 


the  benefit  of  her  dau^ters  from  their  grandfather,  and  she 
used  tiie  same  with  the  daughters'  apparent  oonsent,  for  tha 
maintenance  of  a  college  boarding  house,  in  which  she  received 
the  daughters'  services,  such  gift  did  not  create  a  trust  in  favor 
of  the  daughters,  so  that  its  use  would  constitute  a  sufficient  con- 
sideration for  a  convqrance  by  the  mother  to  the  dau^ters,  as 
against  the  mother's  creditors." 


Col.— S&lmon  t.  Wilson,  41  OftL 
696. 

/ful.— Proctor  v.  Cole,  104  Ind.  373, 
4  N.  £.  303,  a  son  may,  without  being 
guilty  of  maintenance,  assiflt  his 
father  in  conducting  an  action,  and 
the  promise  of  the  father  to  repay  the 
sum  advanced  is  a  valid  one,  as 
against  creditors;  Goff  v.  Rogers,  71 
Ind.  469. 

louM, — Bunn  v.  Cheney,  36  Iowa, 

007. 

ITon. — Hunt  v.    Spencer,   20   Kan. 

126. 

JTy.— Trimble  v.  Ratcliff,  48  Ky. 
611;  Walker  v.  Todd,  33  Ky.  603,  28 
Am.  Dec  94;  Caldwell  v.  Deposit 
Bank,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep.  166,  36  S.  W. 
626;  Daniel  v.  Brandenburgh,  14  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  310,  20  8.  W.  266;  Merritt 
V.  Merritt,  11  Ky.  L.  Rep.  493,  11  8. 
W.  693;  Green  v.  Green,  4  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  260. 

La. — ^Maurin  t.  Rouquer,  19  La. 
694. 

Me, — Bowman  v.  Handlette,  18  Me. 
246. 

Md, — Benson  v.  Benson,  70  Md.  263, 
16  Atl.  667;  Bullett  v.  Worthington, 
3  Md.  Ch.  99. 

Mo. — Dozier  v.  Watson,  94  Mo.  328, 
7  8.  W.  268,  4  Am.  St.  Rep.  388 ;  Don- 
avan  v.  Dunning,  69  Mo.  436;  Rum- 
holds  V.  Parr,  61  Mo.  692. 

K.  J.— Taylor  v.  Dawes  (Ch.  1888), 
13  Atl.  693;  Hoboken  Bank  v.  Beck- 
man,  33  N.  J.  £q.  63. 


y.  O.— Webb  V.  Atidnson,  124  K. 
0.  447,  32  8.  W.  787;  National  Bank 
of  Greensboro  v.  Gilmer,  116  N.  C. 
684,  22  8.  £.  2;  Morris  v.  Allen,  32 
N.  C.  203;  Buie  v.  Kelly,  27  N.  C. 
169. 

Pa. — ^Ketner  v.  Donten,  15  Pa. 
Super.  Ct.  604;  Harmon's  Lessee  ▼. 
Reese,  1  Browne,  11. 

8.  C. — Jackson  v.  Lewis,  29  S.  C. 
193,  7  8.  E.  262. 

Term. — Gaugh  v.  Henderson,  39 
Tenn.  628;  Phillips  v.  Cunningham 
(Ch.  App.  1899),  68  8.  W.  463; 
Grimmett  v.  Midgett  Ch.  App.  1899), 
67  8.  W.  399;  Carpenter  v.  Scales 
(Ch.  App.  1897),  48  8.  W.  249. 

T«».— Wylie  v.  Posey,  71  Tex.  34, 
9  8.  W.  87;  Hawkins  v.  Cramer,  63 
Tex.  99. 

Fa.— PArr  v.  Saunders  (1880),  11 
8.  E.  979;  Stokes  v.  Oliver,  76  Va. 
72;  Braxton  v.  Gaines,  4  Hen.  A  M. 
161. 

W.  Fa.— Sturm  v.  Chalfant,  38  W. 
Va.  248,  18  8.  E.  461. 

A  motlier-iii-Utw  tulj  pay  ber 
■on-in-lAw  for  lier  board  and 
living  expenses,  while  a  member  of 
his  family,  without  any  previous 
agreement  for  compensation,  as 
against  her  other  creditors.  Petty- 
john V.  Kewhart,  7  Kan.  App.  64, 
61  Pac.  69,  citing  Howard  v.  Rynear* 
son,  60  Mich.  307,  16  N.  W.  486. 

18.  Vreeland  v.  Rogers  (N.  J.  Ch* 
1906),  61  Atl.  486. 


CONSIDEBATIOK. 


879 


§  57.  Earnings  of  minor  child. — A  father,  bj  investing  the 
earnings  of  his  minor  children  in  real  estate,  and  taking  title 
in  their  names,  cannot  protect  the  property  from  his  debts,^ 
since  he  is  entitled  to  the  earnings  of  such  children  where  there 
has  been  no  emancipation  before  the  earnings  were  made;**  nor 
are  the  earnings  of  a  minor  son  a  sufficient  consideration  to 
support  a  conveyance  to  him  from  hb  father,  as  against  the 
father's  creditors,  but  such  a  conveyance  is  fraudulent  and  void.*^ 
But  where  a  father  has  emancipated  his  children,  giving  them 
the  right  to  receive  and  appropriate  to  their  own  use  their  earn- 
ings," they  are  entitled  to  their  earnings  as  against  their  father's 
creditors;  and  where  such  earnings  were  loaned  to  the  father 
or  received  by  him  under  a  valid  agreement  to  repay  the  same, 
or  tx>  coiDivey  property  to  them  in  consideration  therefor,  they 
constitute  a  good  consideration  for  a  conveyance  from  him  to 
them,  as  against  his  creditors." 

§  58.  Services  rendered  by  minor  child. — The  services  of  a 
child,  rendered  during  minority  to  his  father,  are  not  a  valuable 
consideration  for  a  conveyance  from  the  father  to  him,  since  a 
child  is  in  law  bound  to  labor  for  his  parents  in  consideration 


10.  Bell  V.  HoUenbach,  Wright 
(Ohio),  761. 

20.  See  Wages  of  debtor's  minor 
child,  chap.  IV,  S  10,  9upra, 

21.  Winchester  t.  Reid,  53  N.  C 
377.      Compare  Rains  v.  Donnegan 
71    Mo.    14S.       See   also   Wages    of 
debtor's  minor  child,  chap.  IV,  (10, 
supra;   Services    rendered    by   minor 
child,  chap.  VIU,  S  68,  infra. 

22.  Atwood  y.  Holoomb,  39  Conn. 
270,  12  Am.  Rep.  386,  a  father  acting 
in  good  faith,  may,  though  insolvent 
at  the  time,  make  a  valid  gift  to  his 
minor  son  of  his  time  and  future 
earnings. 

28.  N.  y.—McCaffrey  ▼.  Hickey,  6S 
Barb.  489. 


Ifast.— Jenney  v.  Alden,  12  Mass. 
375. 

N,  J.— Berla  v.  Meisel  (Ch.  1902), 
52  Atl.  999,  son  entitled,  as  against 
creditors  of  the  debtor,  to  a  mortgage 
given  him  on  property  conveyed  by 
the  debtor  to  his  wife  and  paid  for  in 
part  by  the  son's  earnings. 

Or, — Flynn  v.  Baisley,  35  Or,  26S, 
57  Pac.  908,  76  Am.  St  Rep.  495,  45 
L.  R.  A.  645. 

Tenn, — ^Rosenbanm  v.  Davis  (Ch. 
App.  1898),  48  S.  W.  706,  child  thir- 
teen years  of  age. 

y^— Chase  v.  Elkins,  2  Vt.  290. 

Can, — Jack  v.  Greig,  27  Grant  Ch. 
(U.  C.)  6.  See  also  as  above  last 
note. 


334 


Fkaudulbnt  Conveyanobs. 


§  31.  Consideration  usurious  in  part — ^A  failing  debtor  may 
pay,  or  secure  to  be  paid,  a  debt  barred  by  the  statute  of  limita- 
tions, or  one  which  he  may  defend  as  usurious ;  or  if  he  has  agreed 
to  pay  interest  upon  unpaid  interest,  he  may  pay  or  secure  its  pay- 
ment ;  and,  if  done  in  good  faith,  the  payments  made  or  security 
taken  cannot  be  set  aside  by  his  creditors.^    And  the  fact  that  part 
of  the  consideration  for  a  conveyance  is  compound  interest  does 
not  render  it  void  as  to  creditors,  where  no  agreement  for  com- 
pound interest  was  made  in  advance.^     The  mere  faot  that  a 
debtor  has  paid,  or  agreed  to  pay,  more  than  the  legal  rate  of  in- 
terest does  not  constitute  a  fraud  on  the  debtor's  other  creditors^ 
and  the  mere  refusal  of  the  debtor  to  contest  the  claim  does  not  of 
itself  amount  to  such  fraud.^^    It  is  only  where  a  usurious  con- 
tract is  entered  into  collusively,  as  a  scheme  to  hinder  and  delay 
creditors,  that  the  latter  may  have  any  standing  to  contest  a  judg- 
ment entered  upon  sudi  usurious  contract^     Only  subsequent 
creditors  can  contest  a  prior  obligation  of  their  debtor  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  usurious;"  and  they  cannot  do  so  unless  in  the 
inception  of  the  contract  it  was  intended  to  defraud  them  by  swell- 
ing the  amount  of  the  debt,  or  would  necessarily  have  that  eflFect." 
A  confession  of  judgment  is  not  void  because  it  includes  usury  f^ 
and  a  mistake  in  the  computation  of  interest  is  no  evidence  that 
the  confession  of  judgment  was  made  to  defraud  creditors."*    The 


Oicla. — Jaffray  t.  Wolfe,  4  Okla. 
303,  47  Pac.  490. 

Tex. — Blair  v.  Pinlay,  75  Tex.  210, 
12  S.  W.  983;  Brasher  y.  Jamison, 
76  Tex.  139,  12  S.  W.  809. 

79.  Mellen  v.  Banning,  72  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  176,  25  N.  Y.  Supp.  542;  Mills  v. 
Camley,  1  Bosw.  (N.  Y.)  169.  See 
also  Pennington  v.  Woodall,  17  Ala. 
686;  Spencer  ▼.  Ayranlt,  10  N.  Y. 
202. 

80.  Stewart  v.  Petree,  65  N.  Y.  621 ; 
McConnell  v.  Barber,  86  Hun  (N.  Y.), 
360. 

81.  Appeal  of  Lenning,  93  Pa.  St. 
301;   Wheelock  ▼.  Wood,  93  Pa.  St 


298 ;  Appeal  of  Second  Nat.  Bank,  86 
Pa.  St.  528 ;  Cahn  v.  Farmers'  &  Trad- 
ers' Bank,  1  S.  D.  237,  46  N.  W.  186; 
Spaulding  v.  Austin,  2  Vt.  665. 

Sft.  Appeal  of  Lenning,  Mipro/ 
Wheelock  v.  Wood,  supra. 

83.  Lombaert  v.  Morris,  2  Del.  Co. 
R.  (Pa.)  467;  Building  Assoc.  ▼. 
O'Connor,  3  Phila.  (Pa.)  463,  16  Leg. 
Int.  300. 

84.  Loucheim  ▼.  First  Nat.  Bank,  9S 
Ala.  621,  13  So.  374;  Harris  v.  Bus- 
seU,  93  Ala.  69,  9  So.  541;  LcMnbaert 
▼.  Morris,  supra. 

85.  Miller  v.  Clarke,  37  Iowa,  326. 

86.  Scales  t.  Scott,  13  (M.  76. 


CONSIDEBATION* 


881 


vejanoes  or  transfers  of  propeorty  from  tlie  parents  to  thenn,  as 
against  the  creditors  of  the  parents ;  the  law  implies  no  promise 
to  pay  for  services  rendered  each  other  by  persone  standing  in 
this  relation,  but  such  services  are  deemed  gratuitous.^  A  con- 
veyance by  an  insolvent  parent^  however,  to  his  child,  in  pay- 
ment) of  a  bona  fide  debt  due  the  child  for  services  actuaDy 
rendered,  after  majority  and  while  living  with  the  parent,  under 
an  agreement  for  a  specified  and  reasonable  rate  of  compensa- 
tion, is  valid  as  against  creditors  of  the  parent*^ 


C9^a.— Wilson  v.  MeMiUan,  62  Qa. 
16,  35  Am.  Rep.  116,  where  the 
father  promised  his  minor  child  a  rea- 
sonable part  of  a  prospective  crop  for 
the  child's  labor. 

7Z{.— Heeren  ▼.  Kitson,  28  111.  App. 
259,  where  a  father  agreed  to  pay  his 
minor  son  as  much  as  any  other  man 
would  give  him  for  his  services. 

Ky, — Perry's  Adm'r  v.  Cornelius, 
23  Ky.  L.  Rep.  25,  63  S.  W.  23,  where 
a  father  agreed  to  give  his  minor 
children  a  certain  portion  of  the  cropa 
raised  on  the  farm  for  their  services. 

Neh. — Clemens  v.  Brillhart,  17  Neb. 
335,  22  N.  W.  779,  a  mortgage  given 
by  a  father  to  his  minor  son,  to  secure 
alleged  wages  due,  sustained  as 
against  a  creditor  of  the  father. 

Pa.— Appeal  of  Brown,  86  Pa.  St. 
524,  confession  of  judgment,  by  an 
insolvent  father  in  favor  of  his  minor 
son  for  services  rendered  on  a  ver- 
bal promise  to  pay,  held  valid  as 
against  creditors. 

See  also  Wages  or  earnings  of 
debtor's  minor  child,  chap.  IV,  S  10, 
supra;  ^  56,  supra. 

Contra,  where  the  child  remains  at 
home  and  lives  with  the  father. 
Dowell  V.  Applegate,  15  Fed.  419,  8 
Sawy.  427;  Godfrey  v.  Hays,  6  Ala. 
501,  41  Am.  Dec.  58.     But  where  an 


infant  son  supported  himself,  and 
paid  his  board  at  home,  he  was  eman- 
cipated. Donegan  V.  Davis,  66  Ala.  382. 

28.  N.  Y. — ^Breen  v.  Henry,  34 
Misa  Rep.  232,  69  N.  Y.  Supp.  627. 

/».— Guffin  V.  First  Nat.  Bank,  74 
HI.  259. 

7oi<?a.— Irish  v.  Bradford,  64  Iowa, 
303,  20  N.  W.  447;  Hart  v.  Flinn,  36 
Iowa,  366. 

Mich, — Ionia  County  Sav.  Bank  v. 
McLean,  84  Mich.  625,  48  N.  W.  159. 

iftnn.— McCord  v.  Knowlton,  79 
Minn.  299,  82  N.  W.  589. 

If  o.— Snyder  v.  Free,  114  Mo.  860, 
21  S.  W.  847. 

N.  F.— Lord  v.  Locke,  62  N.  H. 
666. 

N.  /.—Miller  v.  Sauerbier,  80  N.  J. 
Eq.  71. 

Pa, — Sanders  v.  Wagonseller,  19 
Pa.  St.  248;  Hack  v.  Stewart,  8  Pa. 
St.  213. 

29.  U.  fif.— Vansickle  v.  Wells,  105 
Fed.  25. 

Ala. — ^Halsey  v.  Connell,  111  Ala. 
221,  20  So.  445. 

Iowa, — Citizens'  State  Bank  v.  Wes- 
ton, 103  Iowa,  736,  72  N.  W.  542; 
Chadwick  v.  Devore,  69  Iowa,  637,  29 
N.  W.  757 ;  Collier  v.  French,  64  Iowa, 
577,  21  N.  W.  90;  Hunt  v.  Hoover, 
34  Iowa,  77. 


382 


Fraudulent  Cohvstances. 


§  60.  Services  rendered  by  grandchild. — A  conveyance  to  a 
granddiild,  pursuant  to  a  promise  to  convey^  in  consideration 
of  the  grandchild  remaining  with  the  grandparent  and  working 
for  him  during  minority,  is  based  upon  a  sufficient  considera- 
tion, as  against  creditors  of  the  grandparent;  he  being  under 
no  obligation  to  work  without  renimieration,  as  is  the  rule  in 
the  case  of  a  parent  and  a  minor  child.^ 

§  61.  Future  support  generally. — ^As  a  rule,  an  agreement 
between  a  parent  and  his  child  for  the  future  support  by  the 
latter  of  his  parents,  is  not  such  a  consideration  as  will  support  a 
conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  from  the  parent  to  the  child, 
as  against  existing  creditors  of  the  parent  who  are  prejudiced 
thereby,  but  such  conveyance  is  a  voluntary  settlement,  and 
void  as  against  them.'^     It  is,  however,  valid  as  to  subsequeDt 


JTan.— Mitchell  v.  Simpson,  62  Kan. 
343,  63  Pac.  440. 

Jfinn.— Leque  ▼.  Stoppel,  64  Minn. 
152,  66  N.  W.  124. 

N.  J.— Low  V.  Wortman,  44  N.  J. 
Eq.  193,  7  Atl.  664,  14  Atl.  686,  where 
no  account  of  such  services  had  been 

kept. 

Tenn. — Gardenshire  v.  White  (Ch. 
App.  1900),  69  S.  W.  661. 

Tex. — Barnett  v.  Vincent,  69  Tex. 
686,  7  S.  W.  626. 

W.  Fa.— Stuart  v.  Neely,  60  W.  Va. 
508,  40  S.  E.  441. 

Wt«.— Byrnes  v.  Clarke,  57  Wis.  13, 
14  N.  W.  816;  Manseau  v.  Mueller, 
46  Wis.  430;  Seymour  v.  Briggs,  11 
Wis.  196.  Compare  Haney  t.  Nugent, 
13  Wis.  283. 

30.  Dowell  V.  Applegatc,  16  Fed. 
419,  8  Sawy.  427. 

31.  V.  T. — Spotten  v.  Keeler,  12 
St.  Rep.  385;  Jackson  v.  Parker,  9 
Cow.  73.  Compare  Seward  v.  Jack- 
son, 8  Cow.  406,  rev*g  6  Cow.  67. 

Ala.— Stokes  t.  Jones,  21  Ala.  731. 


Conn. — Graves  y.  Atwood,  52  Conn. 
512,  52  Am.  Rep.  610. 

/«.— Guffin  V.  First  Nat.  Bank,  74 
HI.  259;  Funk  v.  Lawson,  12  111.  App. 
229. 

/*Mi.— T^ner  v,  Somenrille,  Smith, 
149. 

Iowa. — Strong  v.  Lawrence,  5S 
Iowa,  56,  12  N.  W.  74;  Graham  r. 
Rooney,  42  Iowa,  567. 

Xy.— Howell  v.  Smith,  1  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  415.  Compare  Layton  v.  Cal- 
houn Bank,  22  Ey.  L.  Rep.  872,  59 
S.  W.  322. 

Me. — Sidensparker  ▼.  Sidensparker, 
52  Me.  481,  83  Am.  Dec.  527;  Hap- 
good  V.  Fisher,  34  Me.  407,  66  Am. 
Dec.  663. 

M<i88. — Slater  v.  Dudley,  35  Mass. 
373;  Gunn  v.  Butler,  35  Mass.  248, 
but  such  a  conveyance  is  not  fraudu- 
lent per  ee. 

Mich. — ^Rynearson  v.  Turner,  52 
Mich.  7,  17  N.  W.  219;  Purse!  v. 
Armstrong,  37  Mich.  326. 

Ohi4>. — Bowlus  V.  Shanabarger,   19 


Consideration. 


883 


creditors.''  A  conveyance  by  a  father  to  his  son,  in  considera- 
tion that  the  grantee  shall  support  his  invalid  brothers,  is  not 
a  voluntary  deed,  but  rests  on  a  valuable  consideration,  and  to 
avoid  it  as  to  creditors  a  fraudulent  intent  must  be  shown.** 


%  62.  Future  support  as  part  of  consideration* — ^An  agree- 
ment by  a  child  to  support  his  parents  in  the  f uture^^  as  a  part 
of  the  consideration  of  a  conveyance  from  his  father,  does  not 
necessarily  show  the  conveyance  to  be  fraudulent  as  to  the  gran- 
tor's creditors.**  A  conveyance  by  a  parent  to  a  child  on  the  con- 
sideration, in  part,  that  the  grantee  will  provide  support  and 


Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  137,  10  Ohio  Cir  Dec. 
16X. 

Pa.— Geiger  v.  Welsh,  1  Rawle,  349. 
See  ftlso  chap.  IX,  S  10,  supra. 

Compare  Worthington  t.  Jones,  23 
Vt.  646. 

A  stipvlatioii  that  tlie  lessee 
flhall  keep  m  eo^r  for  tlie  lessor, 
contained  in  a  lease  of  property  by 
an  insolvent  to  his  son,  is  not  such  a 
contract  for  the  support  of  the  lessor 
as  will  avoid  the  lease.  Stanley  v. 
Bobbins,  36  Vt  422. 

Beevritj  for  mgirevakeut  to 
support. — ^Where  an  insolvent  debtor 
attempts  to  appropriate  his  property 
to  the  benefit  of  himself  and  wife  dur- 
ing their  several  lives,  by  a  convey- 
ance to  his  son  in  consideration  of 
future  support,  the  agreement  being 
secured  by  a  mortgage  back  on  the 
property,  such  mortgage  is  fraudu- 
lent and  void  as  to  creditors.  De- 
witt  V.  Vansickle,  29  N.  J.  £q.  209. 
Where  a  father  conveyed  land  to  his 
son,  the  deed  expressing  a  valuable 
consideration,  but  the  son  verbally  en- 
gaging to  support  the  grantor  during 
life;  and  a  year  afterwards  the  son, 
being  about  to  die  insolvent,  gave  a 
Bkortgage  to  the   father  conditioned 


for  his  support  during  the  residue  of 
his  life,  it  was  held,  in  an  action  by 
the  father  against  one  claiming  the 
land  by  virtue  of  a  sale  by  the  son's 
administrator,  that  the  mortgage  was 
good,  even  against  creditors  of  the 
son.  Tyler  v.  Carlton,  7  Me.  175,  26 
Am.  Dec.  357. 

An  asv^ement  by  a  son  to  sup- 
port kis  f atker's  family  and  culti- 
vate his  farm,  in  consideration  of  the 
residue  of  the  crops  after  feeding  the 
stock,  is  valid,  in  the  absence  of  ex- 
trinsic evidence  of  fraud.  Glasgow 
V.  Turner,  91  Tenn.  163,  18  S.  W.  261. 

S«.  Faloon  v.  Mclntyre,  118  HI. 
292,  8  N.  E.  315;  Buchanan  v. 
Clark,  28  Vt.  799;  Rutland,  etc.,  R. 
Co.  V.  Powers,  26  Vt.  15.  But  see 
McLean  v.  Button,  19  Barb.  (N.  Y.) 
450,  holding  a  conveyance  of  personal 
property  to  be  a  transfer  of  personal 
property  in  trust  for  the  use  of  the 
grantor  within  the  prohibition  of  the 
statute,  and,  therefore,  void  against 
subsequent  creditors. 

38.  Worthy  v.  Brady,  91  N.  C.  265. 

34.  Vial  V.  Mathewson,  34  Hun  (N. 
Y.)  70;  Hapgood  v.  Fisher,  34  Me. 
407,  56  Am.  Dec.  663;  Doughty  v. 
Harael,  91  Mo.  500,  3  S.  W.  63. 


384 


FsATTBULEIfT   CONYEYAKCSS. 


mainteiLaiice  for  tlie  grantor  or  members  of  his  family,  is,  how- 
ever, fraudulent  and  vodd  as  to  existing  creditors,  where  the 
agreement  for  such  support  furnishes  a  substantial  part  of  the 
consideration,  and  the  remainder  is  iBadequate**^  But,  if  a 
conveyance  by  a  pareiut  to  his  child  is  otherwise  valid,  and  is 
supported  by  a  sufficient  considenation,  the  fact  that  the  grantee 
gratuitously  agrees  to  support  his  parents  for  life  does  not  in- 
validate the  conveyance^  as  in  fraud  of  creditors.** 

.§  63.  Past  support  as  part  of  consideration. — Services  renr 
dered  and  money  expended  by  a  child  in  caring  for  and  support- 
ing a  parent,  iu  acxx>rdance  with  an  agreement  between  them,  is  a 
sufficient  oonsidenation  for  a  subsequent  conveyance  from  the 
parent  to  the  child,  and  such  conveyance  is  not  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors,  the  ccmveyance  being  in  payment  of  a  valid  debt  due 
for  past  support.*^  But  services  so  rendered  and  mon^  ex- 
pended, in  the  absence  of  a  prior  contract,  do  not  constitute  a 
valuable  consideration  for  a  conveyance  by  the  parent  of  all  his 
property  to  his  child,  so  as  to  render  it  valid  as  against  his 
creditors." 


.§  64.  Assumption  of  debts^ — ^A  conveyance  from  a  parent 
to  his  child  or  from  a  child  to  his  parent,  in  consideration  of 


35.  N,  T. — ^Kain  ▼.  Larkin,  4  App. 
Div.  200,  38  N.  H.  Supp.  646. 

Ill, — Gordon  ▼.  Reynolds,  114  HI. 
118,  28  N.  E.  455;  Lawson  v.  Funk, 
108  111.  602;  Vanston  v.  Davidson,  41 
111.  App.  646. 

JTy. — ^Marshall  ▼.  Strange,  10  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  410,  0  S.  W.  250. 

N,  H, — ^Morrison  v.  Morrison,  49  N, 
H.  69;  Albee T.Webster,  16 N.H. 362. 

Pa, — Sanders  v.  Wagonseller,  19 
Pa.  St.  248;  Miner  v.  Warner,  2 
Grant,  448;  Johnson's  Heirs  y.  Har- 
vey, 2  Pen.  k  W.  82,  21  Am.  Dec.  426. 

36.  U,  Y.— Bent  v.  Bent,  50  Hun, 
602,  3  N.  Y.  Supp.  750. 


iTy.— Easum  r.  Pirtle,  81  Ky.  661 ; 
Nichols  v.  Walker,  7  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
295. 

Ifo.— Jones  v.  Geery,  163  Mo.  476, 
55  S.  W.  73. 

Or.— Jolly  V.  Kyle^  27  Or.  96,  39 
Pac.  999. 

37.  Nichols,  Shepard  9l  CJo.  v. 
Burch,  128  Ind.  324,  27  N.  E.  737; 
Sweatman  v.  Spears,  6  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
616;  Howard  v.  Rynearson,  60  Mich. 
307,  15  N.  W.  486;  Kelsey  v.  Kelley, 
63  Vt.  41,  22  Atl.  597,  13  L.  R.  A. 
640. 

33.  Snyder  v.  Free,  114  Mo.  360, 
21  S.  W.  847. 


CONSIDEBATIOV. 


385 


an  agreemeiit  on  the  part  of  the  graiitee  to  pay  tlie  debts  of  tbe 
grantor,  is  niot  fraudulent  and  void  a£  to  creditors  of  the  gran- 
tor."* But  a  oonvejance  by  a  father  to  his  child,  made  and  ac- 
cepted' with  the  initention  of  hindering  and  delaying  the  father's 
creditors,  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors/^  Likewise,  a 
conveyanoe  from  a  father  to  his  child,  where  the  value  of  the 
property  conveyed  is  so  greatly  in  excess  of  the  amount  of  the 
debts  assumed  as  to  raise  the  presumption  of  fraud,  will  be  held 
fraudulent  as  to  ereditors.^^  Where  a  father  conveys  land  to 
his  child,  the  latter  agreeing  to  discharge  the  incumbrances 
thereon,  the  conveyance  as  to  the  surplus  of  the  value  of  the 
land  above  the  incumbrances,  is  without  consideratioD^  and  void 
as  to  creditors  of  the  father.^ 


§  6S.  Pajrment  of  pre-existing  debts. — A  bona  fide  pre-eodst- 
ing  debt  or  other  liability  is  a  valuable  and  sufficient  considera- 
tion for  a  conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  from  a  parent  to 
his  child,  or  from  a  child  to  its  parent,  where  the  property  con- 
veyed or  transferred  is  fairly  proportionate  in  value  to  sudi  a 
debt  or  liability,  or  the  indebtedness  is  not  materially  less  than 
the  reasonable  value  of  ^e  property.^    Advancements  made  by 


39.  Jenkins  ▼.  Peace,  46  N.  C.  413; 
Jolly  ▼.  Kyle,  27  Or.  96,  39  Pac.  999; 
Pattiflon  ▼.  Stewart^  6  Watts  A  S. 
(Pa.)  72;  Willie  v.  Heath  (T«l 
1891),  18  S.  W.  801.  See  also  chap. 
Vni,  S  14,  Bupra. 

40.  Grieb  y.  Caraker,  69  111.  App. 
236;  Brady  ▼.  Briscoe,  26  Ky.  212,  a 
transfer  by  a  father  of  all  his  prop- 
erty to  his  son  to  pay  just  debts,  and 
to  evade  the.  payment  of  unjust  debts, 
is  fraudulent. 

41.  Clark  v.  Baymond,  86  Iowa, 
661,  63  N.  W.  363;  Jessup  v.  John- 
stone, 48  N.  C.  336,  67  Am.  Dec.  243. 

42.  Priest  v.  Gonklin,  38  111.  App.  180. 

43.  N.  y.— 'National  Bank  of  Port 

Jenris  ▼.  Bonnell,  46  App.  Dir.  802, 

25 


61  N.  T.  Sapp.  621,  afFff  26  Ifiw. 
Rep.  641,  67  N.  Y.  Suppu  486;  8au- 
gerties  Bank  ▼.  Mack,  34  App.  Div. 
494,  64  N.  Y.  Supp.  360;  Foote  ▼. 
Stryker,  10  N.  Y.  Siq>p.  472,  12  N.  Y. 
Supp.  178. 

U.  £f.-^Gorrell  ▼.  Dickson,  26  I^d. 
464. 

Ala, — Donegan  t.  Davis,  66  Ala. 
362. 

/».— Schuberth  v.  Bchillo,  177  HI. 
346,  62  N.  E.  319,  afTff  76  Dl.  App. 
366. 

Ind. — Clow  V.  Brown  (App.  1904), 
72  N.  E.  634. 

/otra.— JElockford  Boot,  etc.,  Mfg. 
Go.  ▼.  Mastin,  76  Iowa,  112,  39  N. 
W.  219. 


386 


FSATTBULSNT   CoNVEYANOBS. 


a  parent  to  a  child,  who  thereaf ter  becomeB  financially  embar- 
rassed,  cannot  be  changed  in  character  so  as  to  become  debta 
to  the  injury  of  creditors,  and,  hence,  cannot  constitute  a  valid 
consideration  as  against  creditors  for  a  conveyance  by  the  child 
to  the  parent^  Money  furnished  by  a  paremt  to  a  child,  with* 
out  any  contemporaneous  understanding  or  agreement  concern- 
ing  its  repayment,  will  be  presumed  to  have  been  intended  as  an. 
advancement,  with  no  present  purpose  to  treat  it  as  a  debt,  and 
it  cannot  afterwards  be  converted  into  a  debt  without  the  inter- 
vention of  some  new  consideration.^  A  subsequent  deed  con- 
firming a  prior  valid  conveyance  of  the  same  property  is  not  in 
fraud  of  creditors,  as  where  a  father  conveys  land  to  his  sons, 
retaining  sufficient  property  to  pay  his  creditors,  and  delivers 
the  deed  in  escrow,  and  such  deed  is  destroyed  before  the  grantees 
have  performed  the  condition  necessary  for  the  passage  of  title.^ 


JBTon. — ^Beavers  ▼.  McKinley,  60 
Kan.  602,  32  Pac.  363,  33  Pae.  369, 
fictitious  debt. 

Ifd.— McNeal  v.  Glenn,  4  Md.  87. 

Mass. — F.  &  M.  Scha«ffer  Brewing 
Co.  V.  Mocba,  187  Mass.  671,  73  N. 
E.  868. 

iftoA.— Rindge  y.  Grow,  09  Mich. 
482,  58  N.  W.  468;  Nichols  v.  Ban- 
croft, 74  Mich.  191,  41  N.  W.  891; 
Woodhull  V.  Whittle,  63  Mich.  675, 
30  N.  W,  368,  aifg  State  Bank  r. 
Whittle,  48  Mich.  1,  11  N.  W. 
766. 

ifitftf.— Davis  ▼.  Harris,  21  Miss. 
9,  debt  due  from  parent  as  guardian 
of  child. 

Neh, — Carson  v.  Murphy,  1  Neb. 
<Unoff.)  619,  96  N.  W.  110. 

2V.  J.— Silvers  v.  Potter,  48  N.  J. 
Eq,  639,  22  Atl.  684;  First  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Cummins,  38  N.  J.  Eq.  191; 
Updike  V.  Titus,  13  N.  J.  Eq.  151. 

OWo.— Webb  ▼.  Roff,  9  Ohio  St. 
430. 

Pa.— Sebring   v.    Brickley,    7    Pa. 


Super.  Ct.  198,  42  Wkly.  Notes  Gas. 
189. 

Tea. — ^Bamett  v.  Vincent,  69  Tex. 
686,  7  S.  W.  625,  4  Am.  St  Rep.  98. 

Va. — GrajBon  v.  George,  85  Va» 
908,  9  8.  E.  13. 

W.  Fa.— Knight  v.  Gapito,  23  W. 
Va.  639. 

A  elalm  of  m  fmOter  for  board 
of  m  son  is  not  a  valid  consideration, 
as  against  creditors,  for  a  convey- 
ance by  the  son  to  the  father,  where 
there  was  no  agreement,  express  or 
implied,  on  the  part  of  the  son  to  pay 
for  the  board.  Morrow  v.  Camp- 
bell, 118  Ala.  330,  24  So.  862. 

44.  Pearson  v.  Cuthbert,  68  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  395,  68  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1031 ;  Bomar  v.  Means,  63  S.  C.  232, 
31  S.  E.  234. 

45.  Edison  Electric  Illuminating 
Oo.  V.  Riker,  90  Hun,  608,  36  N.  Y. 
Supp.  906;  Higham  v.  Vanosdol,  125^ 
Tnd.  74,  25  N.  E.  140. 

46.  Gudgel  y.  Kitterman,  108  IIU 
60. 


CONSTDEBATION. 


887 


§  66.  EfiFect.of  want  or  insufficiency  of  consideration. — 'The 
general  rules  as  to  want  and  inadequacy  of  consideration  as  an 
element  of  fraud  affecting  the  validity  of  conveyancesy  set  forth 
in  preceding  sections  of  this  chapter/^  are  applicable  to  trans- 
actions between  parents  and  their  childrem.^  The  twife's  equity, 
if  she  does  not  secure  it  in  her  lif etime,  does  not  survive  to  her 
children,  and  where  a  legacy  to  her  is  vested  in  her  husband 
by  her  death,  his  transfer  of  a  portion  of  it  to  their  infant  child, 
is  fraudulent  as  against  his  existing  creditors.^  A  conveyance  by 
an  insolvent  debtor  to  his  son  without  consideration  will  be  con- 
clusively presumed  to  be  frauduleat  as  to  creditors,  whatever 
may  have  been  the  intent  of  the  parties.^  A  conveyamoe  by  a 
father  to  his  son  without  consideration  and  for  the  purpose  of 
defrauding  his  creditors  is  void  as  to  the  creditors.^  A  debtor's 
conveyance  to  his  son  and  son-in-law,  who  in  good  faith  pay  him 
about  a  third  of  its  value,  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors."    A  con- 


47.  See  chap.  VIII,  §§  82-37, 
supra. 

4S.  Alck— Hamll  ▼.  MitcheH,  61 
Ala.  270;  Hubbard  v.  Allen,  50  Ala. 
2Sd. 

Ill — Stevens  ▼.  Dillman,  86  lU. 
233. 

/ful.— O'Brien  t.  Coulter,  2  Blackf. 
421;  Farmers'  Bank  y.  First  Nat. 
Bank,  30  Ind.  App.  520,  66  N.  E. 
503. 

loioa, — Cloud  V.  Malvin  (1898),  75 
N.  W.  646. 

JTy. — ^Loving  v.  Sweeney,  20  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1654,  49  S.  W.  961. 

ir<i— Richards  v.  Swan,  7  Gill.  366. 

Miss, — ^Moore  v.  Jeffries  (1895),  18 
So.  272. 

Mo, — ^Ridenour-Baker  Qrooery  Co. 
T.  Monroe,  142  Mo.  165,  43  S.  W. 
633. 

Neh. — First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Reece, 
64  Neb.  292,  89  N.  W.  804,  where  the 
only  consideration  was  the  payment 


of  the  interest  on  a  mortgage  on  the 
property. 

N.  F.— daswell  r.  Hill,  47  N.  H. 
407,  a  gift  of  a  musical  instrument 
to  a  stepdaughter  from  her  step- 
father is  not  valid,  as  against  exist- 
ing creditors. 

Tenn.— Walter  y.  Hartman  (1902), 
67  S.  W.  476. 

Tea;.— Hughes  v.  Roper,  42  Tex. 
116;  Walters  v.  C^ntrell  (Civ.  App. 
1902),  66  S.  W.  790. 

7*.— Dewey  v.  Long,  25  Vt.  564. 

Va. — Norris  v.  Jones^  93  Va.  176, 
24  S.  E.  911. 

lFt«.— Fischer  v.  Schult*,  98  Wis. 
462,  74  N.  W.  222. 

40.  Barker  v.  Woods,  1  Sandf.  Ch. 
(N.  y.)  129. 

50.  Austin  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  47 
HI.  App.  224. 

51.  Burtch  V.  Elliot,  3  Ind.  99. 

52.  Adams'  Assignee  ▼.  Branch,  8 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  178. 


388  FllAUDULBWT   COWVBYANCES. 

Tojanoe  of  property  bj  a  debtor  in  failing  oircumstanoes  to  his 
child  for  a  very  amall  portion  of  its  value  is  fraudulent  and  void 
as  to  his  existing  creditors."  A  transfer  to  one's  stepdau^ter, 
based  on  a  promise  which  is  not  binding  on  the  promisor,  is  vol- 
untary and  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  where  the  grantor  has  no 
other  property  left  with  which  to  pay  his  debts.^ 

fi3.  LLonberger  v.  Baker,  14  Mo.         64.  Garnet  v.  Simmmni^  103  Iowa, 
App.  353,  affd  88  Mo.  447,  oonv«y-      183,  72  N.  W.  444. 
anoe  of  property  worth  $14,000  for 
$100. 


CoKFmsNTXAi.  Relations  ov  Pabtiss. 


88ft 


CHAPTER   IX. 

Confidential  Bblations  of  Pabths. 

Seelioii   1.  TraEBactions  between  persons  in  fiduciary  And  friendly  TdatloiliL 

2.  Transactions  between  employer  and  emplc^ee. 

3.  Transactions  between  relatives  in  general. 

4.  Transactions  between  busband  and  wife. 

5.  Porcbase  of  husband's  property  at  private  or  publie  aalaL 

6.  Conveyances  to  wife  from  third  persons. 

7.  Giving  false  credit  to  husband. 

8.  Transactions  between  parent  and  child. 

9.  Procuring  conveyance  from  third  person. 

Section  1.  Transactions  between  persons  in  fiduciary  and 
friendly  relations. — ^Where  parties  ooeupy  intimate  and  confiden- 
tial relationSy  transactions  between  them  are  subject  to  more  care* 
ful  scrutiny  than  tiiose  between  strangers,  and,  wiien  such  trans- 
actions conflict  with  the  rights  of  others,  such  parties  are  held  to 
closer  proof  of  their  fairness.^  Evidence  of  confidential  business 
relations  existing  between  the  parties,  as,  for  example,  tiiat  the 
grantor  and  grantee  were  partners  in  the  property  conveyed  at 
the  time  the  instrument  was  executed,  is  admissible  to  show 
fraudulent  intent.'  No  presumption  of  fraud  attaches  because 
the  debtor  conveyed  to  a  personal  friend,'  and  the  fact  that  the 
conveyance  was  made  to  an  intimate  friend  does  not  of  itself 
render  it  invalid;^  but  it  may  be  sufficient  to  avoid  the  convey- 


1.  Leavitt  v.  La  Force,  71  Mo.  353. 
See  Evidence — ^presumptions  and  bur- 
den of  proof  as  affected  by  relation- 
ship of  parties,  chap.  Xvil,  §  4, 
infra.  Weight  and  sufficiency— trans- 
actions between  relatives,  diap. 
XVII,  §  49,  infra. 

2.  Curtis  V.  Wilcox,  01  Mich.  229, 
51  N.  W.  992;   Strtrng  v.  Bines,  35 


Miss.  201;  Heilbronner  v.  Lloyd,  17 
Mont  299,  42  Pac.  843;  Blum  v. 
Jones,  86  Tenn.  492.  25  S.  W.  694. 

3.  Schroeder  v.  Walsh,  16  HI.  App. 
590,  affd  120  HI.  403,  11  N.  E.  70. 

4.  Davis  V.  Schwarts,  155  U.  S. 
631,  15  Sup.  Ct  237,  39  L.  Bd.  289. 
See  also  Baker  v.  Dobyns,  34  Ky. 
220;  Buford  v.  Cook,  36  Fed.  21. 


344 


Fbaudulbnt  Conveyances. 


intent  of  the  parties,  and  even  where  there  is  no  fraudulent  intent, 
a  conveyance  by  a  grantor  who  was  greatly  indebted  or  financially 
embarrassed  at  the  time,  or  where  the  nature  of  the  gift  was  ui^^ 
reasonable,  considering  l^e  grantor's  circumstances  and  condition 
in  life,  disproportioned  to  his  property,  and  left  property  insuffi- 
cient for  the  paymenit  of  his  debts,  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to 
creditors." 


Md.  449;  Dorn  t.  Bayer,  16  Md.  144. 

Maas» — Blake  v.  Sawin,  92  Mass. 
340. 

Mias, — Young  y.  White,  25  Miss. 
1 46 ;   Swayze  v.  McCrossin,  21  Miss.  317 

Mo. — ^Bohannon  v.  Gombs,  79  Mo. 
306;  Payne  v.  Stanton,  59  Mo.  158; 
Patten  v.  Casey,  57  Mo.  118;  Far- 
mers', etc..  Bank  v.  Price,  41  Mo. 
App.  291. 

^6d.— Smith  T.  Schmitz,  10  Neb. 
600,  7  N.  W.  329. 

N.  J. — Bouquet  t.  Heyman,  60  N. 
J.  Eq.  114,  24  Atl.  266;  City  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Hamilton,  34  N.  J.  Eq.  158; 
Haston  t.  Castner,  31  N.  J.  Eq.  697; 
Morris  Canal,  etc,  Co.  y.  Steams,  23 
N.  J.  Eq.  414. 

y.  C. — ^Lassiter  y.  Dayis,  64  N.  C. 
498;  Qreen  y.  Komegay,  49  N.  C.  66, 
67  Am.  Dec.  261. 

R,  /. — ^McKenna  v.  Crowley,  16  R. 
I.  364,  17  Atl.  354. 

B,  O, — ^Backham  y.  Secrest,  2  Rich 
Eq.  54;  Blake  y.  Jones,  1  Bailey  Eq. 
141,  21  Am.  Dec.  530. 

W,  Va. — ^Lockhard  y.  Beckley,  10 
W.  Va.  87. 

10.  N.  7.— Holmes  y.  Clark,  48 
Barb.  tST. 

U.  8. — ^Hinde  y.  Longworth,  11 
Wheat.  199,  6  L.  Ed.  454. 

ArA?.— Wright  y.  Campbell,  27  Ark. 
637;  Smith  y.  Yell,  8  Ark.  470;  Dodd 
y.  MeCraw,  8  Ark.  83,  46  Am.  Dee. 
301. 


Conn, — Salmon  y.  Bennett,  1  Conn* 
525,  7  Am.  Dec.  237. 

Ill — Steyens  y.  Dillman,  86  lU. 
233;  Austin  y.  First  Nat  Bank,  47 
HI.  App.  224;  RusseU  y.  Fanning,  2 
ni.  App.  632. 

/tuf.— Burtch  y.  Elliott,  3  Ind.  99. 

lotoa. — Gameet  y.  Simmons,  lOa 
Iowa,  163,  72  N.  W.  444. 

JSTy.— Trimble  y.  Ratcliff,  9  B.  Men. 
511;  Adams  y.  Branch,  3  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
178. 

Jfe.'Wheelden  y.  Wilson,  44  Me. 
11. 

Md. — Benson  y.  Benson,  70  Md. 
253,  16  Atl.  657;  Biddinger  y. 
WUand,  67  Md.  359,  10  Atl.  202; 
Richards  y.  Swan,  7  Gill,  366. 

Mo. — Snyder  y.  Free,  114  Mo.  360, 
21  S.  W.  847;  Donoyan  y.  Dunning, 
69  Mo.  436;  Dunlap  y.  MitcheU,  80 
Mo.  App.  393. 

If.  J. — Den  V.  Lippencott,  6  N.  J. 
L.  473. 

N.  C— Burton  y.  Farinholt,  86  K. 
C.  260;  Black  y.  Coldwell,  49  N.  C. 
150. 

Ohio. — ^Humbert  y.  Cincinnati  M. 
E.  Church,  Wright,  213. 

Pa.— Kern's  Estate,  4  Pa.  Dist  73. 

Tenn. — Carpenter  y.  Scales  (Ch. 
App.  1897),  48  S.  W.  249. 

7e0.— Van  Bibber  y.  Mathis,  52 
Tex.  406. 

Va. — Coleman  y.  Cocke,  6  Rand. 
618,  18  Am.  Dec  757. 


CONFIDBNTIAL  BsLATIOKB  OF  PaBTIBS. 


391 


§  2.  Transactions  between  employer  and  employee. — A  con- 
veyance by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  his  employee  under  circum- 
stances which  clearly  show  a  scheme  to  defraud  the  creditors  of 
the  debtor  will  be  held  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors.^' 
Where  a  vendor,  who  is  known  to  be  totally  insolvent  by  his 
<30iD£dential  clerk  and  manager,  sells  to  the  latter,  who  has  no 
means,  his  whole  stock  of  goods,  on  long  credit  and  without  se- 
<;urity,  the  sale  will  be  declared  fraudulent  and  simulated.^* 
Where  a  merchant,  unable  to  meet  his  debts  and  expecting  to  be 
pressed  by  creditors,  sells  his  goods  to  a  derk  in  his  employ 
who  has  limited  means,  the  sale  being  made  on  long  credit  and 
without  security,  and  then  takes  employment  from  his  former 
clerk  and  aids  in  carrying  on  the  business  at  a  salary  nearly 
double  that  which  the  clerk  before  received,  the  transaction  is 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  creditors. ^^  Where  a  debtor  con- 
veyed lands  to  one  in  his  employ  who  subsequently  mortgaged 
the  same  to  him,  and  he  afterwards  acted  as  and  for  the  grantee 
in  negotiating  for  the  sale  of  the  land,  and  the  land  was  con- 
veyed to  others  and  mortgaged  back  to  him,  the  original  con- 
veyance was  held  fraudulent  as  to  creditors,** 

§  3.  Transactions  between  rdatives  in  general. — ^The  rela- 
tionship of  parties  to  a  conveyance  to  each  other,  by  blood  or 
marriage,  though  regarded  as  a  circumstance  which  should 
aiwaken  suspicion,  is  of  itself,  without  other  facts  and  circum- 
stances, no  evidence  of  fraud  in  a  conveyance  of  property,  and 


13.  Johnston  y.  Ferris,  12  St.  Rep. 
(N.  T.)  666,  where  the  evidence 
showed  »  sale  of  the  business  of  a 
debtor  to  his  clerk,  and  the  subse- 
quent failure  and  assignment  of  the 
Tendee  after  he  had  executed  a  confes- 
sion of  judgment  to  the  vendor  by 
which  the  latter  was  enabled  to  re- 
possess himself  of  the  stock  in  trade 
or  its  proceeds,  freed  from  his  own 
debts  as  well  as  the  debts  incurred 
\ij  such  vendee  while  he  carried  on 


the  business;  Vance  ▼.  Phillips,  6  Hill 
(N.  T.),  433,  where  one  in  insolvent 
circumstances  sold  his  stock  of  goods 
to  his  clerk,  an  infant  and  a  brother- 
in-law,  took  the  infant's  notes,  and 
absconded. 

14.  Walton  v.  Birch,  10  La.  Ann. 
100 ;  Beck  v.  Brady,  7  La.  Ann.  124. 

16.  O'Connell  v.  Cruise,  1  Handy 
(Ohio),  163,  12  Ohio  Dec.  81. 

16.  Lacrosse  Nat.  Bank  v.  Wilson, 
74  Wis.  301,  43  N.  W.  153. 


392 


FlUUDULENT   CONVSYANOXS. 


afFords  no  preeumption  of  law  against  the  bona  fides  of  the 
transaction;^^  but  the  fact  of  relationship  maj  properly  be  con- 
sidered, in  coimection  with  other  evidence  tending  to  impeach 
the  transaction,  in  determining  whether  a  conveyance  wafi  fraud- 
ulent" The  fact  that  the  parties  to  a  conveyance  are  brothers 
does  not,  of  and  in  itself,  cast  suspicion  on  the  transaction,  or 
create  such  a  prima  facie  presumption  against  its  validity  as 


17.  y.  r.— DuBois  V.  Barker,  4 
Hun,  80,  6  Thomp.  ft  C.  349. 

Ala. — ^Morrow  v.  OampbeU,  118 
Ala.  330,  24  So.  852,  the  kinship  of 
parties  does  not  raise  ai^  presump- 
tion of  fraud,  or  require  any  higher 
degree  of  proof  of  the  bona  fides  of 
the  transaction  than  would  be  suffi- 
cient to  reasonably  satisfy  the  minds 
of  the  Jury  if  the  relationship  did  not 
exist;  Smith  t.  Collins,  94  Ala.  394, 
10  So.  334;  Montgomery's  Ex'rs  ▼. 
Kirksey,  26  Ala.  172. 

D,  C— Clark  v.  Krause,  2  Mackey» 
559. 

/^.—Nelson  v.  Smith,  28  111.  496. 

Ind, — Basye  v.  Daniel,  1  Ind.  378. 

Iowa, — Conry  y.  Boiedict  (1898), 
76  N.  W.  840;  Adams  v.  Ryan,  61 
Iowa,  733,  17  N.  W.  159. 

La, — Shadbume  v.  Amonette,  7  La. 
Am.  89;  Maurin  v.  Rouquer,  19  La. 
594;  Beale  v.  Delancy,  6  Mart.  N.  S. 
641,  17  Am.  Dec.  199;  Ham  v.  Herri- 
man,  1  Mart  N.  S.  535;  St.  Avid  v. 
Weimprender's  Syndics,  9  Mart  648. 

Neh, — ^Lininger  v.  Herron,  18  Neb. 
450,  25  N.  W.  578. 

N.  J. — ^Demarest  ▼.  Terhune,  18  N. 
J.  Eq.  45. 

Pa.-— Reehling  v.  Byers,  94  Pa.  St. 
316;    Newton    t.    Shaffer,    6    Kulp. 

357. 

Tcwi.— Sporrcr  ▼.  Eiller,  48  Tenn. 
633;  Bumpas  v.  Dotson,  26  Tenn.  310, 
46  Am.  Dec.  81. 

lV^t«.— Blciler    v.    Moore,    88    Wis. 


438,  60  N.  W.  792;  Sterling  v.  Rip- 
ley, 3  Chandl.  166,  3  Pin.  156. 

Contra,  —  Ala,  —  Gordon  v.  Mcll- 
wain,  82  Ala.  247,  2  So.  671;  Mar- 
shall v.  Croom,  52  Ala.  554. 

Tfeb, — Lipscomb  t.  Lyon,  19  Neb» 
511,  27  N.  W.  731. 

Tew. — ^Reynolds  r.  Lansford,  16  Tez. 
286. 

18.  U,  B, — ^Whetmore  v.  Murdock, 
29  Fed.  Cas.  No.  17,509,  3  Woodb.  & 
M.  380. 

/U.— Schroeder  ▼.  Walsh,  120  SL 
403,  11  N.  £.  70. 

Iowa, — ^Adams  v.  Ryan,  61  Iowa, 
733,  17  N.  W.  159,  although  it  is  com- 
petent to  show  the  relationship  of  the 
parties  to  an  alleged  fraudulent  con- 
yeyanoe,  such  relationship  will  not 
of  itself  warrant  a  finding  of  fraud 
without  evidence  that  the  grantee 
knew  that  the  grantor  intended  by  the 
conveyance  to  defraud  his  creditors. 

JSTon.— -Whitson  v.  Griffis,  39  Kan. 
211,  17  Pac.  801,  7  Am.  St  Rep.  546; 
Burton  v.  Boyd,  7  Kan.  17. 

La. — Cadiere  t.  Gaidry,  42  La. 
Ann.  169,  7  So.  232. 

Or. — Goodale  v.  Wheeler,  41  Or. 
190,  68  Pac.  753,  on  account  of  the 
relationship  it  is  incumbent  on  the 
grantee  to  establish  the  good  faith  of 
the  transaction. 

Tea?. — Steinam  v.  Gahwiler  (Civ. 
App.  1895),  30  S.  W.  472. 

Wis, — ^^fissinskie  v.  McMurdo,  107 
Wis.  578,  83  N.  W.  758. 


CoiTFmBNTIAL  BSLATIONB  OF  PaBTIBS. 


893 


will  Inquire  a  oaurt  to  hold  it  to  be  invalid,  witliout  proof  of 
fraud  on  the  part  of  the  grantor  participated  in  by  the  grantee.^ 
Although  transactions  between  members  of  a  family  are  closely 
scrutinized^  the  fact  that  a  purchaser  of  a  debtor's  property  was 
his  brother-in-law  was  not  of  itself  sufficient  to  estaUish  fraud 
in  the  conveyance  as  against  creditors.^  The  relation  of  mother- 
in-law  and  son-in-law  between  the  vendor  and  purchaser  of  land 
is  not  of  itself  a  badge  of  fraud,  and  would  not  bIqdb  diif t  the 
burd^i  of  proof ."^  The  fact  that  a  mortgagee  of  goods  is  the 
fathar-in-law  of  the  mortgagor  raises  no  presumption  that  the 
mortgage  was  given  with  intent  to  defraud  the  mortgagor's  credi- 
tors." A  voluntary  conveyance  from  a  brother  to  a  sister  is 
not  fraudulent  as  to  a  subsequent  creditor  of  the  grantor,  un- 
less actual  fraud  is  shown."  In  some  jurisdictions  it  is  held  that 
transactions  between  father  and  child,  husband  and  wife,  brother 
and  sister,  and  others  connected  by  blood  or  marriage,  be- 
tween whom  there  exists  a  natural  and  strong  motive  to  protect 
each  other  at  the  expense  of  creditors,  will  be  more  closely  scru- 
tinized than  if  the  transactions  were  between  strangers,"  and  that 


19.  U.  £r.— Gottlieb  ▼.  Thfitoher,  161 
XJ.  &  271,  14  Sup.  Ct  319,  3S  L.  Ed. 
167. 

Ala. — Sbealj  ▼.  Edwards,  76  Ala. 
411. 

/IL— DaiMd  ▼.  Delanoegr,  36  111. 
25S. 

W.  O.—Ciij  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Bridgen, 
114  N.  C.  383,  19  S.  B.  666. 

8.  Z>.— Lane  ▼.  Starr,  1  S.  D.  107, 
45  K.  W.  212.  There  is  nothing  in 
the  relation  of  brothers  to  render 
fraudulent  a  judgment  by  confession 
on  a  just  debt  by  one  In  tB,Yor  of  an- 
other. Kitchen  ▼.  Mcdoekey,  160 
Pa.  St.  376,  24  Atl.  688,  30  Am.  St. 
Rep.  811. 

20.  Thompson  v.  Zudonayvr 
(Iowa,  1903),  94  N.  W.  476;  Flue- 
gel  V.  Henschel,  7  N.  D.  276,  74  N.  W. 
996,  66  Am.  St  Bep.  6^ 


21.  Tompkins  v.  Nidiols,  63  Ala. 
197. 

22.  Stevens  t.  Breen,  76  Wis.  695, 
44  N.  W.  646. 

23.  Hunt  V.  Nance,  28  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
1188,  92  S.  W.  6.  See  Braffman  y. 
Glover,  36  S.  0.  431,  14  S.  E.  936; 
Copis  T.  Middleton,  2  Madd.  410,  17 
Rev.  Rep.  226,  66  Eng.  Reprint,  386, 
as  to  conveyances  to  a  nephew. 

24.  Marshall  v.  Groom,  60  Ala. 
121 ;  Gregory  v.  Gray,  88  Ga.  172,  14 
S.  E.  187,  transfer  to  son-in-law; 
Mellier  v.  Bartlett,  106  Mo.  381,  17 
S.  W.  296;  Penn  v.  Trompen  (Neb. 
1904),  100  N.  W.  312;  Blair  State 
Bank  v.  Bunn,  61  Neb.  464,  85  N.  W. 
627;  Schott  v.  Machamer,  64  Neb. 
614,  74  N.  W.  864;  Farrington  v. 
Stone,  36  Neb.  466,  53  N.  W.  389; 
3£arcus   v.   Leake,   4   Neb.    (Unoff.) 


394 


Fbaxtdui^kt  Cokveyances. 


they  may  be  shown  to  be  fraudulent  by  less  proof  than  in  oases 
where  such  relationship  does  not  exist;  and  the  party  daiming 
the  benefit  of  such  a  transaction  is  held  to  a  fuller  and  stricter 
proof  of  its  justice,  and  clearer  and  more  oomvincing  proof  of 
the  faimes  of  the  transaction,  after  it  is  shown  to  be  prima 
facte  fraudulent,  than  would  be  required  where  ihe  transaction 
was  between  persons  not  related.^  On  the  oontrary  other  cases 
hold  that  business  dealings  between  near  relatives  are  to  be 
treated  as  are  the  transactions  of  other  people,  and  no  clearer 
proof  of  the  hona  fides  of  the  parties  is  required  than  in  other 
cases,  and  if  the  hcma  fides  of  the  transaction  is  attacked  the 
fraud  alleged  must  be  proved.^  Where  the  evidence  shows  that 
the  grantee  paid  a  full  and  adequate  price  or  about  the  fair 
cash  value  of  the  property,  the  transaction  will  not  be  held 
fraudulent  merely  because  he  was  related  to  the  grantor."  It 
is  only  where  a  conveyance  is  voluntary  or  for  an  inadequate 


364,  04  N.  W.  100,  a  brother-in-law 
is  a  relative  within  the  rule  that 
transactions  between  relatives  should 
be  closely  scrutinized;  Kundson  v. 
Parker,  3  Neb.  (Unoflf.)  481,  91  N. 
W.  350;  Colston  v.  Miller,  65  W.  Va. 
400,  47  S.  £.  268;  Bieme  v.  Ray,  37 
W.  Va.  571,  16  S.  E.  804. 

25.  Reeves  v.  Skipper,  05  Ala.  407, 
10  So.  300,  transfer  between 
brothers;  Lehman  v.  Greenhut,  88 
Ala.  478,  7  So.  200;  Hubbard  v.  Al- 
len, 50  Ala.  283;  Martin  ▼.  Dungan, 
166  lU.  274,  41  N.  E.  43,  transfer 
between  brothers;  Braffman  v.  Glo- 
ver, 35  S.  C.  431,  14  S.  £. 
935,  transfer  to  a  nephew;  Farm- 
ers' Transp.  Co.  v.  Swaney,  48 
W.  Va.  272,  37  S.  E.  502, 
the  relationship,  connected  with 
other  circumstances,  may  strengthen 
the  presumption  of  fraud;  Butler  v. 
Thompson,  45  W.  Va.  660,  31  S.  E. 
960,  72  Am.  St.  Rep.  838,  transfer  to 
a  nephew;  Burt  v.  Ximmons,  20  W. 


Va.  441,  2  a  E.  780,  6  Am.  St  Rep. 
664. 

26.  Curry  v.  Lloyd,  22  Fed.  258; 
Clewis  v.  Malon,  110  Ala.  312,  24  So. 
767;  Morrow  v.  Campbell,  118  Ala. 
330,  24  So.  852;  Goetter  v.  Norman, 
107  Ala.  585,  10  So.  56;  Troy  Fer- 
tilizer Co.  V.  Norman,  107  Ala.  667, 
18  So.  201;  Teague  v.  Lindsey,  106 
Ala.  266,  17  So.  538;  Reehling  v. 
Byers,  04  Pa.  St  316.  See  aUo  Evi- 
dence as  affected  by  relationship  of 
parties,  chap.  XVII,  §§  4,  40,  infra. 

27.  Ala. — ^Russell  v.  Davis,  133 
Ala.  647,  31  So.  514,  01  Am.  St  Rep. 
66,  transfer  to  brother;  Bradley  v. 
Ragsdale,  64  Ala.  558;  Young  v. 
Dumas,  30  Ala.  60;  Troy  v.  Smith, 
33  Ala.  460,  mortgage. 

Del. — ^Hagany  v.  Herbert,  3  Houst. 
628,  sale  of  household  goods  to 
father-in-law. 

Fla.—Wilton  v.  Lott,  5  Fla.  306, 
sale  of  entire  property  to  mother-in- 
law. 


CoNFIDEirTIAL  BeLATIONS  OF  PaBTIES. 


395 


consideration  that  inquiry  into  the  relationship  of  the  parties  be- 
comes material.^  But  a  conveyance  will  be  looked  upoa  with 
suspiciosL  where  the  grantor  is  in  failing  circumstances  and  the 
conveyance  is  of  all  his  property .**  And  where  the  conveyance 
is  made  when  the  grantor  is  insolvent,  for  a  consideration  which 
is  fictitious,  the  sale  will  be  held  to  be  simulated  and  the  con- 
veyance to  be  fraudulent.^  A  conveyance  will  be  held  to  be 
fraudulent  where  it  is  made  to  a  relative  by  a  debtor  in  failing 
circumstances,  upon  an  inadequate  consideration,  and  the  con- 
veyance is  attended  with  circumstances  of  unusual  caution  or 
other  suspicious  circumstances,^  such  as  the  fact  that  the  trans- 
fer is  to  a  poor  relation^  who  is  without  means  or  is  not  shown 
to  be  able  to  pay  therefor,*'  or  in  consideration  of  the  payment 
of  a  large  and  suspicious  debt  to  himself,''  the  fact  that  the 


Oa. — Cowart  v.  Epstein,  101  Ga.  1, 
29  S.  £.  370,  transfer  to  brother. 

/U.— Schroeder  v.  V^alsh,  120  111. 
403/  11  N.  £.  70;  Waterman  ▼.  Don- 
aldson, 43  111.  29,  transfer  to  uncle; 
Wightman  ▼.  Hart,  37  111.  123, 
transfer  to  nephew. 

lotoa, — ^Thompson  t.  Zuckmayer 
(Iowa,  1903),  94  N.  W.  476,  transfer 
to  brother-in-law;  Austin  v.  Bowman, 
81  Iowa,  277,  46  N.  W.  1111,  transfer 
to  father-in-law;  Adams  v.  Ryan,  61 
Iowa,  733,  17  N.  W.  169. 

iTy.— Mills  V.  Hunt,  12  Ky.  L. 
Kep.  866,  15  S.  W.  518,  transaction 
between  brothers. 

Miss, — ^Verner  v.  Vemer,  64  Miss. 
184,  1  So.  52,  transfer  to  brother. 

Mo. — ^Martin  ▼.  Fox,  40  Mo.  App. 
664. 

Mont. — ^Noyes  y.  Boss,  23  Mont. 
425,  59  Pac.  367,  75  Am.  St.  Rep.  543, 
47  L.  R.  A.  400,  mortgage. 

yeh, — ^McEvony  ▼.  MeCann,  31 
Neb.  597,  48  N.  W.  389,  sale  to 
brother. 

Tenn.— Oooee  Bank  t.  Nelson,  41 


Tenn.  186,  the  fact  that  the  property 
was  sold  to  a  relation  by  affinity, 
though  in  general  suspicious,  will  not 
render  the  sale  void,  if  made  bona 
fide  and  for  a  fair  value. 

28.  English  v.  Porter,  109  HI.  285. 

29.  Borland  v.  Mayo,  8  Ala.  104. 

30.  Martin  v.  Kennedy,  83  Ky. 
335;  Friedlander  v.  Brooks,  35  La. 
Am.  741;  Birdsale  v.  Lakey,  6  La. 
Ann.  646. 

31.  Burgess  y.  Simonson,  45  N.  Y. 
225;  Sands  t.  Codwise,  4  Johns.  (N. 
Y.)  536,  4  Am.  Dec.  305;  Barrow  v. 
Bailey,  5  Fla.  9;  Milner  v.  Davis,  65 
Iowa,  265,  21  N.  W.  599;  Cox  v.  Cox, 
39  Kan.  121,  17  Pac.  847. 

32.  Pickett  v.  Pipkin,  64  Ala.  520; 
Schumacher  v.  Bell,  164  111.  181,  45 
N.  E.  428,  affg  61  111.  App.  644; 
Gramet  v.  Simmons,  103  Iowa,  163,  72 
N.  W.  444;  McDonald  v.  Farrell,  60 
Iowa,  335,  14  N.  W.  318;  Steinam  v. 
Qahwiler  (Tex.  Civ.  App.  1895),  30 
S.  W.  470. 

33.  Robinson  v.  Frankel,  85  Tenn. 
475,  3  S.  W.  652. 


896 


FbAUDULBITT   CoiryjEYANOBfiU 


sale  ifl  made  on  a  long  or  unusual  credit^'*  or  for  die  purdiaser'a 
unsecured  notes,^  the  fact  that  the  purchase  is  made  without 
any  reasonably  apparent  motive,**  the  fact  that  the  parties  cannot 
explain,  how  the  indebtedness  arose  and  how  the  amoimt  claimed 
is  made  up,*^  or  the  fact  that  the  seller  takes  an  active  interest 
in  the  property  and  business  after  the  transfer,**  or  retains  pos- 
session of  real  estate  without  payment  of  rent.**  Attachment, 
obtained  by  relatives  of  an  insolvent,  will  be  set  aside  as  to  other 
creditors,  on  proof  of  acts  of  collusion  between  the  relatives  and 
insolvent  to  deceive  other  creditors,  and  on  the  inability  of  lixe 
relatives  to  satisfactorily  explain  their  claims.^* 


f  4.  Traiiaactions  between  husband  and  wife. — ^Fraud  is  one 
of  the  broadest  issues  known  to  the  law,  for  it  can  seldom  be 
proved  by  direct  evidence,  but  is  dependent  upon  circumstances 
which,  separately  considered,  may  be  quite  immaterial,  but  when 
combined  are  not  only  material  but  have  great  persuasive  foroa 
The  marriage  relation  affords  such  peculiar  opportunities  for 
practicing  fraud  upon  creditors,  and  fraud  is  so  easily  practiced 
and  concealed  under  cover  of  the  marriage  relation,  that  equity 
requires  that  the  courts  should  scrutinize  with  the  utmost  care 
all  conveyances  and  businsess  transactions  between  husband  and 
wife,  alleged  to  be  fraudulent  as  against  creditors  and  which 
injuriously  affect  the  rights  of  creditors.^    It  is,  therefore,  held 


84.  Thames  v.  Bembert's  Adm'r, 
63  Ala.  561 ;  Cowling  v.  Estea,  16  111. 
App.  265;  Bibb  ▼.  Baker's  Adm'r,  56 
Ky.  292. 

35.  Helms  v.  Green,  105  N.  C.  251, 
11  8.  E.  470,  18  Am.  8t.  Rep.  893; 
Robinson  v.  Frankel,  85  Tenn.  475,  3 
S.  W.  652. 

36.  Bibb  V.  Baker's  Adm'r,  56  Ky.  292. 

37.  Morris  y.  Lindauer,  54  Fed. 
28,  4  C.  a  A.  162,  6  U.  S.  App.  510; 
Marks  v.  Crow,  14  Or.  382,  13  Pac. 
65;  Catchings  t.  Harcrow,  48  Ark. 
20,  49  Ark.  20,  3  S.  W.  884. 


38.  American  Nat.  Bank  y.  Viter- 
bo,  46  La.  Ann.  1318,  16  So.  199. 

39.  Johnson  y.  Harrison,  6  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  592, 

40.  Rice  y.  Less,  105  Ala.  298,  16 
So.  917. 

41.  White  y.  Benjamin,  150  N.  Y. 
258;  Bennett  y.  Boshold,  123  111. 
App.  311;  Kennedy  y.  Powell,  34 
Kan.  22,  7  Pac.  606,  they  should  be 
closely  scrutinized  to  see  that  they 
are  honest,  that  the  ooonsideration  is 
adequate,  and  that  it  is  paid  by  the 
wife  out  of  her  separate  estate. 


CONFIDSNTIAL  ReLATIOKS  OF  PaBTIES. 


897 


80  a  general  rule  that  transfers  of  property  from  husband  to 
wife,  by  reason  of  which  creditors  are  prevented  from  collecting 
their  claims,  will  be  closely  scrutinized  to  see  that  they  are 
fair  and  honest,  and  not  mere  contrivances  resorted  to  for  the 
purpose  of  placing  the  husband's  property  beyond  the  reach  of 
creditors,  and  must  be  shown  to  have  been  made  in  good  faith 
and  upon  adequate  consideration.^    A  conveyance  from  a  hus- 


42.  y.  7. — ^Allee  ▼.  Slane,  26  App. 
Diy.  455,  50  K.  Y.  Supp.  55,  but 
where  the  plaintiff  fails  to  establish 
that  he  was  creditor  when  the  trans- 
fer was  made,  or  that  the  debtor  was 
insolvent  at  the  time  of  the  delivery 
of  the  deed,  no  presumption  of  fraud 
in  the  conveyanoe  arises  from  the 
relationship  between  the  grantee  and 
the  grantor. 

17.  8. — ^Hinchman  v.  Parlin,  etc., 
Co.,  74  Fed.  60S,  21  C.  C.  A.  273; 
Graves  v.  Davenport,  50  Fed.  SSI. 

Ala. — McTeers  v.  Perkins,  106  Ala. 
411,  17  So.  547. 

Arh. — Hershy  v.  Latham,  46  Ark. 
542. 

Conn. — ^Norwalk  v.  Ireland,  68 
Conn.  1,  35  Atl.  804;  Fishel  v.  Matta, 
76  Conn.  197,  56  Atl.  658;  Throck- 
morton V.  Chapnuui,  65  Conn.  441,  32 
Atl.  930;  Gilligan  v.  Lord,  51  Conn. 
562. 

(Ski.-— Reese  v.  Shell,  05  Oa.  749,  22 
S.  £.  580;  Skellie  v.  James,  81  Ga. 
419,  8  S.  E.  607;  Kelly  v.  Simmons, 
73  Ga.  716;  Rountree  v.  Lathrop,  69 
Ga.  757;  Shorter  v.  Methvin,  52  Ga. 
225. 

/«.— Victor  V.  Swisky,  200  111.  257, 
65  N.  E.  625;  Dillman  v.  Nadelhof- 
fer,  162  111.  625,  45  N.  £.  680;  Har- 
ting  V.  Jockers,  136  111.  627,  27  N. 
£:.  188,  29  Am.  St.  Rep.  341;  Frank 
V.  King,  121  ni.  250,  12  N.  E.  720; 
Gibson  v.  Kimmitt,  113  111.  App.  611. 


JTon.— Kennedy  ▼.  Powell,  34  Kan. 
22,  7  Pac  606. 

Ky, — Gross  v.  Eddinger,  86  Ky. 
168,  3  S.  W.  1,  8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  829. 

La, — Brown  v.  Ferguson,  4  La. 
257. 

Me. — ^Trefethen  v.  Lynam,  00  Me. 
376,  38  Atl.  335,  60  Am.  St.  Rep.  271, 
38  L.  R.  A.  100;  Robinson  v.  Clark, 
76  Me.  493. 

Jfd.—- Duttera  v.  Babylon,  83  Md. 
536,  35  AU.  64. 

Mis9. — ^Wynne  v.  Mason,  72  Mist. 
424,  18  So.  422. 

Mont, — Shepherd  v.  First  Nat. 
Bank,  16  Mont.  24,  40  Pac  67;  Lam- 
brecht  v.  Patten,  15  Mont.  260,  38 
Pac.  1063. 

^6&.-- First  Nat.  Bank  v.  BartleU, 
8  Neb.  319,  1  N.  W.  199;  Aultman  v. 
Obermeyer,  6  Neb.  260. 

Pa.— Sutton  V.  Guthrie,  188  Pa.  St. 
359,  41  Atl.  528;  Billington  v.  Sweet- 
ing, 172  Pa.  St.  161,  33  AU.  543; 
Reese  v.  Reese,  157  Pa.  St.  200,  27 
AU.  703;  Wilson  v.  Silkman,  97  Pa. 
St.  509. 

8.  C.--Charleston  Bank  v.  Dowling, 
52  S.  C.  345,  29  S.  E.  788. 

8,  i).— Watt  V.  Morrow  (1905), 
103  N.  W.  45,  a  court  of  equity  will 
not  regard  of  very  great  importance 
the  mere  fact  that  a  deed  of  land,  al- 
leged to  have  been  purchased  by  the 
judgment  debtor  and  conveyed  to  his 
wife  in  fraud  of  creditors,  was  taken 


398 


TnAJWrrLETfT   CoNVETANOiSS. 


band  to  his  wife  will  not  be  sustained,  in  equity,  wbai  it  inter- 
feres with  the  rights  of  creditors.^    Transfers  between  husband 
and  wife  will  be  looked  on  with  suspicion,  but  a  transfer   of 
property  by  a  debtor  to  his  wife,  if  (m  suificient  consideratiaiiy 
will  not  be  declared  fraudulent  because  of  a  suspicion  arising 
from  the  relatiomfihip  of  the  parties.^    The  existence  of  the  con- 
fidential relationship  between  the  parties  may  be  considered, 
however,  by  the  jury  on  the  issue  of  fraud.*    As  against  a  pre- 
existing creditor,  it  has  been  held  that  a  wife  who  takes  a  con- 
veyance from  her  husband  must  show  an  adequate  consideration^ 
and  that  by  clearer  and  fuller  proof  than  is  required  in  trans- 
actions between  strangers.^    In  some  jurisdictions  a  conveyance 


in  the  name  of  the  wife,  but  wiU  look 
at  the  circumstances  surrounding  the 
transaction,  and  determine  therefrom 
the  real  nature  of  such  transaction; 
Williams  v.  Harris,  4  8.  D.  22,  54  N. 
W.  926,  46  Am.  St.  Rep.  753. 

TeoB. — Flanagan  v.  Oberthier,  50 
Tex.  379. 

Va, — Spence  v.  Repass,  94  Va.  716, 
27  S.  E.  583. 

WM.'Hoxie  T.  Price,  31  Wis.  82. 

4S.  Sims  y.  Rickets,  35  Ind.  181, 
9  Am.  Rep.  679. 

44.  y.  7. — Childs  t.  Connor,  38 
N.  Y.  Super.  Ct,  471,  48  How.  Pr. 
517,  where  the  eyidenoe  fails  to  dis- 
close any  motive  to  induce  a  defend- 
ant to  seek  to  defraud  his  creditors 
by  the  transfer  of  property  to  his 
wife,  and  there  is  an  absence  of 
proof  that  he  was  insolyent  or  unable 
to  pay  aU  his  debts  at  the  time  of 
the  conveyance  by  him,  such  convey- 
ance will  not  be  vacated. 

Ala, — Gopeland  v.  Kehoe,  57  Ala. 
246. 

Me.-— Grant  v.  Ward«  64  Me.  239. 

Jficft.— Steel  V.  De  May,  102  Mich. 
274,  60  N.  W.  684;  Buhl  v.  Peck,  70 
Mich.  44,  37  N.  W.  876. 


Minn, — ^Teller  v.  Bishop,  8  Minn. 
226. 

MiM, — ^Kaufman  v.  Whitney,  50 
Miss.  103. 

Neh. — ^Wanser  v.  Lucas,  44  Keb. 
759,  62  N.  W.  1108;  HUl  ▼.  Fouse, 
32  Neb.  637,  49  N.  W.  760;  Lipscomb 
V.  Lyon,  19  Neb.  511,  27  N.  W.  731. 

W.  Fa.-— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Par- 
sons, 42  W.  Va.  137,  24  S.  E.  554. 

Wm.— Allen  v.  Perry,  56  Wis.  178, 
14  N.  W.  3. 

laerease  la  valve  of  property 
after  purehaae. — ^The  fact  that  a 
married  woman  who  borrowed  five 
hundred  dollars,  with  which  she  pur- 
chased an  interest  in  a  mine  from  her 
husband,  afterwards  sold  it  for  ten 
thousand  dollars,  does  not  stamp  the 
transaction  as  fraudulent,  so  far  as 
the  creditors  of  her  husband  are  con- 
cerned. Sears  v.  Robinson,  61  Iowa, 
745,  16  N.  W.  66. 

46.  Sherman  v.  Hogland,  73  Ind.  472. 

46.  Wedgworth  v.  Wedgworth,  84 
Ala.  274,  4  So.  149;  Claflin  v.  Am- 
brose, 37  Fla.  78,  19  So.  628;  Livey 
V.  Winton,  39  W.  Va.  554,  4  S.  £. 
451.  Contra, — ^Rachofsky  v.  Benson, 
19  Colo.  App.  173,  74  Pae.  655. 


Confidential  Belations  of  Pabties* 


399 


by  an  inBolvemt  debtor  to  his  wife,  whereby  other  creditors  are 
prevemted  from  enforcing  paymeoit  of  their  claims^  is  pTesump- 
tively  fraudulent  as  to  creditors^  and  unless  the  presumption  of 
fraud  be  overcome  by  satisfajctory  affirmative  proof  it  will  not 
be  sustained/^  Where  a  husband  occupies  his  wife's  house  as  a 
home  for  the  family,  he  may  pay  rent  to  her,  and  fraud  is  not 
necessarily  inferred  from  the  fact  that  the  business  transactions 
beytweem  them  are  conducted  on  more  liberal  terms  than  are  usual 
between  strangers.^  Where  a  husband,  being  insolvent,  volun- 
tarily expends  money  in  paying  the  current  expenses  of  taxes,  in- 
surance, and  repairs  on  the  family  residence  belonging  to  his 
wife,  instead  of  paying  rent,  he  is  simply  fulfilling  the  duty 
which  the  law  imposes  upon  him,  and  such  payments  are  not 
made  in  fraud  of  creditors/*  As  we  have  shown  in  previous 
chapters,  the  rules  are  well  established  that  where  the  transaction 
is  unaiffected  by  unfairness  or  fraud,  a  husband  can  convey  prop- 
erty to  his  wife  as  a  gift  where  he  retains  other  property  amply 
sufficient;  to  pay  his  debts,^  and  that  he  may  convey  property  to 


47.  Ala.— Kelley  ▼.  Connell,  110 
Ala.  543,  is  So.  0;  Lammons  t.  Allen, 
88  Ala.  417,  6  So.  016;  Bangs  v.  Ed- 
wards, 88  Ala.  882,  6  So.  764; 
Booker  ▼.  Waller,  81  Ala.  649,  8  So. 
226. 

Ky. — ^Long  y.  Deposit  Bank,  28  Ky, 
L.  Rep.  913,  90  S.  W.  961,  where  the 
husband  was  held  out  as  owner  of  the 
land,  the  conveyance  was  presump- 
tively fraudulent  as  to  creditors  who 
extended  credit  on  the  faith  of  his 
ownership. 

La, — ^Kirkpatrick  v.  Finney,  30  La. 
Ann.  223. 

Mo, — Stivers  v.  Home,  62  Mo.  473. 

Neh, — ^David  Adler,  etc.,  Clothing 
Go.  V.  Hellman,  66  Neb.  266,  76  N.  W. 
877;  Glass  v.  Zutavem,  43  Neb.  334, 
61  N.  W.  679,  47  Am.  St.  Rep.  763; 
Hill  V.  Fouse,  32  Neb.  637,  49  N.  W. 
760;  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Bartlett,  8 


Neb.  319,  I  N.  W.  199;  Lynch  ▼. 
Snglehardt-Winning-Davidson  Mer- 
cantile Co.,  1  Neb.  (Unoff.)  628,  96 
N.  W.  624. 

8.  i).— Williams  v.  Harris,  4  S.  D. 
22,  64  N.  W.  926,  46  Am.  St.  Rep. 
763. 

Fa.~Hunters  v.  Waite,  3  Gratt.  46. 

W.  Fa.— Burt  v.  Timmons,  29  W. 
Va.  441,  2  S.  E.  780,  6  Am.  St.  Rep. 
664;  Core  v.  Cunningham,  27  W.  Va. 
206;  Maxwell  v.  Hanshow,  24  W.  Va. 
406.  Contra, — ^Droop  v.  Ridenour,  11 
App.  Cas.  (D.  C.)  224;  Gottlieb  v. 
Thatcher,  161  U.  S.  271,  14  Sup.  Ct. 
319,  38  L.  Ed.  167. 

48.  Frost  V.  Steele,  46  Minn.  1, 
48  N.  W.  413. 

49.  Bnmdage  v.  Munger,  64  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  649,  66  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1014. 

60.  Indebtedness  or  ioflolveocy  of 


354 


Fraudulent  Convetancbs, 


a  sale  is  made  for  considerably  less  than  the  actual  value,  it  is 
sudi  evideoice  of  fraud  as  requires  explanation,  and  may,  when 
coupled  with  other  facts,  be  controlling  proof  of  dishonesty  and 
fraud.^  Great  inadequacy  of  price  is  a  strong  badge  and  evi- 
dence of  fraud,  and  in  many  cases  will  render  a  sale  void;  but 
it  may  be  explained.*^     Gross  inadequacy  of  price  is  a  strong 


U.  8, — ^HudgiiiB  ▼.  Kemp,  20  How. ' 
45,  16  L.  Ed.  S53;  Bartles  v.  Gibson, 
17  Fed.  293;  Wright  v.  Stanard,  30 
Fed.  Gas.  No.  18,094,  2  Brock.  311. 
But  mere  inadequacy  in  honest 
family  settlements  is  not  a  badge  of 
fraud.  Voorhees  t.  Blanton,  S3  Fed. 
234. 

Ala. — ^McCaskle  y.  Amarine,  12 
Ala.  17;  Seamans  y.  White,  8  Ala. 
666. 

Colo, — Hose  y.  Dunklee,  12  Colo. 
App.  403,  66  Pae.  342. 

Fla, — Barrow  y.  Bailey,  6  Fla.  9. 

Oa. — ^Hawkinsyille  Bank,  etc.,  Co. 
y.  Walker,  99  Oa.  242,  26  S.  E.  205. 

111. — ^Mathews  y.  Reinhardt,  149 
111.  636,  37  N.  E.  86,  alTg  43  HI. 
App,  169;  McArtee  y.  Engart,  13  111. 
242. 

Ind. — ^Hubbs  y.  Bancroft,  4  Ind. 
388.  Compare  Milbum  y.  Phillips, 
136  Ind.  680,  34  N.  E.  983,  36  N.  E. 
360;  Cagney  y.  Cuson,  77  Ind.  494. 

lotoa. — ^Urdangen  y.  Doner,  122 
Iowa,  633,  98  N.  W.  317;  Cathcart  y. 
Grieye,  104  Iowa,  330,  73  N.  W.  836, 
inadequacy  is  not  material  where  a 
deed  was  intended  as  a  mortgage. 

JTy.^Easum  y.  Pirtle,  81  Ky.  661, 
6  Ky.  L.  Rep.  672;  Diamond  Coal  Co. 
y.  Carter  Dry  Goods  Co.,  20  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1444,  49  S.  W.  438. 

Jfd.— City  of  Baltimore  y.  Wil- 
liams, 6  Md.  236. 

Ma88. — Schaefer  Brewing  Co.  y. 
Moebs,  187  Mass.  671,  73  N.  E.  868. 

i#o.— State  T.  MasoD,  112  Mo.  374, 


20  S.  W.  629,  34  Am.  Rep.  390;  Rob- 
inson y.  Robards,  16  Mo.  469. 

N.  H.— CUflin  y.  Batchelder,  66  N. 
H.  29,  17  Atl.  1060. 

2^.  J.— Gnitchel  y.  JeweU  (Ch. 
1888),  41  Atl.  227. 

Or. — Brown  y.  Case,  41  Or.  221,  69 
Pac.  43. 

Pa.— Rhoads  y.  Blatt,  84  Pa.  St. 
31. 

Tew. — ^Moore  y.  Lowery,  27  Tex. 
641;  Mills  y.  Waller,  Dall.  Dig.  416» 
the  inadequacy  must  be  shown  to 
haye  existed  at  the  time  of  the  sale. 

Fa.— Tebbs  y.  Lee,  76  Va.  744. 

Wiff.— Fisher  y.  Shelyer,  63  Wis. 
498,  10  N.  W.  681. 

Can. — Carradioe  y.  Currie,  19 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  108;  Crawford  y. 
Meldrum,  3  Grant  Err.  &  App.  (U. 
C.)   101. 

33.  Dodson  y.  Cooper,  60  Kan. 
680,  32  Pac.  370. 

34.  U.  flf.— Byers  y.  Surget,  60  U- 
S.  303,  16  L.  Ed.  670,  affg  Surget  y. 
Byers,  24  Fed.  Cas.  No.  13,629, 
Hempst.  716. 

Ala.— Fairfield  Packing  Co.  y.  Ken- 
tucky Jeans  Clothing  Co.,  110  Ala. 
636,  20  So.  63;  Gordon  y.  Tweedy,  71 
Ala.  202;  Bozman  y.  Draughan,  3 
Stew.  243. 

ArA;.— Galbreath  v.  Cook,  30  Ark* 
417;  Beebe  y.  DeBaun,  8  Ark.  610. 

Fki.— Gainer  y.  Buss,  20  Fla.  167. 

/K.— Jewett  y.  Cook,  81  111.  260; 
Monell  y.  Schenick,  64  111.  269;  Bay 
y.  Cook,  31  111.  336. 


CoKFiosNTiAjj  Relations  of  Pasties.  401 

thou^  s3ie  was  tnot  shown  to  have  any  separate  estate  prior  to 
the  purchase  bj  her^^^  where  there  is  no  proof  of  actual  fraud. 
But  a.  simulated  execution  sale  of  a  husband's  property  to  his 
wife,  made  for  the  purpose  of  strengthening  her  previous  fraudu- 
lent claim  or  title,  there  being  in  fact  no  levy^  or  possession  or 
control  taken  of  the  property,  by  the  sheriff,  will  vest  no  title  in 
the  wife  as  against  the  husband's  creditors.^  And  if ,  at  a  sher- 
iff's sale,  the  wife  purchases  the  property  with  her  own  and  her 
husband's  money,  for  the  purpose  of  defrauding  his  creditors^ 
this  fraudulent  intent  being  proved,  the  creditors  will  take  the 
whole,  and  she  lose  what  she  has  put  in  of  her  own.^  Where  a 
wife  buys  her  husband's  land  at  sheriff's  sale  in  good  faith,  and 
with  her  own  funds,  taking  title  subject  to  existing  mortgages, 
if  the  husboaid  subsequently  pays  such  mortgages  or  some  of 
them,  his  judgment  creditors  may  levy  on  and  sell  his  interest 
in  the  land  subject  to  the  wife's  prior  lien  for  the  amount  paid 
by  her.** 

f 
§  6.  Conveyances  to  wife  from  third  persons. — ^It  is  no  fraud 

upon  creditors  for  a  third  person  to  convey  property  to  the 
debtor's  wife  free  from  his  control,  where  he  pays  no  part  of  the 
consideration,  and  assumes  no  obligation  on  account  of  it.^  To 
constitute  the  transaction  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  the  con- 
sideration must  have  come  in  whole  or  part^  from  the  husband, 
and  whei^  it  did  not,  but  ctoie  from  the  wife's  separate  estate, 
or  by  way  of  advancement  from  the  wife's  parents,  or  the  con^ 
veyance  from  such  third  person  was  voluntary,  the  property  will 
be  held  by  the  wife  free  and  clear  of  all  claims  of  the  creditors 
of  1jke  husband,  even  though  the  purpose  wtis  to  protect  the 

37  Wkly.  Notes  Cas.  8,  if  it  was  the  -▼     57.    Frankenthal    v.    Gilbert,    34 

wife's  credit,  and  not  her  husband's.  Fed.  5. 

which  induced  other   persons  to  be-  68.  Oox  v.  MiHer,  54  Tex.  16. 

come  sureties  on  a  note  signed  by  her-  59.  Ewing  v.  Gray,  12  Ind.  64. 

self  and  her  husband  and  given  in  60.  Delo  v.  Johnson,  110  Mb.  App. 

payment,  she  acquired  good  title,  as  642,  86  S.  W.  109. 

againet     her      husband's      creditor;  61.  Clark  v.  Kranse,  6  Mackey  (D. 

Cheatham  ▼.  Thornton,  79  Tenn.  296.  C),  108. 

26 


356 


FbAUDULENT   CoNV£YA^*0£8. 


SO  great  as  to  shock  the  conscience  or  a  correct  mind,''  it  will  be 
sufficient  to  avoid  the  sale. 


*§  38.  Transactions  between  husband  and  wife;  nature, 
adequacy,  and  sufficiency  of  consideration. — ^A  oonveryanoe  or 
transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  to  his  wife  in  consideration  of 
natural  love  and  efFection,"  or  for  a  merely  nominal  amount,**  or 
for  a  consideration  which  is  fictitious  and  fraudulent,^  is  not 
made  on  a  valuable  coneideration  sufficient  to  sustain  it  as  against 
creditors.  The  general  rules  as  to  the  nature,  adequacy,  and 
sufficiesicy  of  consideration  for  conveyances  or  transfers  of  prop- 
erty made  by  a  debtor,  as  discussed  in  the  preceding  seotions  of 
this  chapter,  apply  to  such  transactions,  between  husband  and 
wife  in  determining  the  validity  or  invalidity  thereof,  as  against 
creditors.^^    An  agreement  by  a  wife  to  go  from  a  city  to  the 


Wis, — Crocker  v,  Huntzicker,  113 
Wis.  181,  88  N.  W.  232. 

Wyo. — Stirling  v.  Wagner,  4  Wyo. 
6,  31  Pac.  1032,  32  Pac.  1128. 

37.  McGhee  v.  WeUs,  67  S.  C.  280, 
35  8.  E.  629,  76  Am.  St.  Rep.  667; 
Flook  V.  Armentrout's  Adm'r,  100 
Va.  638,  42  S.  £.  686;  Harbottle  v. 
Bawiina,  11  Hawaii,  105. 

38.  Houston  y.  Blackman,  66  Ala. 
559,  41  Am.  Rep.  756;  Baker  ▼.  Hol> 
lis,  84  Iowa,  682,  51  N.  W.  78;  Shaw 
▼.  Manchester,  84  Iowa,  246,  50  N. 
W.  985;  Baldwin  v.  Tuttle,  23  Iowa, 
66;  MilhoUand  v.  Tiffany,  64  Md. 
455. 

39.  Houston  y.  Blackman,  8upra; 
Shaw  v.  Manchester,  supra, 

40.  Smith  y.  Perrine,  49  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  605,  1  N.  Y.  Supp.  495;  Hodges 
V.  Hickey,  67  Miss.  715,  7  So.  404; 
Robert  y.  Hodges,  16  K.  J.  Eq.  299. 

41.  2^.  y. — Sandman  y.  Seaman, 
84  Hun,  337,  32  N.  Y.  Supp.  338. 

Conn, — Paulk  y.  Ck>oke,  39  Ck)nn. 
560. 


/«.— Fox  V.  Peck,  151  HI.  226,  37 
N.  E.  873,  affg  45  111.  App.  239. 

Ind, — Gable  y.  Columbus  Cigar 
Co.,  140  Ind.  563,  38  N.  E.  474; 
Secor  y.  Souder,  95  Ind.  95;  Schaef- 
fer  y.  Fithian,  17  Ind.  463. 

Iowa, — Cox  y.  Collis,  109  lowa^ 
270,  80  N.  W.  343 ;  Dayis  y.  Garrison, 
85  Iowa,  447,  52  N.  W.  359. 

Ky, — Ray  y.  Life  Assoc,  of 
America,  6  Ky.  L.  Rep.  514. 

La.— Preslar  &  Tier  y.  Walker,  116 
La.  661,  40  So.  1033. 

Mich, — Otis  y.  Sprague,  118  Mich. 
61,  76  N.  W.  154. 

MxBs, — ^Wynne  y.  Mason,  72  Miss. 
424,  18  So.  422. 

tf,  J, — Faitoute  v.  Sayer  (Ch. 
1894),  28  Atl.  711;  Aber  y.  Brant, 
36  N.  J.  Eq.  116. 

N,  C— Walton  y.  Parish,  95  N.C.259. 

OhU>, — German  Nat.  Bank  y.  Gun- 
ther,  3  Ohio  S.  k  C.  PI.  Dec.  686,  3 
Ohio  N.  P.  311. 

Pa, — ^Duffy  y.  Mechanics',  etc.,  Ins. 
Co.,  8  Watts  &  S.  413. 


Confidential  Belations  of  Pabties. 


403 


actually  belonged  to  the  husband  and  was  placed  in  the  wife's 
name  for  the  express  purpose  of  preventing  its  being  reached 
by  the  husband's  creditors.^  A  conveyance  of  realty  to  the 
wife  of  a  debtor  by  a  third  party,  at  the  instance  of  the  hus- 
band, who  had  paid  the  purchase  money,  is  void  as  against  the 
latter's  existing  creditors,  and  lands  purchased  with  funds  of  the 
husband  in  his  wife's  name,  or  paid  for,  wholly  or  in  part,  with 
his  money,  may  be  subjected  in  equity  to  levy  in  satisfaction  of 
his  debts,  contracted  before  the  property  was  placed  in  the 
wife's  name.^  But  real  estate  purchased  by  a  husband,  the  title 
whereof  id  taken  in  the  name  of  the  wife,  cannot  be  subjected 
to  the  claims  of  existing  creditors  of  the  husband,  where  the 
husband  at  the  time  of  the  purchase  is  substantially  free  from 
debt  and  solvent,"  or  where  the  consideration  was  savings  of 
both  husband  and  wife  and  the  property  was  bought  for  a 
homestead." 


66.  Hark  v.  Else  (S.  D.)»  110  N. 
W.  88.  Where  the  owner  of  a  stock 
of  goods,  two  or  three  days  hefore  his 
aasignment  for  the  benefit  of  credi- 
tors, sold  the  stock  at  a  grossly  in- 
adequate consideration  to  a  third 
person,  taking  notes  for  the  price,  and 
turning  them  over  to  the  assignee, 
but  retained  possession  of  and  sold 
goods  from  the  stock,  and  with  the 
proceeds  repurchased  it  for  his  wife, 
the  transaction  was  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors.  Bishop  v.  John  H.  Hibben 
Dry  Goods  Co.  (Ky.  1907),  99  S.  W. 
644. 

66.  Ala, — Wimberly  v.  Montgom- 
ery Fertilizer  Co.,  132  Ala.  107,  31  So. 
524;  Watts  v.  Burgess,  131  Ala.  333, 
30  So.  868. 

ArJb.— Davis  v.  Yonge  (1905),  85 
S.  W.  90,  the  wife  cannot  procure  the 
cancellation  of  an  execution  sale 
thereof  on  a  judgment  against  the 
husband  without  affirmatively  show- 


ing that  the  husband  was  solvent,  and 
able  to  make  the  gift. 

D.  C— Turner  v.  Qottwals,  15  App. 
Cas.  43,  the  interest  of  the  husband 
may  be  subjected  to  the  claims  of  his 
creditors. 

F/a.— Florida  L.  A  T.  Co.  v.  Crabb 
(1903),  33  So.  523. 

JSTy.-— Robinson  v.  Woolstein,  22  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  883,  58  S.  W.  706. 

ificA.— Adams  v.  Bruske,  135  Mich. 
339,  97  N.  W.  766. 

Mo. — W.  F.  Johnson  &  Co.  v.  Chris- 
tie, 79  Mo.  App.  46,  2  Mo.  App.  Rep. 
322,  where  stock  in  a  corporation  was 
given  to  the  wife  by  agreement  with 
the  husband. 

Neb. — Omaha  Brewing  Assoc  v.  Zel- 
ler,  4  Neb.  (unoff.)  198,  98  N.  W.762. 

67.  Davis  v.  Yonge  (Ark.  1905), 
85  S.  W.  90;  Fox  v.  Lipe,  14  Colo. 
App.  258,  59  Pac.  850. 

68.  Scott  V.  Holman,  117  Wis.  206, 
94  N.  W.  30. 


404  Fraudulent  Conveyakoes. 

§  7.  Giving  false  credit  to  husband. — Suffering  the  separate 
property  of  a  married  woman  to  remain  in  the  possession  of  the 
husband  is  not  necessarily  fraudulenit  as  to  creditors,  if  the 
husband's  possession  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  trust,  and  the 
question  of  fraud  should  be  left  to  the  jury.**  Fraud  is  not 
neoessarily  indicated  by  the  fact  that  the  wife  suffered  her 
husband  to  manage  her  property  without  interference  on  her  part, 
and  that  he  mainly  appeared  in  the  negotiations  necessary  in  the 
various  matters  affecting  her  property.'®  When  a  wife  lends 
money  to  her  husband,  which  he  uses  in  his  business,  she  need 
not  notify  persons  with  whom  he  deals  that  he  is  trading  with 
her  capital,  nor  take  any  writing  showing  the  state  of  her  ac- 
count with  him,  and  if,  while  solvent,  he  buys,  with  her  money, 
land  which  is  conveyed  to  her,  it  cannot,  when  he  becomes  in- 
solvent, be  subjected  to  pay  his  debts.'*  But  a  wife  cannot  al- 
low her  husband  to  use  and  appropriate  her  property  as  his  own 
for  years,  and  incorporate  a  part  of  his  own  means  into  it,  and 
then,  upon  a  conveyance  of  the  whole  from  her  husband,  make 
valid  daim  to  it  as  against  his  creditors.'^  A  conveyance  made 
by  a  husband  to  his  wife  in  order  to  defraud  his  creditors  will 
be  set  aside  at  their  suit,  though  the  land  was  originally  bought 
with  the  wife's  money,  where  she  has  allowed  the  title  to  stand 
in  her  husbaind's  name,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  him  credit'' 
And  where  a  wife  permits  her  husband  to  take  title  to  her  lands, 
or  allows  the  title  to  lands  paid  for  by  her  to  be  taken  in  the 
lUime  of  her  husband,  and  he  holds  himself  out  to  the  world  as 
the  owner  of  them,  and  contracts  debts  upon  the  credit  of  such 
ownership,  the  rights  and  equity  of  his  creditors,  who  rely  on 
such  apparent  ownership  and  give  him  credit  in  the  belief  that 
he  is  the  owner,  are  superior  to  the  rights  of  the  wife,  and  they 

69.  M«mtt  V.  Lyon,  3  Barb.   (N.  73t.     Moyer    v.    Adams,     2     Fed. 
Y.)    110.  182. 

70.  Hensley  v.  Hensley,  65  111.  App.  7S,   Lowentrout  v.  Campbell,    130 
195;  Emerson  v.  Hewins,  64  Me.  297.  111.  603,  22  N.  E.  744,  affg  31  111. 

71.  Buhl  V.  Peck,  70  Mich.  44,  37  App.   114;   Stillwell  v.  StOlweU    (N. 
N.  W.  876.  J.  Ch.),  18  Atl.  679. 


Confidential  Eslations  of  Pabtibs. 


405 


may  subject  the  lands  or  tbe  proceeds  thereof  to  the  payment  of 
their  debts,  even  though  the  property  has  been  subsequently  con- 
veyed to  the  wife.'*  But  the  rule  does  not  apply  where  the 
wife  did  not  know  that  he  was  doing  business  on  credit  and 
supposed  that  his  own  meana  were  anoiple  to  carry  on  his  busi- 
ness.^ Where  a  conveyance  is  made  to  husband  and  wife,  though 
the  wife  furnishes  the  consideration^  both  become  seized  of  the 
entirety,  and  where  the  wife  acquiesces  in  her  husband's  seizin 
imtil  he  is  prosecuted  for  a  debt,  presumably  contracted  on  the 


74.  /{Z.— MaddoK  v.  Epler,  48  III. 
App.  265. 

Ind, — ^Minnich  v.  Shaffer,  135  Ind. 
634,  34  N.  E.  987. 

JTj^.^Meade  v.  Stairs,  88  Ky.  66, 
10  S.  W.  272,  10  Ky.  L.  Rep.  702. 

Jtfitfff.— Myers  v.  Little,  60  Miss. 
203,  where  the  statute  provided  that 
such  a  conveyance  shall  he  void  as 
against  creditors  ''who  contracted  or 
gave  credit  in  consequence  of  the  pos- 
session of  such  property." 

iVed.— Swartz  v.  McClelland,  31 
Neh.  646,  48  N.  W.  461. 

y.  J.— City  Nat.  Bank  v.  Hamil- 
ton, 34  N.  J.  Eq.  158. 

Wi*.— Hopkins  v.  Joyce,  78  Wis. 
443,  47  N.  W.  722. 

Wliere  credit  is  not  giTen  on 
tbe  faith  of  the  snpposod  title 
in  tlio  hnsband,  a  conveyance  to 
the  wife  cannot  be  successfully  at- 
tacked. First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Peterson, 
3  Neb.  (Unoff.)  102,  91  N.  W.  195. 
See  also  Hill  v.  Meinhard,  39  Fla. 
Ill,  21  So.  805. 

Wlioro  deed  v^aa  taken  in  name 
of  hnsband  and  wife  jointly,  al- 
though the  property  was  purchased 
with  the  wife's  separate  estate,  a 
conveyance  by  the  husband  and  wife 
to  a  third  person,  and  by  the  latter 
back  to  the  wife,  was  fraudulent  as 
ngainst  a   judgment  creditor   wboee 


debt  arese  before  the  conveyance. 
Rosenblath  v.  Buttlar,  7  N.  J.  L.  J. 
143. 

A  eontraot  in  good  faith  be- 
tween bnaband  and  wif e,  involv- 
ing the  use  by  him  of  her  separate  es- 
tate, not  with  the  intent  to  hinder, 
delay  or  defraud  her  husband's  cred- 
itors, will  not  be  deemed  to  be  fraud- 
ulent from  the  fact  that  subsequently 
the  husband  becomes  insolvent, 
though,  where  the  effect  of  the  con- 
tract is  to  debar  the  husband's  cred- 
itors from  subjecting  his  property  to 
the  payment  of  their  claims,  proof  of 
good  faith  will  be  required.  Hill 
V.  Fouse,  32  Neb.  637,  49  N.  W. 
760. 

Bepeal  of  etatnte.  —  Section 
2499,  Revision  1860,  providing  that  if 
personal  property  of  the  wife  is  left 
under  the  control  of  Jbhe  husband,  it 
will,  in  favor  of  third  persons  act- 
ing in  good  faith  and  without  knowl- 
edge of  the  real  ownership,  be  pre- 
sumed to  have  been  transferred  to 
him,  having  been  repealed  by  the 
Code  of  1873,  has  no  application  to 
persons  who  became  creditors  of  the 
husband,  after  the  adoption  of  the 
later  Code.  Hedge  v.  Glenny,  75 
Iowa,  613,  39  N.  W.  818. 

76.  Alkire  Grocery  Co.  v.  Ballen- 
ger,  137  Mo.  369,  38  S.  W.  911. 


406  F&AUDULENT  Conveyances. 

faith  of  his  seizin,  the  property  is  liable  for  the  debtJ*  A  volun- 
tary oonveyance  by  a  husband  to  his  wife  of  all  his  property 
is  in  fraud  of  his  creditors,  where  he  •continues  to  enjoy  the 
property  as  before,  and  continues  to  obtain  money  to  a  large 
amount  on  the  strength  of  his  ownership."  Where  real  estate 
purchased  with  the  wife's  money  is  placed  in  the  name  of  her 
husband,  by  him  managed  and  controlled,  and  is,  prior  to  the 
rendition  of  a  judgment  against  him,  conveyed  to  his  wife,  such 
conveyanoe  wiU  stand,  as  against  a  judgment  creditor,  unless 
special  facts  appear,  such  as  actual  fraud  on  the  part  of  the 
husband  or  the  wife,  the  giving  of  credit  on  the  faith  of  the  hus- 
band's record  ownership,  or  the  creditors  being  in  some  way 
misled  by  reason  of  such  record  ownership.'*  A  conveyance  by  a 
husband,  after  becoming  financially  involved,  to  his  wife  of  real 
property  paid  for  by  the  earnings  of  both,  but  the  legal  title 
of  which  had  been  in  his  name  for  many  years,  operates  as  a 
legal  fraud  against  the  creditors  of  the  husband  who  are  preju- 
diced thereby,  however  ininocent  the  motives  of  the  parties  may 
have  been.'?  The  same  rule  applies  where,  although  the  record 
title  is  in  the  wife,  she  permits  the  husband  to  appear  to  the 
outside  world  as  the  owner  thereof,  and  he  thereby  obtains  credit, 
and  such  subsequent  creditors  are  entitled  to  have  the  lands  sub- 
jected to  the  lien  of  their  judgment*^  Where  a  husband  pur- 
chases land  with  his  wife's  money,  and  by  mistake  the  convey- 
ance was  in  his  name,  but  the  wife  was  notified,  and  allowed 
the  husband  to  manage  the  estate  as  though  it  were  his  own,  a 
subsequent  conveyance  to  the  wife  was  void  as  to  a  creditor  who 
made  a  loan  to  the  husband  on  the  faith  of  his  ownership.*^ 

76.  Ward  v.  Krumm,  54  How.  Pr.  W.  1086,  eitinj^  Iseminger  v.  Criswell 
(N.  Y.)  96.  (Iowa),  67  N.  W.  289;  Carbiener  ▼. 

77.  Lander  v.  Ziehr,  159  Mo.  403,  Montgomery  (Iowa),  66  N.  W.  900. 
61  S.  W.  742,  73  Am.  St.  Rep.  456.  80.  McCanless  v.  Smith,  51  N.  J. 

78.  Torrey  v.  Dickinson,  213  111.      Eq.  505,  25  Atl.  211. 

36,  72  N.  E.  703,  rev^g  111  111.  App.  81.  Searg  v.  Davis,  40  Or.  236,  66 

624.  Pac.  913.      See  also  Talbott  ▼.  Gil- 

79.  Maple  Valley  Twp.  v.  Foley,  lespie,  21  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1065,  53  S.  W. 
113  Mich.  622,  4  Det  C.  N.  424,  71  N.  1047. 


CONFIDENTIAI.  EeLATIONS  OF  PaBTIES. 


407 


Where  land  beloDgiiig  to  the  wife's  estate  was  convejed  to  the 
liusband  and  hdd  by  him  and  treated  a3  his  own^  amd,  in  makiug 
statements  to  commercial  agencies^  he  included  the  land  as  pari 
of  his  assets,  a  subsequent  oonvejance  to  the  wife  was  fraudulent 
as  to  creditors.^ 

§  8.  Transactions  between  parent  and  child. — Transactions 
between  relatives  are  subjected  to  rigid  scrutiny.  Courts  scru- 
tinize with  the  utmost  care  business  transactions  between  hus- 
basnd  and  wife  alleged  to  be  fraudulent  as  against  creditors,  be- 
cause fraud  is  so  easily  practiced  and  concealed  under  cover  of 
the  marriage  relation,  and  the  same  rule  applies,  though,  possi- 
bly, in  a  less  degree,  to  a  transfer  from  a  parent  to  a  child  when 
they  are  both  members  of  the  same  family.^  As  a  general  rule 
the  relationship  of  the  parties  to  a  transaction  as  parent  and 
child  is  not  regarded  in  law  as  a  badge  of  fraud,  or  necessarily 
indicative  of  fraud,  or  sufficient  to  stamp  it  with  fraud,  but  it 
is  a  fact  or  circumstance  proper  to  be  considered  in  evidence 
in  determining  the  validity  or  fraudulent  character  of  the  con- 
veyance, and  which  requires  the  transaction  to  be  subjected  to 
the  closest  scrutiny.**    No  presumption  of  fraud  arises  from  the 


82.  Cowling  V.  Hill,  69  Ark.  350, 
63  S.  W.  800,  86  Am.  St.  Hep.  200; 
White  y.  Magarahan,  87  Ga.  217,  13 
tS.  E.  609. 

S3.  First  Nat.  Bank  of  Amster- 
dam V.  Miller,  163  N.  Y.  164,  57  K  E. 
308. 

84.  y,  y.— Bristol  v.  Hull,  166  N. 
Y.  59,  50  N.  E.  698;  National  Bank 
of  Port  Jervis  v.  Bonnell,  26  Misc. 
Rep.  541,  67  N.  Y.  Supp.  486;  Bailey 
V.  Fransioli,  101  App.  Div.  140,  91  N. 
Y.  Supp.  852;  First  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Moflfatt,  77  Hun,  468,  28  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1078;  Morris  ▼.  Morris,  71  Hun,  45, 
24  N.  Y.  Supp.  579;  Scofleld  v. 
Spauldin^,  54  Hun,  523,  7  N.  Y. 
Supp.  927;  Nichols  v.  Morrow,  UN. 


Y.  Supp.  878;  Pell  v.  Tredwell,  5 
Wend.  661. 

Ala, — ^Morrow  v.  Campbell,  118 
Ala.  330,  24  So.  852;  Teague  v.  Lind- 
sey,  106  Ala.  266,  17  So.  638;  Har- 
mon V.  McRae,  91  Ala.  401,  8  So.  548; 
Barnard  y.  Davis,  54  Ala.  565. 

CoZ.— Gray  v.  Galpin,  98  Cal.  633, 
33  Pac.  725.  See  Bank  of  Willows  v. 
Small,  144  Cal.  709,  98  Pac.  263. 

flfa.— Cooley  v.  Abbey,  111  Ga.  439, 
36  S.  E.  786,  such  a  conveyance,  while 
regarded  with  suspicion,  will  stand 
unless  shown  to  be  fraudulent,  which 
fact  is  entirely  within  the  province 
of  the  jury  to  determine. 

/{|.— Hewitt  V.  Gibson,  93  111.  App. 
427,  where  a  daughter  sold  household 


408 


w 

F&AUBULBNT    CoNVETANCJES. 


mere  fact  of  relation ;  presmnptioiis  are  isi  favor  of  the  f umesa 


goods,  including  a  piano,  to  her 
father,  who  took  exdoslTe  poaacetion, 
the  mere  fact  of  the  relati<HiBhip,  and 
that  the  daughter,  after  several 
months,  returned  and  lived  with  the 
father,  did  not  subject  the  piano  to 
the  daughter's  debts. 

Iowa. — ^Riddick  v.  Parr,  111  Iowa, 
733,  82  N.  W.  1002,  the  relationship 
of  the  parties  is  proper  to  be  consid- 
ered, but  not  necessarily  indicative 
of  fraud. 

iTy.— Redd  y.  Redd,  23  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
2379,  67  8.  W.  387 ;  Williams  v.  Tye, 

19  Ky.  L.  Rep.  818,  42  8.  W.  00; 
Green  v.  Green,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep.  250, 
the  court  vHll  look  with  more  vigi- 
lance  into  the  transaction  than  where 
the  sale  is  to  a  stranger. 

La. — Maurin  v.  Rouguer,  10  La. 
594;  Layson  v.  Rowan,  7  Rob.  1. 

Minn, — ^Nichols,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Gerlidi, 
84  Minn.  483,  87  K.  W.  1120. 

ITo.— White  y.  Million,  114  Mo. 
App.  70,  89  8.  W.  699;  8tate  ▼.  True, 

20  Mo.  App.  176.  See  also  McKin- 
ney  v.  Hensley,  74  Mo.  326. 

l#on^— Mueller  v.  Renkes  (1904), 
77  Pac.  512;  Noyes  y.  Ross,  23  Mont. 
425,  59  Pac.  367,  75  Am.  St.  Rep.  543, 
47  L.  R.  A.  400. 

Neh. — Gibson  ▼.  Hanunang,  63  Neb. 
349,  88  N.  W.  500,  in  case  of  a  gift 
or  voluntary  oonv^ance  from  parent 
to  child,  no  presumption  of  fraud 
or  undue  influence  arises,  as  between 
the  parties  thereto,  from  the  mere 
fact  of  relation. 

^.  J.— First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Cum- 
mins, 38  N.  J.  Eq.  191;  Hoboken  Sav. 
Bank  y.  Beekman,  36  N.  J.  Eq.  83. 

N.  e.— Mitchell  v.  Eure,  126  N.  C. 
77,  35  8.  E.  190;  Kelly  v.  Fleming, 
113  N.  C.  133,  18  8.  E.  81,  a  convey- 
ance from  a  parent  to  a  child  is  not. 


in  law,  presompdvely  frauduleiit^ 
unless  it  be  shown  to  be  a  Toluntary 
conveyance,  or  one  upon  insufiBcient 
oonsid^ation,  while  the  parent  is  in 
embarrassed  circumstances ;  Jenkins 
Y.  Peace,  46  N.  C.  413,  the  related 
parties  are  held  to  a  stricter  and 
more  exact  proof  of  the  fairness  of 
the  transaction. 

P«.— In  re  Weldon's  Estate,  31  Pa- 
Super.  Ct.  47,  tiie  mere  fact  of  rda- 
tionship  did  not  inyalidate  as  fraud- 
ulent  a  judgment  note  given  by  a 
debtor  to  his  son;  Sebring  v.  Bride- 
ley,  7  Pa.  Super.  Ct.  198,  42  Wkly. 
Notes  Cias.  189,  assignment  fay  an  in- 
solvent fatiier  to  his  son  of  policies 
on  his  wife^s  life  is  not  necessarily 
fraudulent. 

S.  C— Weaver  v.  Wright,  la 
Rich.  9. 

8.  D. — Studebaker  Bros.  Mfg.  Co. 
V.  ZoUars,  12  8.  D.  296,  81  N.  W. 
292. 

Tenn. — Rosenbaum  v.  Davis  (Ch. 
App.  1898),  48  8.  W.  706. 

W.  Fa.— Miller  v.  Gillispie,  54  W. 
Va.  450,  46  8.  £.  451;  Farmers^ 
Transp.  Co.  v.  Swaney,  48  W.  Va.  272, 
37  S.  E.  592;  Douglass  v.  Douglass, 
41  W.  Va.  13,  23  8.  E.  671;  Hardin 
V.  Wagner,  22  W.  Va.  356. 

Wm.— Missinski  v.  McMurdo,  107 
Wis.  578,  83  N.  W.  758;  Bleiler  v. 
Mooie,  88  Wis.  438,  60  N.  W.  792; 
Barr  v.  Church,  82  Wis.  382,  62  N. 
W.  591. 

Eng, — See  Golden  v.  Gillam,  51  L. 
J.  Ch.  503. 

Contra, — ^Businese  dealings  between 
parents  and  children  are  to  be  treated 
as  are  the  transactions  of  other  peo- 
ple, and  if  the  bofia  fide9  thereof  is 
attacked,  the  fraud  all^^  must  be 


Confidential  Relations  of  Pabties. 


409 


of  the  traBsaction,  rather  than  otherwise.^  Whether  conyey- 
aifcoes  from  paarent  to  child  or  from  child  to  parent  are  fraudu* 
leat  or  not  has  been  held  to  depend  on  the  intent  with  which 
they  were  made."  Land  conveyed  to  a  father  in  trust  for  his 
minor  child,  who  pays  the  consideration  with  money  given  to 
him  by  the  father  while  Solvent,  cannot  be  reached  by  creditors 
of  the  father  where  he  has  transferred  it  to  the  son  after  becom- 
ing insolvent.^  Where  the  wife's  father  paid  one-third  of  the 
ooDsideration  for  the  land  purchased  by  the  husband  under  an 
agreemenity  to  which  the  wife  was  a  party,  that  she  should  own 
one-third  of  the  land  and  its  proceeds,  but  the  husband  took  the 
title  to  himself,  a  deed  executed  by  him  after  he  became  in- 
solvent, and  after  the  wife's  death,  conveying  one-third  of  the 
land  to  her  infant  son  by  direction  of  the  father,  will  not  be 
set  aside  at  the  instance  of  the  husband's  creditors*^  A  con- 
veyance by  a  father  to  his  children  in  settlement  of  hona  fide 
gifts  received  from  their  deceased  mother's  father,  although  made 
with  a  fraudulent  intent  on  his  part,  is  not  illegal  if  they  did 
not  share  in  the  fraudulent  purpose.^  A  voluntary  conveyance 
by  a  married  woman  to  her  children  is  void  against  a  mechanic's 


proved.  Carry  v.  Lloyd,  22  Fed.  258; 
Keehling  y.  Byen,  94  Pa.  St.  316. 

No  more  stringent  proof  of  good 
faith  is  required  than  in  the  instance 
of  transactions  between  strangers. 
Seitz  V.  Bennig,  Lehigh  Val.  L.  Rep. 
130. 

A  Yolnntary  conyeyance  from 
father  to  child  is  constructively 
fraudulent  as  to  an  existing  creditor, 
unless  the  grantor  has  remaining 
after  the  conveyance  sufficient  prop- 
erty to  satisfy  his  creditors.  Camp- 
bell v.  Campbell  (Iowa),105N.W.583, 

It  is  error  to  charge  that  relation- 
ship affords  ground  for  suspicion  as 
to  the  good  faith  of  the  mortgagee, 
as  against  other  creditors,  and  calls 
for  satisfactory  proof  of  good  faith. 


Gilmore  v.  Swisher,  69  Kan.  172,  62 
Pac.  426. 

86.  Maurin  y.  Rouguer,  19  La. 
694;  State  y.  True,  20  Mo.  App.  176; 
Weaver  v.  Wright,  13  Rich.  (8.  C.) 
9;  Bleiler  v.  Moore,  88  Wis.  438,  60 
N.  W.  792. 

86.  Barnard  v.  Davis,  64  Ala.  665; 
Miller  v.  Thompson,  3  Port.  (Ala.) 
196;  May  v.  Hoover,  48  Neb.  199,  66 
N.  W.  1134. 

87.  Hayford  y.  Wallace  (Cal. 
1896),  46  Pac.  293. 

88.  Sparks  v.  Colson,  109  Ky.  711, 
22  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1369,  60  S.  W.  640,  23 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  146,  63  S.  W.  739. 

89.  Oleitz  V.  Schuster,  168  Mo. 
298,  67  S.  W.  661,  90  Am.  St  Rep. 
461. 


410 


FbAUDULSNT   CoNVEYANOfiS. 


lien  for  a  debt  oantracted  by  her  for  tbe  impro^enLeiit  of  the 
land  coBweyed.*^  But  a  oonveyanoe  from  a  motlier  to  her  dauj^- 
ter  is  not  in  fraud  of  creditors,  where  the  conveyance  was  made 
in  consideration  of  money  to  the  value  of  the  property  given  to 
the  mother  for  the  use  of  the  dan^ter  by  the  grandmother  of 
the  dau^ter,  and  which  the  mother  had  applied  to  her  own 
use.*^  While  a  voluntary  conveyance  to  a  child  of  the  grantor, 
or  a  conveyance  for  less  than  the  fair  value  of  the  property, 
whem  the  grantor  is  insolvent  or  greatly  indebted  at  the  time,  is 
prima  facie  evidence  of  fraud,  or  presumptively  fraudulent,* 
the  presumption  may  be  rebutted  by  proof  of  good  faith,  and  the 
want  or  inadequa<^  of  consideration  is  not  of  itself  necessarily 
conclusive  evidence  of  fraud.**  Where  the  father,  without  con- 
sulting the  dau^ter,  purchased  for  her  certain  land,  and  paid  a 
part  of  the  price  with  money  belonging  to  her,  and  the  daughter 
later  ratified  the  purchase  and  paid  another  installment  on  the 
price,  and  the  father,  being  indebted  at  the  time  of  the  pur- 


00.  Bankard  v.  Shaw,  23  Pa.  Co. 
Ct.  561,  16  Mont|r.  Co.  L.  R.  137,  30 
Pitteb.  L.  J.  N.  S.  413. 

01.  National  Bank  of  Port  Jervis 
V.  Bonnell,  26  Misc.  Rep.  (N.  T.) 
641,  57  N.  Y.  Supp.  4S6. 

02.  2V.  y.-— First  National  Bank  v. 
Moffatt,  77  Hun,  468,  28  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1078;  Pell  v.  Tredwell,  5  Wend.  661. 

Ind. — ^Tjmerv.Somerville,  1  Ind.176. 

/oioa.— Johnston  Harvester  Co.  y. 
Cibula,  62  Iowa,  697,  13  N.  W.  418. 

Ky, — Cincinnati,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Mat- 
thews, 24  Ky.  L.  Rep.  2446,  74  S.  W. 
242;  City  Nat.  Bank  y.  Gardner,  5 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  689. 

Mo, — ^Mason  v.  Perkins,  180  Mo. 
702,  79  S.  W.  683,  103  Am.  St  Rep. 
591;  Imhoff  y.  McArthur,  146  Mo. 
371,  48  S.  W.  456;  Lionberger  y. 
Baker,  14  Mo.  App.  353. 

y.  J. — Le  Herisse  y.  Hess  (Ch. 
1904),  67  Atl.  808;  Mason  y.  Somers, 


69  N.  J.  Eq.  451,  45  AU.  602;  Fint 
Nat.  Bank  y.  Cummins,  38  N.  J.  Eq. 
191. 

N.  C. — ^MeCanless  y.  Flinehom,  80 
N.  C.  373;  Tredwell  y.  Qraham,  88 
N.  C.  208. 

W.  Fa.— Blackshire  v.  Pettit,  35 
W.  Va.  547,  14  S.  E.  133. 

Can, — ^McDonald  y.  McQueen,  9 
Manitoba,  315. 

OS.  Caldwell  y.  Deposit  Bank,  18 
Ky.  L.  Rep.  156,  35  S.  W.  625; 
Green  y.  Green,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep.  250; 
Commonwealth  Bank  y.  Keams,  100 
Md.  202,  59  Atl.  1010;  P.  ft  M. 
Shaefer  Brew.  Co.  y.  Moebs,  187 
Mass.  571,  73  N.  E.  858;  Richards  y. 
Vacarro,  67  Miss.  516,  7  So.  506,  19 
Am.  St.  Rep.  322,  the  burden  of  show- 
ing good  faith  is  on  the  grantee; 
Gibson  y.  Hill,  23  Tex.  77,  the  eW- 
dence  of  good  faith  should  be  indis- 
putable. 


CoKfiDEirTiAL  £j&i.ATXoira  of  Pasties. 


411 


ehase,  inunediatelj  after  the  service  of  a  summons  oa  him  to 
recover  such  indebtedness^  formally  assigned  the  contract  to  pur- 
chase the  land,  which  he  had  tak^i  in  his  own  name,  to  th^ 
daughter,  such  purchase  and  tranefer  was  not  fraudulent  as  to 
his  creditors.*^ 

§  9.  Procuring  conveyance  from  third  person.^— ^Where    a 

debtor  purchases  land  with  his  own  money  and  takes  the  con- 
veyance in  the  name  of  his  child  for  the  purpose  of  securing 
the  land  against  his  debts,  and  defrauding  his  creditors,  the 
transaction  is  fraudulent,  and  the  creditors,  having  obtained 
judgment,  may  by  bill  in  equity,  subject  the  land  to  their  debts.^ 
A  deed  is  not  fraudulent  if  procured  to  be  made  by  a  father  to 
his  son  in  paymenA  of  a  just  debt,  though  the  father  be  em- 
barrassed in  circumstances.^  A  purchase  with  his  own  funds  by 
one  who  causes  the  title  to  land  to  be  made  to  himself  as  trustee 
for  a  minor  child  is,  in  the  absence  of  any  valid  consideration, 
equivalent  to  a  gift  to  the  child ;  and  the  fact  that  the  father  mis- 
takenly supposed  that  the  child  had  a  valid,  l^al  claim  against 
him,  and  intended  thus  to  settle  it,  does  not  invalidate  auch 
deed  as  against  creditors  of  the  father,  if  he  was  in  fact  solvent 
at  the  tdme  of  the  conveyance,  and  had  no  intention  to  hinder, 
delay,  or  defraud  his  creditors.*^ 


94.  QehreB  v.  Wallace,  38  Wash. 
101,  80  Pac.  273. 

95.  Ala. — Patterson  v.  CampbeU, 
0  Ala.  933. 

Cal, — ^Lander  v.  Beers,  48  Cal.  646. 

/nd. — ^Demaree  v.  Driskill,  3 
Blackf.  115. 

/otoa. — Smalley  ▼.  Mass,  72  Iowa, 
171,  33  N.  W.  619;  State  Bank  of 
Indiana  v.  Harrow,  26  Iowa,  426. 

La. — Frazer  ▼.  Pritchard,  6  La. 
Ann.  728. 


V.  C— WaU  ▼.  Fairley,  73  N.  C. 
464. 

8.  0. — Godbold  y.  Lambert,  8  Rich. 
Eq.  155,  70  Am.  Dec.  192;  Croft  ▼. 
Arthur,  3  Desauss.  223. 

Va. — Coleman  v.  Cocke,  6  Rand. 
618,  18  Am.  Dec.  757. 

96.  Vattier  ▼.  Hinde,  32  U.  S.  252, 
8  L.  Ed.  675,  rev'g  Fed.  Cas.  No. 
6,512,  1  McLean,  110. 

97.  Cohen  ▼.  Parish,  105  Ga.  889» 
31  S.  £.  205. 


412  Fbaudulent  Convsyanoks. 


CHAPTER  X. 

RbBEBVATIONS  and  T&U8T8  FOB  GbAVTOB; 

Saotioii   1.  Benefits  reseryed  to  grantor  in  general  as  element  or  eHdenee  of 
fraud. 

2.  Conveyanoes  in  trust  for  grantor. 

3.  What  constitutes  convejanoes  in  trust  for  grantor. 

4.  Reservation  of  life  estate  in  grantor. 

6.  Reservation  of  life  estate  with  power  of  appointment  at  death. 

6.  Reservation  of  power  to  revoke. 

7.  Reservation  of  support  or  oare  of  grantor  or  family. 

8.  Reservation  of  surplus. 

9.  Reservation  of  power  to  direct  applicati<m  of  proceeds. 

10.  Employment  of  debtor. 

11.  Reservation  of  right  of  repurchase  or  return  of  property. 

12.  Reservation  of  power  to  appoint  substitute  trustee. 

13.  Reservation  of  exempt  property. 

14.  Secret  reservations  or  trusts  as  element  or  evidence  of  fraud. 

15.  What  constitutes  a  secret  reservation  or  trust. 
10.  Absolute  conveyance  intended  as  security. 

17.  Absolute  sale  with  reservation  of  surplus. 

18.  Reservation  of  right  to  repurchaseu 
10.  Employment  of  debtor. 

20.  Future  support  of  grantor. 

21.  Purchase  at  execution  or  other  sale  for  benefit  of  debtor. 

22.  Subsequent  disposition  of  property  fay  debtor  in  creditor's  favor. 

23.  Discharge  of  secret  trust  by  subsequent  agreement. 

Section  1.  Benefits  reserved  to  grantor  in  general  as  element 
or  evidence  of  fraud. — As  a  general  rule  a  transfer  of  real  or  per- 
sonal property,  or  any  provision  in  such  a  transfer,  by  a  person 
indebted  at  iJie  time,  by  which  the  grantor  secures  or  reserves  some 
benefit  or  advantage  to  himself  or  family,  or  to  any  other  person 
tor  him,  at  the  expense  of  his  creditoire,  unless  assented  to  by  them, 
is  deemed  fraudulent  and  voidi  as  to  existing  creditors.^     Hie 

1.  ^.  y. — ^Toung  V.  Heermans,  66  Bell,   20   Johns.   442,    11    Am.   Dee. 

N.  Y.  374;  Elias  v.  Farley,  3  Keyes,  297;  Sturtevant  ▼.  Ballard,  9  Johns. 

398,  2  Abb.  Dec.  11,  2  Transe.  App.  337,  6  Am.  Dec.  281;  Cooke  y.  Smith, 

116,  5  Abb.  Pr.  N.  S.  39;  Spotten  t.  3  Sandf.  Ch.  333.    A  mortgage  by  a 

Keeler,   12  St.  Rep.  385;   Austin  v.  corporation,  reserring  the  power  to 


Besbbvations  and  Tbubts  fob  Qbawtob. 


413 


same  rule  applies  to  a  transfer  whereby  creditors  are  prevented 
from  compelling  aa  immediate  appropriation  of  the  debtor's  prop- 


sell  the  personal  property  and  use 
the  income  in  the  business,  and  not 
requiring  the  application  of  the  pro- 
ceeds to  any  particular  purpose,  but 
for  the  use  of  the  mortgagor,  is  void 
as  to  creditors.  Zartman  ▼.  First 
Nat.  Bank,  109  App.  IMv.  406,  96  N. 
Y.  Supp.  633. 

V,  H.— Robinson  ▼.  Elliott,  22 
Wall.  613,  22  L.  Ed.  768;  Clements  v. 
Moore,  73  U.  S.  299,  18  L.  Ed.  786; 
Kellog  y.  Richardson,  19  Fed.  70; 
Howe  Mach.  Co.  v.  Clayboum,  6  Fed. 
438;  Burbank  ▼.  Hammond,  4  Fed. 
Cas.  No.  2,137,  3  Sumn.  429.  See 
Imperial  Woolen  Co.  v.  Longbottom, 
143  Fed.  483,  where  a  conveyance  was 
held  not  to  be  fraudulent  in  law  or 
fact,  where  all  the  creditors  but  one 
assented,  and  such  one  expressed  no 
objection. 

AZa.— McDowell  v.  Steele,  87  Ala. 
493,  6  So.  288;  Pritchett  v.  Pollock, 
82  Ala.  169,  2  So.  736;  Sandlin  t. 
Robbins,  62  Ala.  477;  Stokes  t. 
Jones,  18  Ala.  734. 

Ark, — Sparks  ▼.  Mack,  31  Ark. 
666. 
Cal.— Riddell  v.  Shirley,  6  Cal.  488. 
Colo.— Wellington  v.  Terry  (1907), 
88  Pac.  467,  where  chattels  covered 
by  a  mortgage  are  sold  bj  the  mort- 
gagor with  the  acquiescence  of  the 
mortgagee,  and  the  proceeds  are  ap- 
plied to  any  other  purpose  than  that 
of  liquidating  the  mortgage  debt,  the 
mortgage  is  void  at  the  instance  of 
creditors  of  the  mortgagor;  Taub  v. 
Swofford  Bros.  Dry  Goods  Co.,  8  Colo. 
App.  213,  46  Pac.  613. 

Go, — Coleman,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Rice, 
116  Ga.  610,  42  S.  E.  6;  Mitchell  v. 
Stetson,  64  Ga.  442,  two  years'  reser- 


vation of  the  use  and  possession  of 
land  sold  a  few  weeks  before  judg- 
ment by  an  insolvent  debtor  destroys 
the  validity  of  the  oonveyaoee  so  far 
as  buoh  judgment  creditor  is  con- 
oemed;  Edwards  v.  Stinson,  69  Ga. 
443;  Hobbs  v.  Davis,  60  Ga.  213; 
Eastman  v.  McAlpin,  1  Ga.  167. 

lU, — Hurd  V.  Ascherman,  117  111. 
601,  6  N.  E.  160;  (Gardner  v.  Com- 
mercial Nat.  Bank,  06  HI.  298,  a  con- 
veyance made  to  secure  an  extension 
of  time  or  other  benefits  to  the 
grantor  is  void  as  to  creditors; 
Hardin  v.  Osborne,  60  HI.  93;  Beid- 
ler  V.  Grane,  22  111.  App.  638,  a^tf 
136  lU.  92,  26  N.  E.  665,  26  Am.  St. 
Rep.  349,  an  absolute  assignment  of 
letters  patent  which  the  assignee 
transferred  to  a  corporation  organ- 
ised for  the  manufacture  of  the 
patented  article,  is  fraudulent  and 
void,  where  the  assignor  controlled 
the  operation  of  the  corporation  for 
his  own  benefit. 

Ky, — German  Ins.  Bank  v.  Nunes, 
80  Ky.  334. 

La, — ^Bank  of  Mobile  v.  Harris,  6 
La.  Ann.  811. 

Me, — Jones  v.  Light,  86  Me.  437,  30 
Atl.  71;  Wyman  v.  Brown,  60  Me. 
139;  Smith  v.  Parker,  41  Me.  452. 

lf(l.~Franklin  v.  Claflin,  49  Md. 
24. 

ir(w«.— Pacific  Nat.  Bank  v.  Wind- 
ram,  133  Mass.  175. 

Minn, — ^Williams  v.  Kemper 
(1906),  109  N.  W.  242;  Pabst  Brew. 
Co.  V.  Butchart,  67  Minn.  191,  69  N. 
W.  809,  64  Am.  St.  Rep.  408. 

MtM.— Wooten  v.  Clark,  23  Miss. 
76 ;  Arthur  v.  Commercial,  etc..  Bank, 
17  Miss.  394,  48  Am.  Dec.  719. 


414 


Fiuuduo:nt  Conveyatoxs. 


erty  to  the  payment  of  his  debts.'    Slich  a  conveyance  is  fraudu- 
lent as  to  the  creditors  of  the  grantor,  whether  tihe  benefit  reserved 


Mo, — ^Bigelow  ▼.  Stringer,  40  Mo. 
195;  Zeigler  t.  Maddox,  26  Mo.  675; 
Monarch  Rubber  Co.  v.  Bonn,  78  Mo. 
App.  55. 

y.  F.— Coolidge  ▼.  Melvin,  42  N. 
H.  510;  Albee  v.  Webster,  16  N.  H. 
362;  Trask  ▼.  Bowers,  4  N.  H.  309, 
the  tranafer  must  be  without  any 
trust  whatever,  either  express  or 
implied.  Compare  Low  v.  Garter,  21 
N.  H.  433. 

y,  C.—Holmes  v.  Marshall,  78  N. 
C.  262;  Carter  ▼.  Cocke,  64  N.  C. 
239;  Sturdiyant  v.  Davis,  31  K.  C. 
365. 

Pa. — ^Houseman  ▼.  Grossman,  177 
Pa.  St.  453,  35  Atl.  736;  Hennon  v. 
McClane,  88  Pa.  St.  219;  Bentz  t. 
Rockej,  69  Pa.  St.  71;  Johnson  v. 
Harvey,  2  Pen.  ft  W.  82,  21  Am.  Dec. 
426;  Pennsylvania  Knitting  Mills  v. 
Bibb  Mfg.  Co.,  12  Pa.  Super.  Ct. 
346;  Low  v.  Ivy,  10  Pa.  Super.  Ct. 
32. 

8.  C— Smith  v.  Hewry,  1  Hill,  16. 

Tcnn.— Doyle  v.  SmitlT,  41  Tenn. 
15;  Austin  v.  Johnson,  26  Tenn.  191; 
Gibbs  V.  Thompson,  26  Tenn.  179. 

Tex. — ^Donnebaum  v.  Tinsley,  54 
Tex.  362,  a  voluntary  conveyance  by 
a  husband  of  all  his  property  to  his 
wife,  reserving  it  to  himself  and  his 
heirs  after  his  death,  should  she 
separate  from  him  or  again  marry,  is 
void  as  against  his  existing  cred- 
itors; Baldwin  v.  Peet,  22  Tex.  708, 
75  Am.  Dec.  806;  Reynolds  v.  Lans- 
ford,  16  Tex.  286. 

Va, — ^Rueker's  Adm'rs  v.  Moss,  84 
Va.  634,  5  S.  B.  527;  Young  v.  Wil- 
lis, 82  Va.  291. 

W.  Fa.— Loekhard  v.  Beekley,  10 
W.  Va.  87. 


WtB. — ^Merehants',  etc.,  Sav.  Bank 
V.  Lovejoy,  84  Wis.  601,  55  N.  W. 
108;  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  McDonald 
Mfg.  Co.,  67  Wis.  373,  28  N.  W.  225, 
a  provision  in  a  deed  of  trust  allow- 
ing the  trustee  to  continue  the  busi- 
ness in  the  old  way  for  an  indefinite 
time. 

J5«^.— Twine's  Case,  3  Coke,  80a,  1 
Smith  Lead.  Cas.  1;  In  re  Pearson, 
3  Ch.  Div.  807,  35  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S. 
68,  25  Wkly.  Rep.  126;  Ware  v, 
Gardner,  L.  R.  7  Eq.  317,  38  L,  J. 
Ch.  848,  20  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S.  71,  17 
Wkly.  Rep.  439;  French  v.  French, 
6  De  G.  M.  A  G.  95,  2  Jur.  N.  S.  169, 
25  L.  J.  Ch.  612,  4  WWy.  Rep.  139, 
55  Eng.  Ch.  74,  43  Eng.  Reprint, 
1166;  Neale  v.  Day,  4  Jur.  N.  S. 
1225,  28  L.  J.  Ch.  45,  7  Wkly.  Rep. 
45;  Higginbotham  v.  Holme,  12  Rev. 
Rep.  146,  19  Ves.  Jr.  88,  34  Eng.  Re- 
print, 451. 

A  deed  of  tnui  reaervlBc  to 
the  gttmtor  the  use  of  tho 
property-  until  creditors  could  order 
a  sale  (Lanier  v.  Driver,  24  Ala. 
149),  or  the  use  and  profits  for  a 
definite  period  by  paying  annual  in- 
terest on  certain  debts,  a  sale  to  be 
made  at  the  end  of  that  period  at  the 
instance  of  the  majority  of  the  un- 
paid creditors  (Toung  v.  Willis,  82 
Va.  291 ) ,  is  not  per  se  fraudulent  on 
its  face.  See  also  Keagy  v.  Trout,  85 
Va.  390,  7  S.  E.  329. 

2.  Young  V.  Heermans,  66  N.  Y. 
374.  An  assignment  of  all  his  prop- 
erty by  a  debtor  for  less  than  one- 
third  of  its  value,  in  order  to  prevent 
the  same  from  being  subjected  to  a 
forced  sale,  was  fraudulent  as  against 
creditors,  where  the  assignee  under- 


Bess&vatiohs  and  Tbusts  fob  Qbantob. 


415 


to  liim  was  great  or  small/  but  not  where  a  reservation  is  merely 
incidental/  One  of  the  surest  tests  of  a  fraudulent  conveyance  is 
that  it  reserves  to  the  grantor  an*  advantage  inconsistent  with  its 
avowed  object  or  purpose^^  or  an  unusual  indulgence,*  and  such  a 
conveyance  is  void  as  against  creditors  and  subsequent  purchasers. 
Where  a  oonveyance^  professedly  to  indemnify  creditors,  expressly 
or  impliedly  reserves  to  the  grantor  powers  inconsistent  vnth,  or 
adequate  to  defeat,  such  purpose,  it  is  void  as  to  creditors.^  A 
conveyance  made  to  prefer  one  or  more  creditors,  by  which  the 
debtor  obtains  a  benefit  for  himself  or  his  family,  is  fraudulent 
towards  other  creditors,  as  being  intended  to  hinder,  delay  and  de- 
feat them.  The  law  allows  a  debtor  to  give  a  preference  to  one 
creditor  over  another,  but  it  will  not  allow  him  to  secure  an  advan- 
tage  to  himself,  at  the  expense  of  creditors,  as  the  price  of  sudi 
preference.'    To  render  a  transfer  voidable,  however,  there  must 


stood  the  assignor's  necessities,  and 
that  the  assignment  covered  all  prop- 
erty available  for  the  satisfaction  of 
creditors,  regardless  of  whether  the 
assignee  intended  ultimately  to  turn 
any  surplus  over  to  the  assignor  or 
to  keep  it  himself.  Wahlheimer  v. 
Truslow,  106  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  73, 
94  N.  Y.  Supp.  137.  But  see  Whit- 
son  V.  GrifiSs,  39  Kan.  211,  17  Pac. 
801,  7  Am.  St.  Rep.  546,  a  chattel 
mortgage  made  in  good  faith,  by 
which  the  mortgagor  receives  some 
benefit,  is  not  void,  though  the  prop- 
erty is  thereby  placed  out  of  the 
reach  of  creditors. 

3.  Tissier  v.  Wailes  (Ala.  1905), 
39  So.  924. 

4.  Shoemaker  v.  Hastings,  61  How. 
Prac.  (N.  Y.)  79;  Camp  v.  Thomp- 
son, 25  Minn.  175. 

6.  Thompson  v.  Furr,  57  Miss. 
484;  Brockenbrough  v.  Brocken- 
brough,  31  Gratt.  (Va.)  580;  Lang 
T.  Lee,  8  Rand.  (Va.)  410;  Knhn  v. 
Mack,  4  W.  Va.  186. 


6.  Thompson    v.    Furr,    57    Miss. 

7.  Saunders  v.  Waggoner,  82  Va. 
316. 

8.  y,  r.— Mackie  v.  Cairns,  5 
Cow.  547,  15  Am.  Dec  477;  affg 
Hopkins,  373. 

Ark. — Sparks  v.  Mack,  31  Ark. 
666. 

/fu2.~Nbyes  v.  Tootle,  2  Ind.  T. 
144,  48  S.  W.  1031. 

Minn. — Carson  v.  Hawley,  82  Minn. 
204,  84  N.  W.  746,  a  scheme  by  an 
insolvent  debtor  and  a  preferred  cred- 
itor to  dispose  of  the  entire  stock  of 
such  debtor,  to  put  the  purchase 
price  into  a  homestead  for  the  benefit 
of  the  debtor,  and  fraudulently  ap- 
ply the  balance  to  pay  the  creditor, 
is  illegal  in  so  far,  at  least,  as  the 
preferred  creditor  is  concerned. 

N,  C.^Hafner  v.  Irwin,  23  N.  C. 
490. 

Pa. — ^Thombum  v.  Thompson,  192 
Pa.  St.  298,  43  Atl.  992;  Bentz  v. 
Roekey,  69  Pa.  St.  71. 


416 


Fbaudulent  Convstancss. 


be  some  interest  left  to  the  debtor  in  the  property,  some  reeerva- 
tion  inooDi^isteiit  with,  a  true  sale,  or  some  hiding  or  cloaking  of 
the  surplus,  so  as  to  cover  it  up  for  the  benefit  of  the  debtor  or  hia 
family.'  A  transfer  of  personal  property  aooompanied  by  an  actual 
and  continued  diange  of  poesession  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors 
because  made  in  consideration  of  a  promise  by  the  transferee  to 
use  the  property  in  a  certain  manner,  which  would  confer  pe- 
cuniary profit  on  the  transferrer,^®  nor  because  the  consideration  is 
largely  for  services  to  be  performed  in.  the  future."  A  mortgage 
is  not  void  as  to  creditors,  on  the  ground  of  reserving  an  interest 
to  the  mortgagor,  because  it  secures  claims  that  certain  co-sureties 
of  his  may  have  upon  him  for  contribution,^  nor  because  it  in- 
cludes a  small  claim  on  behalf  of  another  creditor  in  addition  to 
the  bona  fide  debt  which  it  was  given  to  secure*^  A  transaction 
in  which  one  creditor  consents,  upon  receiving  security  by  way  of 
mortgage,  to  give  indulgence  to  his  debtor,  is  not  fraudulent  as 
to  other  creditors,^^  nor  is  a  judgment  by  confession  fraudulent 
as  to  creditors,   as  reserving  a  benefit  for  the  debtor,  because 


R.  1. — ^Lennon  t.  Parker,  22  R.  I. 
43,  46  AH.  44. 

8,  C— Smith  v.  Henry,  1  Hill,  16. 
Tenn. — Austin  ▼.  Johnson,  26  Tenn. 

191. 

Tea, — ^Temple  Grocer  Co.  v.  Cla- 
baugh,  18  Tex.  Civ.  App.  655,  45  S. 
W.  482.  See  also  Preferences — 
Knowledge  and  intent  of  parties, 
chap.  XI,  §S  21,  22,  infra, 

9.  Hobbs  y.  Davis,  60  Oa.  213,  one 
has  a  right  under  the  law  to  buy  in 
good  faith  of  a  debtor  in  insolvent 
circumstances,  and  pay  in  a  debt  due 
from  the  insolvent  to  the  purchaser, 
if  it  be  in  truth  a  purchase,  if  it  be 
not  a  mere  scheme  to  get  the  effects 
away  from  the  creditors,  or  if  there 
be  no  trust  or  reserve  of  any  surplus 
to  the  debtor's  benefit;  and  that,  in 
addition  to  the  purchaser's  debt,  the 
purchaser     gives     something     more, 


either  in  money  or  in  his  own  note, 
does  not  alter  the  case. 

Payias  moaex  to  a  debtor  to 
■eevre  foom  Idbn  a  yvef eremtlal 
eonToya&oe  to  a  creditor  is  not 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors  as  in  viola- 
tion of  the  statutory  provision 
against  reservations  for  the  benefit  of 
the  grantor.  Bangs  Milling  Co.  v. 
Bums,  152  Mo.  350,  53  S.  W.  023. 

10.  Lewin  v.  Hopping,  67  Cal.  541» 
8  Pao.  73. 

11.  Farmers',  etc.,  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Mosher,  63  Neb.  130,  88  N.  W.  552. 

12.  Steele  v.  Farber,  37  Mo.  71. 

13.  Taylor  v.  Harle-Haas  Drug  Co. 
(Neb.  1903),  96  N.  W.  182. 

14.  Harshaw's  Ez'rs  v.  Woodfin, 
64  N.  C.  568,  the  equity  of  redemp- 
tion is  open  to  the  creditors,  and  a 
purchaser  would  have  an  election,^ 
either  to  pay  the  mortgage  debt  and 


Besebvations  and  Trusts  fob  Gbantob.  417 

of  a  stipulation  theieiii  that  no  execution  shall  issue  for  a  certain 
tima^  A  deed  of  trust  of  a  mining  company's  property,  authoriz- 
ing the  company  to  dispose  of  any  machinery  covered  thereby 
which  cannot  be  advantageously  used,  it  to  replace  it  by  other  ma- 
chinery of  at  least  equal  value,  is  not  within  a  statute  avoiding 
conveyances  of  chattels  to  the  use  of  the  grantor.^*  A  reservation 
to  the  debtor  in  a  deed  is  not  a  conclusive  badge  of  fraud,  if  the 
deed  can  be  construed  as  a  mortgage  or  otherwise  so  as  to  be  con- 
sistent with  the  reservation,  as  of  the  surplus;  for  that  can  be 
readily  readied  in  equity,  like  any  other  property,  and  the  pur- 
pose is  apparent  on  the  {see  of  the  transaction,^^  Thus,  a  transfer 
by  an  insolveoit  to  one  of  his  creditors  is  not  void  as  to  other  cred- 
itors because  it  provides  that,  if  the  property  transferred  is  of  a 
value  in  excess  of  the  debt  constituting  the  consideration,  the  excess 
shall  remain  in  the  hands  of  the  vendee  to  be  paid  on  the  order  of 
the  vendor  to  his  other  creditors,  sinoe  no  benefit  is  stipulated 
or  provided  to  or  for  the  debtor  beyond  what  the  law,  without  suoh 
agreement,  would  secure  to  him.^  Under  the  law  of  Pennsylvania, 
a  reservation  of  title  in  a  contract  under  which  goods  are  delivered 
to  another  until  the  purchase  price  shall  have  been  paid  is  void  as 
against  creditors  of  the  person  in  possession,  whaftever  may  be  the 
form  of  the  contract,  if  it  is  essentially  one  of  conditional  sale,  and 
not  of  bailment.^* 

§  2.  Conveyances  in  trust  for  grantor, — It  is  well  established 
as  a  general  rule  that  a  debtor  cannot  settle  his  estate  in  trust  for 
his  own  use  or  benefit,  so  as  to  free  it  from  liability  for  his  debts, 
and  such  a  conveyance  or  transfer  by  a  debtor  is  fraudulent  and 
void  as  against  his  ereditorSy  whether  prior*  or  subsequent,  and  the 

call  for  title,  or  elte  take  the  benefit  17.  Baldwin  v.  Peet,  22  Tex.  70S, 

of  the  extended  credit.  75  Am.  Dec  SOS. 

16.  Merchants'  Nat  Bank  ▼.  New-  18.  Goetter    v.    Smith,    104    Ala. 

ton  Cotton  Milts,  116  N.  C.  607,  20  4S1,  16  So.  534;  Harmon  v.  McRae, 

S.  E.  766.  91  Ala.  401,  8  So.  648;  McDowell  ▼. 

16.  Hasbronck   v.   Rich,    113   Mo.. I  Steele,  87  Ala.  493,  6  So.  288. 

App.  389,  88  S.  W.  131.  !••  In  re  Tice,  139  Fed.  62. 

27 


418 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


property  may  be  aubjected  by  them  to  the  payment  of  their  debta.* 
A  oonveyance  made  to  the  use  of  the  grantor  is  fraudulent  without 
regard  to  the  existence  of  an  intention  to  defraud  and  thoo^ 
there  was  no  fraudulent  intent  to  hinder  or  delay  creditors.^  The 
statute  of  Henry  YII,  enaoted  in  1487,  against  trusts  in  personal 
property  for  the  use  of  the  persons  creating  them,  re-enacted  in  New 
York  in  1787,  and  in  many  other  jurisdictianfi  with  immaterial 


20.  N.  7. — ^Young  ▼.  Heermans,  66 
K.  Y.  374;  CoUumb  ▼.  CaldweU,  16 
K.  Y.  484 ;  Curtis  t.  Leavitt,  16  N.  Y. 
9;  Vilas  Nat.  Bank  v.  Newton,  25 
App.  Div.  62,  48  N.  T.  Supp.  1009; 
Bier  t.  Kibbe,  43  Hun,  174;  Spotten 
▼.  Keeler,  12  N.  Y.  St.  Rep.  385. 

Ala.— Smith  ▼.  Hill,  103  Ala.  235, 
16  So.  525,  void  as  against  creditors 
existing  and  subsequent;  McDennott 
T.  Ebom,  90  Ala.  258,  7  So.  751; 
Benedict  ▼.  Renfro,  75  Ala.  121,  51 
Am.  Rep.  429;  Sandlin  v.  Robbins,  62 
Ala.  477;  Reynolds  v.  Crook,  31  Ala. 
634;  Johnson  v.  Thweatt,  18  Ala.  741. 

Colo. — ^Innis  t.  Carpenter,  4  Colo. 
App.  30,  34  Pao.  1011. 

Gfa. — Coleman,  etc,  Co.  v.  Rice,  115 
Ga.  510,  42  S.  £.  5;  Hobbs  ▼.  Davis, 
60  6a.  213;  Eastman  v.  McAlpin,  1 
Ga.  157;  Cameron  v.  Scudder,  1  Ga. 
204. 

/U.— Hardin  v.  Osborne,  60  HI.  93. 

/nd.— Plunkett  ▼.  Plunkett,  114 
Ind.  484,  16  N.  E.  612,  17  N.  E.  662; 
Stout  ▼.  Price,  24  Ind.  App.  360,  55 
N.  £.  964,  56  N.  K  857. 

lotva, — ^Hook  v.  Mowre,  17  Iowa, 
195. 

Kan. — Clark  y.  Robbins,  8  Kan. 
574. 

ITe.— Hamlin  ▼.  Bridge,  24  Me. 
145;  Legro  t.  Lord,  10  Me.  161. 

I#«ftft.— Smith  ▼.  Conkright,  28 
Minn.  23,  8  N.  W.  876. 

Mo.— Bigelow  ▼.  Stringer,  40  Mo. 
195;   Armstrong  ▼.   TutUe,  34  Mo. 


432;  Robinson  v.  Robards,  15  Mo. 
459;  Scudder  ▼.  Payton,  65  Mo.  App. 
314;  State  of  Mueller,  10  Mo.  App. 
87;  State  of  Jacob,  2  Mo.  App.  183. 

Neh, — Graham  ▼.  Townsend,  62 
Neb.  364,  87  N.  W.  169. 

N,  J, — ^Newman  ▼.  Van  ihiyne,  42 
N.  J.  Eq.  485,  7  Atl.  897. 

N.  C— Carter  ▼.  Cocke,  64  N.  C. 
239;  Sturdiyant  ▼.  Daris,  31  N.  C. 
365;  Smith  v.  Blank,  3  N.  C.  229. 

Pa.— Ghormlej  ▼.  Smith,  139  Pa. 
St  584;  Bentz  ▼.  Hockey,  69  Pa.  St 
71;  Appeal  of  Mackason,  42  Pa.  St 
330,  82  Am.  Dee.  517;  Hart  ▼.  Mc- 
Farland,  13  Pa.  St  182;  Shaffer  v. 
Watkins,  7  Watts  &  S.  219 ;  Andrews 
▼.  Lewis,  1  Pa.  Co.  Ct  293;  Patrick 
▼.  Smith,  39  Wklj.  Notes  Caa.  4;  In 
re  Catherwood's  Estate,  29  Wkly. 
Notes  Cas.  344. 

8.  C— Ford  T.  CaldweU,  3  Hill, 
248;  Wilson  ▼.  Cheshire,  1  McCord 
Eq.  233. 

Tex. — Rives  ▼.  ^phens  (CiT. 
App.  1894),  28  S.  W.  707. 

Fo.— Burton  t.  Mills,  78  Va.  468; 
Lewis  V.  Caperton,  8  Gratt.  148. 

Wii. — Stapleton  ▼.  Brannaa,  102 
Wis.  26,  78  N.  W.  181;  Severin  t. 
Rueckerick,  62  Wis.  1,  21  N.  W.  789. 

Zl.  Innis  ▼.  Carpenter,  4  Colo. 
App.  30,  34  Pac.  1011;  Plunkett  ▼. 
Plunkett,  114  Ind.  484,  16  N.  E.  612, 
17  N.  E.  562;  Wetherill  v.  Caoney, 
62  Minn.  341,  64  N.  W.  18;  State  t. 
Jacob,  2  Mo.  App.  183. 


Resbbvationb  asd  Tbusts  fob  Gbantob.  418 

differenices  in  phrafieology,  applies,  however,  only  to  convejanoes 
primarily  and  wholly  for  the  use  of  the  grantor,  and  not  to  instni- 
ments  made  in  good  faith  for  the  actual  and  real  use  of  the  grantee 
and  where  the  reservations  to  the  grantor  are  incidental  and  par- 
tial.'* Its  object  is  to  render  simply  ineffectual  purely  nominal 
transfers  of  personal  estate  where  the  entire  use  and  control  are, 
by  a  declaration  of  trust  in  or  out  of  the  instrument,  left  in  him 
who  makes  the  transfer.  It  is  not  in  any  proper  sense  a  statute 
against  frauds,  althou^  fraudulent  practices  may  have  led  to  its 
enactment;  but  it  is  founded  on  the  fielf -evident  principle  that  a 
man's  property  should  pay  his  debts,  although  he  has  vested  a 
nominal  title  thereto  in  some  other  person.  For  that  purpose  the 
statute  declares  the  title  to  be  in  the  debtor,  and  no  transfer  which 
is  entirely  nominal  can  stand  in  the  way.  It  has  no  reference  to 
intentions,  whether  fraudulent  or  honest  There  may  in  fact  be 
no  creditors  until  long  after  the  tranaaction,  but  if  the  debtor  has 
property  they  are  entitled  to  be  paid.  The  simple  inquiry  is 
whether  the  property  belongs  to  the  debtor,  not  upon  a  theory  of 
fraud  and  against  the  terms  of  his  conveyance,  but  upon  a  theory 
of  equitable  title  reserved  to  himself  by  the  very  conveyance  whidi 
transfers  the  legal  and  nominal  title  to  another."  The  statute 
has  no  application  to  mortgages,  trusts,  or  other  instruments 
created  to  raise  money  or  secure  a  creditor.  It  is  the  necessary 
incident  of  all  such  transactions  that  some  beneficial  interest  re- 
mains in  the  debtor,  and  that  the  whole  belongs  to  him  when  he 

I 

88.  N.  Y. — Cartis  ▼.  Leavitt,  16  K.  promise  to  share  the  crops  with  the 

Y.    9;    Shoemaker    ▼.    Hastings,    61  grantor    and    pay    certain    relatives 

How.  Pr.  79.  part   of  the   consideration   therefor; 

Colo. — Jefferson  County  Bank  t.  Wetherill  ▼.  Canney,  62  Minn.  841, 
Hnmmell,  11  Ck>Io.  App.  337,  63  Pac.  64  N.  W.  818;  Camp  ▼.  Thompson,  26 
286,  a  deed  intended  as  a  mortgage  Minn.  176;  Butler  v.  White,  26  Minn, 
which  expresses  a  consideration  432, '  where  the  reservation  was 
largely  in  excess  of  the  d^bt  is  not  merely  of  the  surplus  after  satisfy- 
constructively  fraudulent.  ing    the    grantee's    claim;    Vose    v. 

Minn. — ^Hunt  v.  Ahnemann  (1004),  Stickney,    19   Minn.    367;    Truitt   v. 

102  K.  W.  376,  a  deed  made  in  con-  Caldwell,  3  Minn.  364,  74  Am.  Dec. 

sideration    of   past   services    of    the  764. 

grantee    to    the    grantor,    with    his  83.  Curtis  v.  Leavltt^  16  K.  Y.  9. 


420 


Fbaudtjlent  Conveyances. 


has  discharged  the  obligation.  Therefore,  a  d^^otOTy  whetker 
solvent  or  insolvent,  maj,  acting  in  good  faith,  mortgage  a  portion 
or  the  whole  of  his  property  to  secure  existing  claims  against  him, 
and  also  future  loans  and  advances.^  When  it  appears  from  the 
face  of  a  deed  that  there  is  a  trust  or  reservation  of  use  to  the 
grantor,  the  court,  as  a  matter  of  law,  will  declare  such  deed  void 
as  against  creditors;  where  such  deed  is  fair  on  its  face,  but  is 
afiFected  with  a  secret  trust  in  favor  of  the  grantor,  the  existence 
of  fraud  is  a  question  of  fact.'^  While  these  statutes  are  in  terms 
limited  to  goods  and  chattels,  the  principle  upon  which  they  rest  is 
a  part  of  the  common  law,  and  in  some  jurisdictions  it  is  applied 
to  transfer  of  realty  as  well  as  personal,  and  a  transfer  of  real  or 
personal  property  by  a  debtor  to  a  third  party  to  be  held  in  trust 
for  his  use  and  benefit  is  held  to  be  void  as  to  existing  and  subse- 
quent  creditors.** 

§  3.  What  constitutes  conveyance  in  trust  for  grantor. — ^A 

conveyance  to  pay  certain  creditors,  the  surplus  to  be  returned  to 
the  grantor,  is  void  as  a  conveyance  in  trust  for  the  grantor.''  But 
neither  the  statute  nor  the  common  law  principle,  rendering  a  con- 
veyance void  as  to  creditors  which  contains  a  reservation  for  the 


24.  Knapp  v.  McGowan,  96  N.  Y. 
76. 

25.  Zeigler  v.  Maddox,  26  Mo.  675. 

26.  Sandlin  v.  Bobbins,  62  Ala. 
477;  Williams  v.  Kemper  (Minn. 
1906),  109  N.  W.  242;  WetheriU  v. 
Canney,  62  Minn.  341,  64  N.  W.  818; 
Racek  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  62  Neb. 
669,  87  N.  W.  542,  under  a  statute 
making  all  transfers  of  property 
made  in  trust  for  the  use  of  the  per- 
son making  the  same  void  as  against 
existing  and  subsequent  creditors  of 
the  transferror,  where  a  debtor  con- 
veys realty  to  his  wife  without  any 
consideration  therefor,  to  be  held  for 
the  use  and  benefit  of  herself  and 
such  debtor,  his  interest  therein  may 
be  seized  by  either  prior  or  subse- 


quent creditors  for  the  satisfaction 
of  their  claims  against  him. 

But  in  Idal&o  it  is  held  that  a 
conveyance  of  land  with  intent  to  de- 
fraud the  grantor's  creditors  is  not 
within  a  statute  providing  that  "all 
deeds  of  gift,  all  conveyances,  and  all 
transfers  or  assig^nments,  verbal  or 
written,  of  goods,  chattels,  or  things 
in  action,  made  in  trust  for  the  use 
of  the  person  making  the  same,**  are 
void  as  against  creditors.  Brown  v. 
Perault,  5  Ida.  729,  51  Pac.  752. 

27.  Collomb  v.  Caldwell,  16  N.  Y. 
484;  Leitch  v.  Hollister,  4  N.  Y.  211; 
Barney  v.  Griffin,  2  N.  Y.  365;  Dove- 
mu3  V.  Lewis,  8  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  124: 
Goodrich  v.  Downs,  6  Hill  (N.  Y.), 
4.38. 


_  _  I 

Besebvations  and  Tbusts  fob  Quantojl  421 

benefit  of  the  aasignor,  applies  to  an  afleignment  made  in  good 
faith  of  a  part  of  the  debtor's  property  to  creditors  themselves  for 
the  purpose  of  securing  particular  demands^  though  a  provision 
for  the  repayment  of  the  surplus  is  contained  in  the  instrument^ 
since  such  conveyance,  whatever  may  be  its  form,  is  in  effect  but  a 
mortgage  of  the  property  transferred,  and  the  residuary  interest 
of  the  assignor  may  be  reached  by  legal  process  or  bill  in  equity.** 
A  conveyance  or  assignment  of  real  estate,  in  consideration  of  an 
agreement  on  the  part  of  the  grantee  to  support  the  grantor  during 
life^  does  not  create  a  trust  for  his  benefit  so  as  to  render  the  con- 
veyance void  as  to  his  creditors,  in  the  absence  of  fraud  ;**  but  a 
conv^ance  of  personal  property  on  such  consideration  is  a  convey- 
ance in  trust  for  the  use  of  the  grantor  within  the  meaning  of  the 
statute,  and  void  as  against  the  grantor's  present  or  subsequent 
creditors.*^  Where  a  trust  deed,  executed  by  a  banking  association 
to  secure  the  payment  of  certain  bonds,  contained  a  provision  that 
the  trustees  might  borrow  money  upon  or  sell  the  property  as- 
signed, and  that  after  payment  of  the  bonds  the  remainder  of  the 
property  should  be  held  in  trust  for,  and  subject  to  the  direction 
of  the  company,  such  a  reservation  of  an  incidental  benefit  or  re- 
siduary interest  was  held  not  to  be  such  a  trust  as  is  rendered  void 
by  the  statute,  since  the  trust  avoided  is  merely  a  passive  one,  made 
exclusively  for  the  grantor's  use,  where  the  title  of  the  trustee  is 
merely  nominal.'^  A  conveyance  of  a  stock  in  trade  to  secure  a 
debtor,  the  grantor  to  remain  in  possession  until  the  happening 
of  one  or  more  contingencies  specified  in  the  deed,  but  with  no 
accountability  for  the  proceeds  of  sales  made  in  the  meantime,  is 
a  conveyance  in  trust  to  the  use  of  the  grantor."  Where  a  debtor 
has  mortgaged  his  homestead  to  secure  a  loan  of  the  school  fund, 
and  subsequently  gave  a  chattel  mortgage  on  a  stock  of  goods  to 

88.  Leitch  ▼.  Holli8ter,4N.Y.211;  90.  McLean  v.  Button,   10  Burb. 

Bier  ▼.  Kibbe,  43  Hun  (N.  Y.),  174.  (N.  Y.)   450;  Sererin  ▼.  Rusekeriek, 

20.  Hungerford  v.  Cartwright,  13  62  Wfe.  1,  21  N.  W.  7S9. 

Hun   (N.  Y.),  647;  McLean  ▼.  But-  31.     Curtis     v.     Leavitt,     16    N. 

ton,  19  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  450.     But  see  Y.  9. 

Severin  ▼.  Rueakmek,  62  Wis.  1,  21  92.  Armstrong  v.  Tuttle,  34  Ma 

N.  W.  7S9,  432. 


422 


Fbaudulent  Convetances. 


secure  certain  specified  debtSy  directixig  that  the  ftorplus  be  applied 
to  the  payment  of  the  school  fund  debty  it  is  a  convqranoe  for  the 
use  of  the  debtor,  and  therefore  fraudulent  aiod  void  as  to  cred- 
itors." But  Tirfiere  insolvent  debtors  have  made  a  convejanoe  of 
their  property  to  a  particular  creditor,  the  mere  fact  of  a  reserva- 
tion in  the  deed  of  the  surplus  which  ahall  remain  after  payment 
of  such  creditor's  debt  will  not  of  itself  make  the  conveyance 
fraudulent,  as  being  to  the  use  of  the  grantors.^  An  afiftignment 
of  property  in  trust  to  sell  part  of  it  to  pay  for  advances,  and  to 
retain  part  of  it  subject  to  the  order  of  the  assignor,  is  fraudulent 
as  against  the  creditors  of  the  assignor.** 

§  4.  Reservation  of  life  estate  in  grantor. — A  person  cannot 
place  or  settle  his  property  in  trust  with  remainder  over,  reserving 
to  himself  the  beneficial  interest  for  his  life,  subject  to  the  ex- 
penses of  the  trust,  and  thereby  put  his  life  interest  beyond  the 
reach  of  his  creditors,  either  prior  or  subsequent,  by  any  provision 
restricting  the  power  of  alienation  or  otherwise.'*  A  trust  to  place 
one's  property  beyond  the  reach  of  creditors,  while  retaining  full 
enjoyment  of  the  income  and  revenue  therefrom  through  the  in- 


33.  Paddock*Hawlej  Iron  Co.  ▼. 
McDonald,  61  Mo.  App.  569. 

34.  Bigelow  ▼.  Stringer,  40  Mo. 
193.  But  see  Johnaon  ▼.  Sage  (Ida. 
1896),  44  Pac.  641. 

35.  Hart  v.  McFarland,  13  Pa.  St. 
182. 

31k  y,  Y, — Schenck  ▼.  Barnes,  166 
N.  Y.  316,  50  N.  E.  967,  41  L.  R.  A. 
396;  Young  v.  Heermans,  66  N.  Y. 
374. 

U,  S. — ^De  Hierapolis  ▼.  Lawrence, 
115  Fed.  761. 

Kan. — Polley  ▼.  Johnson,  62  Kan. 
478,  36  Pac.  8,  23  L.  R.  A.  258. 

lf<2.~Brown  ▼.  Macgill,  87  Md.  161, 
39  Atl.  613,  67  Am.  St.  Rep.  334, 
39  L.  R.  A.  806. 

if  a«9.— Pacific  Kat  Bank  ▼.  Wind- 
ram,  133  Mass.  175. 


Mo, — ^Lambert  ▼.  Haydel,  96  Ma 
439,  9  S.  W.  780,  9  Am.  St.  Rep.  368, 
2  L.  R.  A.  213;  Donovan  ▼.  Donning, 
69  Mo.  436;  McXlvaine  ▼.  Smith,  42 
Mo.  46,  97  Am.  Dec.  296. 

Pa.— Ohormlejr  ▼.  Smith,  139  Pa. 
St.  684,  21  Atl.  135,  23  Am.  St.  Rep. 
215,  11  L.  R.  A.  666;  Appeal  of  Mae- 
kason,  42  Pa.  St  330,  82  Am.  Dec 
517;  In  re  Catherwood's  Estate,  29 
Wkly.  Notes  Gas.  344;  Andress  ▼. 
Lewis,  17  Wkly.  Notes  Gas.  270,  1 
Pa.  Co.  Ct.  293. 

Va. — ^Lewis  y.  Caperton,  8  Gratt 
148. 

A  deed  eoaTejlac  m  elATe  for 
a  Taluable  consideration,  with  a  resei^ 
Tation  of  possession  to  the  vendor 
daring  his  life  or  pleasure,  is  valid. 
Gullett  V.  Laraberton,  6  Ark.  109. 


Kesbbvatiohs  and  Tbubts  fob  Gbantob. 


423 


strumeiitalitj  of  a  trustee,  eannot  be  created  even  by  a  married 
woinaa  or  a  woman  in.  oon4;emplatdoii  of  marriage,"  or  by  an  un- 
married woman.**  A  transfer  by  a  debtor  of  all  his  property,  both 
real  and  personal,  without  oouflideration,  in  trust  for  himself  and 
for  his  benefit  during  life,  and  after  his  death  for  the  payment  of 
his  debts,  etc.,  is  per  se  condusive  evidence  of  fraud  as  to  existing 
creditors,  and  therefore  void  as  against  them.**  The  reservation  of 
a  life  estate  in  a  conveyanoe  of  property  by  a  person  largely  in- 
debted at  the  time  is  generally  held  to  be  evidence  of  fraud,  eitlier 
actual  or  constructive,  rendering  the  whole  conveyance  fraudulent 
and  liable  to  annulment  at  the  instance  of  existing  creditors,^  and 
in  some  jurisdictions  of  subsequent  creditors.^^  And  such  a  con- 
veyance cannot  be  upheld  as  to  the  reservation  of  the  life  estate 
to  the  extent  of  requiring  that  the  land  be  sold  subject  to  the  life 
interest  as  an  encumbrance.^ 

§  &.  Reservation  of  life  estate  with  the  power  of  ap] 


37.  Brown  v.  Macgill,  S7  Md.  161, 
39  Atl.  613,  39  L.  R.  A.  806,  citing 
Warner  ▼.  Rice,  66  Md.  436;  Pacific 
Nat  Bank  ▼.  Windram,  133  Mass. 
176;  Jackson  y.  Von  Zedlits,  136 
Mass.  342;  Lampert  v.  Haydel,  96 
Mo.  489,  2  Ii.  R.  A.  113;  Ghormley  v. 
Smith,  139  Pa.  8t.  684,  11  L.  R.  A. 
666;  Appeal  of  Mackason,  42  Pa.  St. 
330,  82  Am.  Dec.  617. 

38.  Ghormley  ▼.  Smith,  139  Pa.  St. 
684;  In  re  Oatherwood's  Estate,  29 
Wkly.  Notes  Om.  (Pa.)  344. 

39.  Young  ▼.  Heermans,  66  N.  Y. 
374. 

40.  Ala.— Sandlin  y.  Robbins,  62 

Ala.  477. 

/iMi.— MeNally  v.  White,  164  Ind. 
163,  64  N.  E.  794,  66  N.  E.  214. 

».  ff.— Coolidge  ▼.  Melvin,  42  K. 
H.  610.  But  a  conveyanoe  in  tmst 
for  the  wife  and  children  of  the 
grantor,  and  in  trust  for  the  grantor 
for  lif«  in  case  he  surviye  his  wife. 


is  not  void.  Low  v.  Carter,  2x  N.H.  483. 

O^fo.— Berry  v.  Haas,  12  Ohio  Cir. 
a.  189,  6  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  48. 

8.  C— Ford  V.  Caldwell,  3  Hill, 
248;  De  Millon  ▼.  McAlliley,  2  Mc- 
Mull,  499;  Swindersine  ▼.  Miscally,  1 
Bail^  £q.  304;  Brown  y.  McDonald, 
1  Hill,  297. 

Eng.—TBjloT  v.  Jones,  2  Atk.  600, 
26  Eng.  Reprint,  768;  Tarback  r. 
Marbury,  2  Vem.  Ch.  610,  23  Eng. 
Reprint,  926. 

41.  Schenck  y.  Barnes,  166  N.  Y. 
316,  60  N.  E.  967,  41  L.  R.  A.  396; 
Coolidge  y.  Melyin,  42  N.  H.  610; 
Ford  y.  Caldwell,  3  Hill  (S.  O.),  248. 

A  Tolvatavj  dead  of  aUTea,  de- 
liyered  to  the  grantee,  reserying  a 
life  estate  to  ihe  grantor,  is  yalid 
against  purchasers  and  subsequent 
creditors.  Adam  y.  Brougfaton,  13 
Ala.  731. 

42.  McNally  y.  White,  164  Ind. 
163,  66  N.  K  214« 


4S4 


Fbattdulent  Cokyetahoxs. 


at  deatlL — ^A  oonyejanoe  of  property  to  be  held  m  trust  for  the 
benefit  of  the  grantor  daring  his  life^  with  remainder  oyer,  with 
reserved  power  of  appointment  or  devise  or  disposition  at  his 
death,  is  fraudnlent  and  void  both  as  to  existing  and  subsequent 
creditors,  and  both  the  principal  and  income  may  be  subjected  ta 
the  claims  of  such  creditors.^ 


§  6.  Reservation  of  power  to  revoke. — ^A  reservation  in  a 
ToortgB^  deed  of  trust,  or  contract  for  the  sale  of  property  of  the 
right  or  power  to  the  maker  or  vendor  to  revoke  or  rescind  the  con- 
tract and  resume  the  ownership  of  the  property,  in  a  certain  events 
is  inconsistent  with  a  fair,  honesty  and  absolute  disposition  of  the 
property,  and  renders  the  transfer  fraudulent  and  void  and  sub- 
ject to  be  defeated  at  the  instance, of  creditars  of  the  maker  or 
v^idor.^  The  same  rule  applies  to  a  conveyance  reserving  a  power 
equivalent  in  effect  to  a  power  of  revocation.^  The  reservation 
to  the  vendee  of  the  right  to  rescind  or  cancel  the  contract  at  any 
time  before  the  purchase  money  is  paid  and  thus  restore  the  owner- 
ship of  the  property  to  the  seller,  or  the  right  to  relinquish  the  bar- 
gain whenever  he  chooses  and  on  a  redelivery  of  the  property  be 
repaid  whatever  he  has  expended,  is  likewise  fraudulent  as  to 


49.  8cott  ▼.  Keane,  87  Md.  709, 
40  Atl.  1070,  42  L.  R.  A.  359;  Brin- 
ton  ▼.  Hook,  3  Md.  Ch.  477;  Ghorm- 
ley  V.  Smith,  139  Pa.  St.  684,  21  Atl. 
135,  27  Wkly.  Notes  Gas.  331,  23  Am. 
St  Rep.  215,  11  L.  R.  A.  565;  Appeal 
of  Maekason,  42  Pa.  St.  330,  82  Am. 
Bee.  517;  In  re  Catherwood's  Estate, 
29  Wkly.  Notes  Gas.  344;  Patrick  ▼. 
Smith,  2  Pa.  Super  Ct.  113;  Hunters 
▼.  Waite,  3  Gratt.  (Va.)  26. 

44.  Westfall  r.  Jones,  23  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  9;  Riggs  v.  Murray,  2  Johns.  Ch. 
(N.  Y.)  565;  West  v.  Snodgrass,  17 
Ala.  549;  Cannon  ▼.  Peebles,  26  N.  C. 
204;  Jenkyn  y.  Vau^an,  3  Drew. 
419,  2  Jur.  N.  S.  109,  26  L.  J.  Ch. 
338,  4  Wkly.  Rep.  214. 


45.  Riggs  ▼.  Murray,  2  Johns.  Ch. 
(N.  Y.)  565,  an  assignment  in  trust 
to  (pay  certain  releasing  creditors, 
but  if  they  should  refuse  to  release, 
then  in  trust,  after  paying  a  debt  due 
one  of  the  assignees,  for  such  credi- 
tors as  the  assignor  should  appoint; 
Lang  T.  Lee,  3  Rand.  (Va.)  410,  a 
deed  of  trust,  the  sum  to  be  secured 
thereby  not  being  specified  therein, 
and  it  being  therein  agreed  that  the 
goods  should  remain  in  the  possession 
of  the  debtor,  with  authoritjr  to  make 
Hales  of  them,  but  to  account  to  the 
trustee  if  called  on;  Tarback  y.  Mar- 
bury,  2  Vem.  Ch.  510,  23  Eng.  Re- 
print, 926,  a  reseryation  of  a  power 
to  mortgage. 


Besbbvations  akd  Tbusts  fob  Gbantob.  425 

creditors.^  But  where  a  series  of  assignments  were  made,  the 
first  of  them  oantaining  a  power  of  revocation,  but  the  last^  restat- 
ing the  appointment  with  some  modification,  was  absolute,  it  was 
held  that  the  earlier  instruments^  though  voidable  by  reason  of  the 
power  to  revoke^  were  capable  of  oonfirmation,  and  that  the  last 
assignment^  no  liens  or  proceedings  of  creditors  having  then  inter- 
vened to  prevent,  was  operative  as  a  confirmation,  and  was  legal 
and  valid/^  The  deposit  of  an  aasigimtient  with  a  stranger  after 
complete  execution,  to  hold  until  receipt  of  further  orders  from 
the  assignor,  or  to  file  when,  in  the  judgment  of  the  depositary,  it 
shall  be  for  the  best  interests  of  all  creditors,  amounts  to  a  reserva- 
tion of  power  to  revoke  in  the  assignor  and  renders  the  assignment 
void.*  Where  a  husband  conveyed  to  his  wife  certain  property 
for  her  separate  usei,  reserving  in  the  deed  a  power  of  revocation 
or  appointment  to  other  uses,  it  was  held  that  the  reservation  did 
not  create  an  imputation  on  the  grantor's  good  faith  in  the  transac- 
tion as  to  his  creditors.* 

§  7.  Reservation  of  support  or  care  of  grantor  or  family. — 

Where  a  debtor,  in  failing  circumstances,  stipulates  in  the  sale  of 
his  property  for  the  support  of  himself  or  of  his  family  for  a  term 
of  years  or  for  lifet,  the  law  will  regard  the  transaction  with  great 
suspicion^  since  he  thereby  secures  a  benefit  to  himself  at  the  ex- 
pense of  his  creditors;  for  a  purchaser  would  give  lees  for  a  prop- 
erty encumbered  with  such  a  condition  than  for  a  dear  right  to 
immediate  and  untrammeled  possession.^  Where  a  conveyance 
contains  a  covenant^  or  a  stipulation  or  provision,  that  the  grantee 
will  support  the  grantor  or  his  family  during  life  or  for  a  term  of 
years,  as  a  part  of  the  consideration  for  the  transfer,  such  pro- 
vision creates  a  trust  in  favor  of  and  for  the  benefit  of  the  grantor 

46.  West  ^   Snodgrass,    17    Ala.      How.  Pr.  (N.  Y.)  512,  12  Daly  (N. 
549;    Shannon  y.   Gommonwealtli,   8      Y.),  525. 

8erg.  &  R.  (Pa.)  444.  48.  Jones  ▼.  Clifton,  101  U.  S.  225, 

47.  Murray  v.   Riggs,    15   Johns.      25  L.  Ed.  908.      See  also  Riggs  v. 
(N.  Y.)  571,  T€^9  Riggs  ▼.  Murray,      Murray,  2  Johns.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)  565. 

2  Johns.  Oh.  (N.  Y.)  565.  60.    Wooten    ▼.    Clark,    23    Miss. 

48.  Reichenhach  v.  Winkhaus,  67      76. 


426 


FbaUBUUBNT   C0VVXTAVCE8. 


whidi  lendere  the  oonyeyano^  either  prima  fade  or  ooodiuiTely, 
fraudulent  and  void  9a  to  existing  creditors  of  the  grantor,  and  the 
property  sold  or  oonveyed  may  be  subjected  to  their  daims  either 
at  law  or  in  equity."  Where  a  covenant  creating  a  trust  for  the 
support  of  a  grantor  is  inserted  in  a  deed  without  the  knowledge 
of  the  grantee,  thus  making  the  transfer  void  as  to  the  creditors 
of  the  grantor,  and  the  grantee,  after  discovering  sudi  covenant, 
takes  no  steps  to  repudiate  it,  he  will  be  held  to  have  adopted  the 
provision,  and  will  be  bound  thereby."  It  has  been  held  that  the 
law  will  infer  no  fraud  from  a  provision  for  the  grantor's  support, 
if  the  agreement  be  made  in  gcx>d  faith ;  that  the  question  as  to  the 
fraudulent  character  of  such  an  arrangement  is  wholly  one  of 
f act"*  It  has  also  be^i  held  that  a  contract  for  the  future  support 
of  the  grantor,  as  part  of  the  consideration  for  the  sale^  does  not 
render  the  sale  necessarily  fraudulent  as  to  creditors^  but  that  it 
must  also  appear  that  the  grantor  was  insolvent  at  the  time  of  the 
execution*.^  On  the  contrary,  it  has  been  held  that  a  debt(Mr  has 
no  right  in  this  way  to  secure  his  property  for  the  use  of  himself 


51.  y.  y.— Stearns  ▼.  Gage,  79  N. 
Y.  102;  Towiwend  ▼.  Bumpos,  29  App. 
Dir.  122,  61  N.  Y.  Supp.  613;  Todd 
y.  Monell,  19  Hun,  363;  McLean  ▼. 
Button,  19  Barb.  460;  Keep  v.  Keep, 
7  Abb.  N.  C.  240.  Compare  Hunger- 
ford  ▼.  Carwrighty  13  Hun,  647. 

Ato.— &ndlin  ▼.  Bobbins,  62  Ala. 
477;  Green  ▼.  Branch  Bank,  33  Ala. 
643,  but  a  conveyance  by  a  djd)tor  in 
trust  for  payment  of  his  debts  and 
support  of  his  wife  and  children  is 
not  fraudulent  on  its  face  as  against 
creditors,  not  being  vitiated  by  the 
provision  for  the  benefit  of  the  debtor's 
family;   Stokes  v.  Jones,  18  Ala.  734. 

La.— Duval  v.  Ardrey,  1  La.  Ann. 
243.  Compare  Bourgeat  v.  Dumou- 
lin,  12  La.  Ann.  204. 

Jfe.— Hapgood  v.  Fisher,  34  Me. 
407,  66  Am.  Dec.  663. 

r.— Hunt  V.  Knox,  34  Miss.  666. 


V.  ff.— Albes  V.  Webster,  16  N.  H. 
362;  Smith  v.  Smith,  11  N.  H.  460. 

Pa. — Hauseman  v.  Grossman,  177 
Pa.  St.  463,  36  Atl.  736;  Hennon  v. 
McClane,  88  Pa.  St.  219;  Miner  v. 
Warner,  2  Grant,  448;  Johnson  v. 
Harvey,  2  Penr.  &  W.  82,  21  Am.  Dee. 
426;  Kirker  v.  Johnson,  13  Wkly. 
Notes  Gas.  386. 

Wi». — Stapleton  v.  Brannan,  102 
Wis.  26,  78  N.  W.  181;  Merchants', 
etc.,  Sav.  Bank  v.  Lovejoy,  S4  Wb. 
601,  66  N.  W.  108;  Severin  v.  Rneck- 
erick,  62  Wis.  1,  21  N.  W.  789. 

52.  Townsend  v.  Bumpos,  29  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  122,  61  N.  Y.  Supp. 
613. 

53.  Tibbals  t.  Jacobs,  SI  Conn. 
428. 

54.  Faloon  v.  Mclntyre,  118  Ili. 
292,  8  N.  £.  316;  Hapgood  v.  Fisher, 
34  Me.  407,  66  Am.  Dee.  663. 


Rbssbvations  and  Trusts  fob  Obantos.  427 

and  his  family  to  the  prejndioe  of  those  to  whom  he  is  indebted 
at  the  time,  even  if  he  supposes  that  he  has  propeortj  enoa^  left 
to  satisfy  his  existing  creditoie  and  his  intentions  ai^  fair;  but 
that  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the  grantee  has  paid  or  seoured  to  the 
grantor  the  value  of  the  land  apart  from  the  agreement  to  main- 
tain, and  this  was  done  without  any  design  or  intention  to  defraud 
or  delay  oreditorsy  the  addition  of  the  oblig^on  to  maintain  will 
not  avoid  the  conveyance.^  A  conveyance  of  personal  property,  in 
consideration  of  the  future  support  of  the  assignor,  his  wife  and 
children,  is  void  as  to  subsequent  creditors^  under  the  statutes  of 
New  York  relating  to  transfers  of  personal  property  in  trust  for 
the  use  of  the  grantor.^  But  in  other  jurisdictions  a  conveyance 
in  consideration  of  a  life  support  of  the  grantor  by  the  grantee  has 
been  held  valid  as  against  subsequent  creditors,  if  without  actual 
intent  to  defraud  future  creditors,  the  grantor  retains  property 
sufficient  to  satisfy  existing  creditors." 

§  8.  Reservaticm  of  surplus. — ^A  stipulation  in  a  mortgage  or 
deed  of  trust,  or  any  other  instrument  which  is  in  effect  a  mortgage 
of  real  or  personal  property,  given  by  a  failing  debtor,  that  the 
surplus  remaining  after  paying  th.e  debt  secured  shall  be  paid  to 
the  debtor,  does  not  vitiate  it,  since  the  mortgagor  or  grantor  stipu- 
lates for  nothing  more  than  the  law  would  have  given  him.  The 
interest  of  a  debtor  in  the  surplus  remaining  after  the  property 
conveyed  has  been  a.pplied  to  the  payment  of  his  debt  being  avail- 
able to  unsecured  creditors  by  execution  or  bill  in  equity,  the  pro- 
vision that  the  surplus  be  paid  to  the  debtor  does  not  operate  to 
hinder  and  delay  other  creditors,  so  as  to  render  the  deed  fraudu- 
lent as  to  them.  It  is  but  the  usual  clause  in  every  mortgage  upon 
real  estate."'    A  conveyance  of  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  in 

55.  AU>ee  ▼.  Webeter,  16  N.  H.  3S2.      v.  Mclntyre,  118  111.  202,  S  N.  E.  316, 

56.  McLean  ▼.  Button,  19  Barb.  a  oonveyanoe,  though  voluntaiy,  is 
<N.  T.)  50.  not  void  as  to  subsequent  creditors. 

57.  Bowlus  y.  Shanabarger,  19  58.  N.  T.— Hine  ▼.  Bowe,  114  K. 
Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  187,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  T.  350,  21  N.  £.  733;  Rc^r  VHieel 
1S7;  Holmes  ▼.  Penny,  3  Jur.  K.  S.  Co.  ▼.  Fielding,  101  N.  T.  504,  5  N. 
SO,  3  Kaj  &  J.  90,  26  L.  J.  Gh.  179,  S.  431;  Dunham  ▼.  Whitehead,  21  N. 
5  Wklj.  Rep.  132.      See  also  Faloon  Y.  131;  Curtis  r.  Leavitt,  15  N.  Y.  9; 


428 


FBATTDUIiBNT   CONVEYANCSS. 


trafit  to  pay  certain  creditors  to  the  exduflion  of  odiera,  with  a 
reservation  of  the  surplus  to  the  debtor,  or  a  conveyance  of  prop- 


Leitcb  V.  HolliBter,  4  N.  Y.  211 ;  WH- 
liam  Ottman  ft  Co.  v.  Cooper,  81  Hun, 
530,  30  N.  Y.  Supp.  1086;  Bier  ▼. 
Kibbe,  43  Hon,  174;  Royer  Wheel 
Co.  ▼.  FroBt,  13  Daly,  283.  Compare 
Delaney  ▼.  Valentine,  80  Hun,  476,  30 
N.  Y.  Supp.  512;  Jackson  ▼.  BruBb, 
20  John.  5. 

U.  8. — ^Huntley  ▼.  Kingman  ft  Co., 
152  U.  S.  527,  14  Sup.  Ct.  688,  38  U 
Ed.  540;  Fechheimer  ▼.  Baum,  43 
Fed.  710,  2  L.  R.  A.  153.  Compare 
Kellogg  ▼.  Richardson,  10  Fed.  70,  de- 
cided under  Missouri  statute. 

Ala, — ^Loucheim  ▼.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
08  Ala.  521,  13  So.  374;  Perry  Ins., 
etc.,  Co.  ▼.  Foster,  58  Ala.  502,  29 
Am.  Rep.  770;  Miller  v.  Stetson,  32 
Ala.  161;  Brown  ▼.  Lyon,  17  Ala.  659; 
Hindman  ▼.  Dill,  11  Ala.  689;  Ravi- 
sies  y.  Alston,  5  Ala.  297;  Johnson 
V.  Cunningham,  1  Ala.  249;  Malone  v. 
Hamilt<m,  Minor,  286,  12  Am.  Dee. 
49. 

Oa. — Calloway  ▼.  People's  Bank,  64 
Ga.  441;  Lay  ▼.  Seago,  47  Ga.  82; 
Carey  ▼.  Giles,  10  Ga.  9. 

/U.-~Beach  ▼.  Bestor,  47  DI.  521, 
an  assignment  of  a  judgment  with  an 
agreement  to  collect  it  and  pay  cer- 
tain creditors  and  pay  the*balance  to 
the  assignor  was  not  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors. 

Ind, — Hays  ▼.  Hostetter,  125  Ind. 
60,  25  N.  E.  134,  reservation  of  the 
surplus  to  the  grantor's  wife;  Des- 
Bar  V.  Field,  99  Ind.  548. 

Md. — Fouke  ▼.  Fleming,  13  Md. 
r,92;  McCall  ▼.  Hinkley,  4  Gill,  128. 

Mass. — ^New  England  Marine  Ins. 
Co.  ▼.  Chandler,  16  Mass.  275,  but 
the  surplus  after  paying  the  debt  is 
liable  to  attachment  by  trustee  pro- 


JTmA.— -Butler  v.  White,  25  Mum. 
432;  Camf)  T.  Thompson,  25  Minn. 
175.  But  see  Truitt  r.  CaldwcJl,  3 
Minn.  364. 

Ifo.— Barton  ▼.  Sitlington,  128  Mo. 
164,  30  S.  W.  514;  Bigelow  ▼. 
Stringer,  40  Mo.  195.  Compare  Pad- 
dock-Hawley  Iron  Co.  y.  McDonald, 
61  Mo.  App.  559;  State  ▼.  Mueller, 
10  Mo.  App.  87. 

N,  J, — ^Muchmore  v.  Budd,  53  N.  J. 
L.  369;  22  Atl.  518,  where  there  is 
in  fact  no  surplus  the  transfer  is  not 
▼oid  per  se, 

y.  C— Burgin  t.  Burgin,  23  N.  C. 
453. 

Pa«— Sheble  y.  Bryden,  114  Pa.  147, 
6  Atl.  905. 

Tenn. — ^Austin  y.  Johnson,  26  Tenn. 
191. 

Te».— McClure  v.  Sheek,  68  Tex. 
426,  4  S.  W.  552;  Stiles  y.  Hill,  62 
Tex.  429;  Baldwin  y.  Peet,  22  Tex. 
708,  75  Am.  Dec.  806;  Parlin,  etc., 
Co.  y.  Hanson,  21  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  401, 
53  S.  W.  62;  Sutton  v.  Gregory  (Civ. 
App.  1898),  45  S.  W.  932,  a  trust 
deed  for  the  benefit  of  certain  cred- 
itors is  not  illegal  because  it  pro- 
vides that  the  surplus  remaining 
after  payment  of  the  secured  debts 
shall  be  subject  to  the  order  of  the 
grantors,  on  the  ground  that  such 
provision  makes  it  a  negotiable  in- 
strument; Puckett  V.  Richardson 
Drug  Co.,  1  Tex.  Civ.  App.  634,  20  8. 
W.  1127. 

Fa.— -Harvey  v.  Anderson  (1896), 
24  S.  E.  914. 

W.  Va. — ^Keneweg  Co.  y.  Schilan- 
sky,  47  W.  Va.  287,  34  S.  E.  773. 

Wis. — ^Kneeland  v.  Cowles,  3  Pinn. 
316,  4  Chadl.  46.  But  see  Grant  y. 
Lewis,  14  Wis.  487,  80  Am.  Dec.  785. 


Besehvatioks  and  Tbusts  fob  Obantob, 


429 


erty  by  the  debtor  by  way  of  preferenoe  to  a  creditor  or  oertain 
creditors,  tlie  latter  to  return  the  fturplLufi,  after  satisfying  the  pre- 
ferred debts,  to  the  grantor,  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  other 
creditors  because  of  the  reservation  to  the  debtor.^  But  a  convey- 
ance by  a  solvent  debtor  of  a  portion  of  his  property  to  trustees  to 
pay  a  portion  of  his  creditors,  containing  a  provision  ihai  any  sur^ 
plus  after  execution  of  the  trust  shall  be  returned  to  him,  is  not, 
as  matter  of  law,  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  not  provided  for.*^ 

§  9.  Reservation  of  power  to  direct  application  of  proceeds, — 
An  assignment  of  property  by  a  debtor  for  the  purpose  of  placing 
the  proceeds  under  the  control  of  the  assignor,  or  a  conveyance  by 
a  debtor  to  a  third  person  in  trust,  to  sell  and  apply  the  proceeds 
to  such  persons  and  in  such  proportions  as  the  debtor  shall  direct, 
is  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  prior  creditors,  since  in  order  to 
make  a  valid  transfer  the  debtor  must  not  only  part  with  his  prop- 
erty, but  must  also  surreoider  all  power  to  interfere  with  or  con- 
trol it  or  the  proceeds  thereof  afterwards.^  But  a  stipulation  in 
an  asedgnment  of  property  to  secure  an  indebtedness  that,  after 
working  out  the  indebtedness  of  the  grantor,  the  grantee  shall  pay 
balances  as  the  grantor  shall  direct,  or  a  reservation  in  a  deed  of 
trust,  which  in  reality  is  a  chattel  mortgage^  of  the  surplus  to  the 
grantor,  is  not  fraudulent  and  will  not  avoid  the  instrument  as 
against  his  creditors,  since  it  is  no  more  than  the  law  implies  in 
every  transfer  of  property  as  a  security  for  debts.**  So  where 
property  is  conveyed  to  a  creditor  by  way  of  preference  it  will  not 
be  invalidated  because  of  a  provision  that  the  excess  over  the  debt 
shall  be  paid  to  such  other  creditors  as  the  debtor  shall  direct,  or 


59.  Barney  v.  Griffin,  2  N.  Y.  365; 
Strong  V.  Skinner,  4  Barb.  (K  Y.) 
646;  Jackson  ▼.  Brush,  20  Johns.  (N*. 
Y.)  6;  Rigor  v.  Simmons,  47  111. 
App.  428;  Selz  ▼.  Evans,  6  111.  App. 
466;  Thompson  v.  Parker,  S3  Ind.  06. 

60.  Elnapp  y.  McGowan,  96  N.  Y. 
76. 

61.  Kittredge  r.  Slack,  67  111.  App. 


128;  Mitchell  v.  Stiles,  13  Pa.  St.  306. 
68.  Vallance  ▼.  Miners'  L.  Ins.  Co., 
42  Pa.  St.  441;  Huntley  ▼.  Kingman 
ft  Co.,  152  U.  S.  627,  14  Sup.  Ct  688, 
38  L.  Ed.  640.  See  also  Chicago, 
etc.,  R.  Go.  ▼.  Watson,  113  111.  195; 
Stockbridge  r.  Franklin  Bank,  86  Md. 
189,  37  Atl.  645.  See  also  Reserva- 
tion of  surplus,  §  8,  supra* 


430 


Fraudulent  Cokvetakces. 


be  retained  to  be  paid  on  the  order  of  the  debtor  to  his  other  cred* 
itora,  aa  such  a  provision  is  merely  a  recognition  of  the  dd^tor's 
legal  right  to  make  preferences  and  is  not  a  reeervation  of  a  use  or 
benefit  to  himself.**  The  transfer  being  absolutely  and  in  good 
faith  made,  there  is  no  reason  why  the  debtor  may  not  as  well 
direct  payment  of  the  surplus  of  the  consideration  by  the  pur- 
chaser upon  his  debts,  or  such  debts  as  he  may  direct,  as  to  take  the 
money  and  pay  it  <hi  them  himself.^ 

§  10,  Emplojrment  of  debtor, — The  fact  of  a  stipulation  in  a 
transfer  of  a  stock  of  goods  or  other  property  by  a  debtor  for  the 
employment  of  the  debtor,  by  the  purchaser,  after  the  sale  to  the 
latter,  at  a  reasonable  compensation  for  his  services,  to  manage  the 
property,  or  to  assist  in>  the  sale  or  disposition  of  the  goods  and  the 
collection  of  accounts,  does  not  raise  a  presumption  of  fraud  in  the 
transaction  or  render  the  sale  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  cred- 
itors, on  the  ground  that  there  is  an  implication  of  the  reservation 
of  a  benefit  to  the  debtor  or  a  beneficial  use  of  the  property  trans- 
ferred.* Whether  such  a  stipulation  is  valid  or  invalid  depends 
upon  its  intention.  If  its  object  appeared  on  its  face  to  have  been 
to  secure  a  benefit  to  the  debtor  or  his  family,  it  would  be  fraudu- 
lent in  law.*    But  if  its  sole  purpose  was  to  obtain  services  neces- 


\.  Hine  v.  Bowe,  114  N.  T.  350, 
21  N.  E.  733 ;  Goetter  ▼.  Smith,  104 
Ala.  481,  16  So.  534. 

64.  Hine  v.  Bowe,  114  N.  Y.  360, 
21  N.  E.  733;  Royer  Wheel  Co.  ▼. 
Fielding,  101  N.  Y.  504, 

65.  y.  T. — ^HaTens  v.  Extein,  5  N. 
Y.  Supp.  735;  QtHBh  v.  Cranston,  23 
N.  Y.  Super.  Ct.  1;  Nicholson  v. 
Leavitt,  6  N,  Y.  Super.  Ct.  262. 

C7.  8. — Bamberger  ▼.  Schoolfield, 
160  U.  S.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct.  225,  40  L. 
Ed.  374;  Smith  v.  Craft,  123  U.  S. 
436,  8  Sup.  Ct.  196,  31  L.  Ed.  267, 
alTg  17  Fed.  706. 

Go.— Cribb  y.  Bagley,  83  Ga.  105, 
10  S.  E.  194,  it  will  not  per  te  render 
the  sale  void. 


Minn. — ^Wilooz  ▼.  Lundberg,  30 
Minn.  93,  14  N.  W.  366,  it  is  not,  as 
a  matter  of  law,  fraudulent.  The 
question,  of  its  character  as  fraudu- 
lent or  not  is  for  a  jury. 

N.  C— Cowan  ▼.  Phillipe,  119  N.  C. 
26,  25  8.  E.  711. 

Pa.— Davis  ▼.  Yoder,  173  Pa.  St. 
138,  33  Atl.  882.  But  see  Birming- 
ham Dry  Goods  Co.  ▼.  Roden,  110 
Ala.  511,  18  So.  135;  Blumenthal  v. 
Magnus,  97  Ala.  530,  13  So.  7; 
Stephens  v.  Reginstein,  89  Ala.  661, 
8  So.  68,  18  Am.  St.  Rep.  166. 

66.  Smith  ▼.  Craft,  123  U.  S.  436, 
441,  8  Sup.  Ct.  196,  31  L.  Ed.  267; 
Lukins  v.  Aird,  6  Wall.  (U.  S.)  78, 
18  L.  Ed.  760;  Harris  y.  Smmitry  2 


ESSXBVATJONS  AND   TbUSTS  FOB  QbANTOB.  431 

Mury  to  wind  up  the  buflineea  and  torn  the  goods  into  money  as 
promptly  and  economically  ae  poBsible^  for  the  benefit  of  the  otber 
party,  it  is  valid.*' 

^  11.  Reservaticm  of  right  ol  repurchase  or  return  of  prop- 
erty.— No  presumption  of  a  fraudulent  intent  to  hinder  or  de- 
lay other  creditors  arises  from  a  transfer  of  property  as  security 
to  a  bona  fide  creditor,  whose  debt  is  due,  because  of  a  provision 
of  the  instrument  of  transfer  that  the  property  shall  be  returned 
in  case  a  certain  contemplated  adjustment  of  affairs  of  the 
debtor  diall  be  made,  which  provision  is  favorable  to  other  credi- 
tors,** nor  will  an  agreement  betiween  debtor  and  creditor,  made 
after  an  assignment  of  property,  that,  if  the  debtor  could  sell  the 
property  for  more  than  a  certain  amount,  he  could  have  the 
differ^ice^  invalidate  the  transfer  as  againat  creditors.**  Where 
a  bill  of  sale  gaye  the  vendor  a  right  to  repurchase,  within  a 
certain  time,  and  the  testimony  was  conflicting  as  to  whether  an 
absolute  sale  or  a  transfer  as  security  for  moneys  advanced  wias 
intended,  in  the  absence  of  any  evidence  of  fraud,  the  transaction 
was  valid  as  against  creditors  levying  on  goods  under  execution 
against  the  vendcnr.^  But  an  absolute  conveyance  by  a.  person  in 
failing  ciroumstances,  conditioned  that  the  grantor  may  repur- 
chase when  he  chooses  and  the  grantee  be  repaid  whatever  he 
has  expended,  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.^  Where  a  debtor 
conveyed  land  to  his  creditor,  retaining  a  right  of  redemption, 
with  a  contemporaneous  agreement  under  whidi  he  remained  in 
possession  of  part  of  the  land,  cultivating  it  for  his  own  benefit, 

Pick.     (Mass.)      129;     Meanrg     ▼.  462.  ofTg  Earle  r.   McCartney,   112 

Leeky,  3  Penr.  &  W.   (Pa.)    S3,  23  Fed.  372. 

Am.  Dee.  64.  69.  In  re  A.  L.  Robertshaw  Mfg. 

67.  Smith  t.  Craft,  9Upra;  Strong  Co.,  133  Fed.  566. 

T.  Carrier,  17  Conn.  319;  Wilcoxen  ▼.  70.  Mabler  y.  Schloss,  7  Daly  (K. 

Annesley,   23    Ind.    285;    Baxter    ▼.  Y.),  291. 

Wlieeler,  9  Pick.  (Mass.)  21.  71.  Shannon  ▼.  Cranmonwealth,  8 

68.  McCartney  ▼.  Earle,  115  Fed.  Serg.  k  R.  (P^)  444. 


432  Fbaubulent  Convbtanoss. 

the  law  presumes  such  advantage  to  have  been  the  amaiderar 
tion  for  the  preference,  which  will  be  thereby  rendered  invalid.^ 
But  a  conveyance  by  a  debtor  of  all  his  property  while  a  suit 
is  pending  against  him,  with  a  stipulation  that  he  will  repur- 
chase the  property  conveyed  at  the  same  price  within  a  certain 
time,  if  the  purchaser  desires  it,  has  been  held  not  to  be  con- 
clusive evidence  of  fraud,  but  evidence  of  circumstances  may  be 
admitted  to  explain  and  justify  the  transaction."  The  fact  that 
there  was  an  understanding  between  the  pairties  to  a  bill  of 
sale  that  the  purchaser  was  to  reconvey  the  property  to  the  seller 
when  the  purchaser  was  paid  a  certain  debt  does  not  render  the 
bill  of  sale  void  as  to  subsequent  attaching  creditx>r8.^^  But  it 
has  been  held  that  a  ccxaveyance  by  an  insolvent  to  his  father  as 
security  for  a  debt  due  him,  the  property  to  be  returned  when  the 
father  got  his  money  out  of  it,  is  constructively  fraudulent,  and 
void  as  to  other  creditors." 

f  12.  Reservation  of  power  to  appoint  substitute  trustee* — 
A  deed  of  trust  for  certain  creditors  is  not  rendered  fraudulent 
as  to  other  creditors  by  the  reservation  therein  of  a  power  to 
the  grantor  to  appoint  a  substitute  trustee,  in  case  of  the  failure 
of  the  trustee  named  therein,  from  death  or  any  cause,  to  act,  all 
least  if  no  attempt  is  made  to  exercise  the  power," 

f  13.  Reservation  of  exempt  property. — .A  deed  of  trust  to 
secure  an  existing  debt  is  not  invalidated  as  against  creditors  by 
the  grantor's  reserving  in  it  to  himself  and  family  all  exemp- 
tions and  property  allowed  by  the  state  constitutioni  and  laws 
and  the  bankrupt  laws.^     A  reservation  in  an  assignment  for 

72.  Anderson  y.  Fuller,  Mc^ul.  76.  Cook  &  B.  Co.  ▼.  Himt»  IS  To. 
Eq.  (8.  C.)  27,  36  Am.  Dec.  290.              Civ.  App.  814>  45  S.  W.  163. 

73.  Barr  v.  Hatch,  3  Ohio,  627.  77.   McCord   ▼.   Moore,   62   Tmn. 

74.  Cary-Halidy  Lumber  Co.  y.  734;  Farquharson  v.  McDonald,  49 
Cain,  70  Miss.  628,  13  So.  239.  Tenn.  404;  Brockenbrough  ▼.  Broeken- 

75.  Frey  v.  Gessler,  9  Pa.  Cas.  500,  brongli,  31  Gratt.  (Va.)  580.  See 
12  Atl.  854.  See  also  Grant  ▼.  Lewis,  also  Exempt  property,  diap.  IV,  {  41v 
14  Wis.  487,  80  Am.  Dec.  786.  aupra^ 


Ressbvations  and  Tbusts  fob  Gbantob. 


433 


the  benefit  of  creditors,  by  mistake  of  the  assignor,  of  property 
as  exempt,  which  he  did  not  hold  or  control  or  nvhich  was  not 
in  fact  exempt,  does  not  render  the  assignment  void,  if  in  fact 
he  conveys,  r^ardless  of  such  reservatioii,  all  his  property  not 
exempt  from  execution.^ 

§  14.  Secret  reservations  or  trusts  as  element  or  evidence 
of  frauds— *The  general  rule  is  well  established  that  any  secret 
understanding  or  agreement  for  a  benefit  to  accrue  to  or  be 
reserved  by  the  debtor,  or  any  secret  reservation  in  trust  for 
the  debtor  of  any  interest,  benefit  or  advantage,  inconsistent  with 
the  terms  of  the  conveyance  or  transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor 
ini  failing  circumstances,^  the  conveyance  being  absolute  in  terms, 
and  such  reservation  not  apparent  on  the  face  of  the  conveyance 
but  resting  wholly  in  parol,  renders  the  entire  transaction  fraud- 
ulent and  void  as  against  creditors  of  the  debtor  injured 
thereby.^    The  rule  applies  to  absolute  conveyances  of  land,*^  and 


78.  Robinson  ▼.  Belt  (Ind.  T.),  51 
S.  W.  076. 

79.  Parkman  ▼.  Welch,  36  Mase. 
231,  actual  inaolvency  of  the  grantor 
18  not  required,  all  that  is  necessary 
is  that  the  grantor  be  deeply  indebted. 

80.  N,  y.— Hardt  ▼.  Deutsch,  22 
Misc.  Rep.  66,  48  N.  Y.  Supp.  564; 
Stoddard  v.  Butler,  20  Wend.  607. 

U»  8, — ^Huntley  v.  Kingman,  152  U. 
8.  527,  14  Sup.  Ct.  688,  38  L.  Ed. 
540;  Dent  ▼.  Ferguson,  132  D.  S.  50, 
10  Sup.  Ct.  laT,  33  L.  Ed.  242;  Smith 
▼.  Craft,  123  U.  S.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct. 
106,  31  L.  Ed.  267;  In  re  Dauchy,  122 
Fed.  688;  Howe  Mach.  Co.  ▼.  aay- 
boum,  6  Fed.  438,  while  the  reserva- 
tion of  a  secret  benefit  on  the  execu- 
tion of  an  absolute  conveyance  does 
not  necessarily  render  the  conveyance 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  the  land 
may  be  eharged  in  equity  with  the 
benefit  reserved;  Burbank  v.  Ham- 
numd,  4  Fed.  Cas.  No.  2,137,  3  Sumn. 

28 


429;  Hamilton  v.  Russell,  1  Graneh, 
309,  2  L.  Ed.  118. 

Ala. — ^Davidson  v.  Watts  Min.  Car 
Wheel  Co.,  121  Ala.  591,  25  So.  758, 
a  confession  of  judgment  designed  to 
cover  up  the  leviable  property  of  the 
debtor  company;  Smith  v.  Hall,  103 
Ala.  235,  15  So.  625;  McDermott  v. 
Ebom,  90  Ala.  268,  7  So.  751;  Pritr 
chett  V.  Pollock,  82  Ala.  169,  2  So. 
735;  Fellows  v.  Lewis,  65  Ala.  348, 
39  Am.  Rep.  1;  Sims  v.  Gaines,  64 
Ala.  392;  Borland  v.  Walker,  7  Ala. 
269.  See  also  Crawford  v.  Kirksey, 
55  Ala.  282,  28  Am.  Rep.  704,  as  to 
rule  where  conveyance  is  based  upon 
a  valuable  consideration. 

Ark, — Sparks  v.  Mack,  31  Ark.  666. 

Coto.— George  v.  Tufts,  5  Colo.  162; 
Taub  V.  Swofford  Bros.  Dry  Goods 
Co.,  8  Colo.  App.  213,  45  Pac.  513; 
Innis  V.  Carpenter,  4  Cok).  App.  30, 
34  Pac.  1011. 
-     I>aJk.~First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Comfort, 


484 


FBAUDULEirT   OoNVEYANCES. 


a  conveyance  of  land,  witli  a  secret  reservation  that  the  voider 
shall  have  the  use  and  enjoyment  of  it  for  a  long  time  without 


4  Dak.  167,  2S  K.  W.  865. 

Del. — ^Dutton  t.  Jackson,  2  Del.  Ch. 
86. 

Flo. — ^Neubert  t.  Massman,  37  Fla. 
91,  19  So.  626. 

Oa, — ^Edwards  t.  Stinaon,  69  Ga. 
443. 

/It.— Best  T.  Fuller  ft  Fuller  Oo., 
185  Dl.  43,  56  N.  E.  1077,  aiTg  85 
111.  App.  600;  Higfaley  ▼.  American 
ExdL  Nat.  Bank,  186  lU.  665,  57  N. 
E.  436,  alf'ff  86  m.  App.  48;  Beidler 
▼.  Crane,  135  lU.  92,  25  N.  E.  656, 
26  Am.  St.  Rep.  349,  afTg  22  111.  App. 
638;  Hurd  t.  Ascherman,  117  111. 
501,  6  N.  E.  160;  McNeil,  etc.,  Go.  t. 
Holland,  91  IlL  App.  315;  Hutchin- 
son Nat  Bank  t.  Crow,  56  111.  App. 
558;  Pericho  v.  Qiiinn,  52  111.  App. 
102. 

/fuf.— Plunkett  t.  Plunkett,  114 
Ind,  484,  16  N.  E.  612,  17  N.  E.  562; 
Pennington  ▼.  Clifton,  11  Ind.  162,  a 
eoQY^ance  on  secret  trust  is  a  con- 
tinuing fraud,  and  therefore  void  in 
favor  of  all  creditors  during  its  con- 
tinuance. 

/ofixt.— Parlin,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Daniels, 
111  Iowa,  640,  82  N.  W.  1015;  Brun- 
dage  T.  Cheneworth,  101  Iowa,  256, 
70  N.  W.  211,  63  Am.  St.  Rep.  382. 

jTy.— -White  v.  Graves,  30  Ky.  523. 

jf^.^jones  V.  Light,  86  Me.  437, 
30  Atl.  71;  Sidensparker  v.  Siden- 
sparker,  52  Me.  481,  83  Am.  Dec.  527. 

jfd._Spuck  V.  Logan,  97  Md.  152, 
54  Atl.  989,  99  Am.  St.  Rep.  427; 
Brooks  V.  Dent,  1  Md.  Ch.  523;  Jones 
V.  Slub^,  5  Harr.  &  J.  372. 

Ma9».—VlimpUm  v.  Goodell,  143 
Mass.  365,  9  N.  E.  791;  Oriental 
Bank  v.  Hkskins,  44  Mass.  332,  37 
Am.  Dec.  140,  a  secret  trust,  incon- 


sistent with  the  terms  of  a  eoiifcj- 
ance,  is  not  fraud  per  ee  nor  oonelu- 
sive  evidence  of  fraud;  Parkman  ▼. 
Welch,  36  Mass.  231 ;  Cutler  v.  Dick- 
inson, 25  Mass.  386.  Compare  Strat- 
ton  V.  Edwards,  171  Mass.  374,  54  K. 
£.  886,  a  conveyance  in  trust  for  tlie 
grantor,  made  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
tecting the  property  from  the  risks 
incident  to  business,  but  without  any 
intent  to  contract  debts  and  avoid 
them  by  such  conveyance,  is  not  in 
fraud  of  future  creditors. 

Jfinn.— SmiUi  v.  Conkri^t,  29 
Minn.  23,  8  N.  W.  876. 

Misa. — Thompson  v.  Fur,  57  Mias. 
478;  Hunt  v.  Knox,  34  Miss.  655. 

Mo. — Zeigler  v.  Maddox,  26  Mo. 
575;  Scudder  v.  Payton,  65  Mo.  App. 
314;  Pattison  v.  Letton,  56  Mo.  App. 
325. 

^65.— Racek  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
62  Neb.  669,  87  N.  W.  542;  Grimes 
Dry  Goods  Co.  v.  Shaffer,  41  Neb. 
112,  59  N.  W.  741;  Houck  v.  Hetns- 
man,  37  Neb.  463,  55  N.  W.  1062. 

N,  H. — ^Doucet  v.  Richardson,  67 
Neb.  186,  29  Atl.  635;  Stratton  ▼. 
Putney,  63  N.  H.  577,  4  Atl.  876 
Putnam  v.  Osgood,  52  N.  H.  148 
Coolidge  V.  Melvin,  42  N.  H.  510 
Low  V.  Carter,  21  N.  H.  435;  Tdwle 
V.  Hoit,  14  N.  H.  61;  Trask  v.  Bow- 
ers, 4  N.  H.  309;  Parker  v.  Pattee, 
4  N.  H.  176;  Oobum  v.  Pickering.  3 
N.  H.  415,  14  Am.  Dec.  375. 

y.  J. — Muchmore  v.  Budd,  63  N.  J. 
L.  369,  22  Atl.  518,  a  parol  reserva- 
tion accompanying  a  bill  of  sale  abso- 
lute in  form,  though  a  badge  of 
fraud,  is  not  conclusive  evidence 
thereof. 

y.  C— Carter  v.  Cocke,  64  N.  C. 


Besbbvations  and  Tbusts  fob  Obantob. 


436 


payment  of  rent^  the  same  constitating  a  part  of  the  oonsidera- 
tion,  is  fraudulent^  although  baaed  upon  a  valuable  cooBidera- 
tion."*    That  a  grantor  in  a  deed,  absolute  on  its  faoe^  by  a  secret 


239;  Morrison  v.  MeNeUl,  53  N.  C. 
45;  StordiTBiit  ▼.  Bavis,  31  N.  C. 
366. 

N,  Z>.— Newell  v.  Wagness,  1  N.  D. 
62,  44  N.  W.  1014. 

Ohio, — ^Bowlus  ▼.  Shanabarger,  19 
Ohio  dr.  Ct  137,  10  Ohio  Cir.  Dec. 
167. 

Pa. — Thombum  ▼.  Thompson,  192 
Pa.  St  298,  43  Atl.  992;  Bentz  v. 
Rockey,  69  Pa.  St.  71;  Shaffer  v. 
Watkins,  7  Watte  &  S.  219;  McCnl- 
loch  y.  Hutchinson,  7  Watts,  434,  32 
Am.  Dec.  776;  Passmore  v.  Eldridge, 
12  Serg.  &  R.  198. 

R.  I. — ^Lennon  ▼.  Parker,  22  R.  I. 
43,  46  AtL  44. 

8,  C— Winsmith  v.  Winsmith,  15 
8.  C.  611. 

Tenn. — ^Homsby  v.  City  Nat.  Bank 
(Ch.  App.  1900),  60  8.  W.  160,  a 
parol  trust  in  land  in  favor  of  a 
grantor's  wife  and  children  is  fraud- 
ulent as  against  his  creditors. 

Tew, — Schultze  v.  Schultze  {CW. 
App.  1901 ) ,  66  S.  W.  56. 

Vt. — ^McLane  v.  Johnson,  43  Vt.  48. 

Va.— Young  v.  Willis,  82  Va.  291. 

Wash. — Adams  v.  Dempsey,  35 
Wash.  80,  76  Pac.  538. 

Wis, — Franske  ▼.  Hitchon,  105 
Wis.  11,  80  N.  W.  931. 

^n^.— Twyne's  Case,  3  Coke, 
80a,  1  Smith  Lead.  Cas.  1. 

Can, — ^Beamish  v.  Pomeroy,  6 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  586. 

Ome  holdims  money  mm  the 
•eoret  trastee  or  deposttary  of 
the  owner  in  order  to  keep  the  lat- 
ter's  creditors  from  reaching  it  may 
be  liable  as  a  garnishee  at  the  suit 
of  a  creditor.  Feary  y.  Gummings, 
41  Mich.  376,  1  N.  W.  946. 


SI.  U.  i9.— Lokins  ▼.  Aird,  73  U. 
S.  78,  18  L.  Ed.  750. 

Ate.— Deposit  Bank  v.  Caffee,  135 
Ala.  208,  33  So.  152. 

III.— BoBtwick  V.  Blake,  145  111.  85, 
34  N.  E.  38;  Tyler  ▼.  Tyler,  126  HI, 
525,  21  N.  E.  616,  9  Am.  St.  Rep. 
642;  MitcheU  ▼.  Sawyer,  115  111.  650. 
5  N.  E.  109;  Moore  v.  Wood,  100  111. 
451. 

Mass. — ^Rice  v.  Cunningham,  116 
Mass.  466. 

ifiMMi*— Thompson  ▼.  Bickford,  19 
Minn.  17. 

i^e5.— Gillespie  ▼.  Cooper,  36  Neb. 
775,  55  N.  W.  302. 

N.  /.—Scott  V.  Hartman,  26  N.  J. 
Eq.  89. 

N.  C— Clement  v.  Cozart^  109  N. 
C.  173,  13  S.  E.  862. 

OAto.— Schultz  V.  Brown,  3  Ohio 
Cir.  a.  609,  2  Ohio  Cir.  Dec.  353. 

Teff.— Baldwin  ▼.  Peet,  22  Tex.  708, 
75  Am.  Dec.  806.  See  Stayers  ▼. 
Stavers,  69  N.  H.  158,  45  Atl.  319, 
where  the  deliveiy  of  a  deed  to  the 
grantee,  with  a  secret  agreement 
postponing  its  taking  effect  until  de- 
fault in  payment  of  a  mortgage  on 
the  property  by  the  grantor,  was  held 
not  conclusiye  evidence  of  fraud. 

82.  Lukins  ▼.  Aird,  73  U.  S.  78,  18 
L.  Ed.  750;  Page  r,  Francis,  97  Atl. 
379,  11  So.  736,  where  the  rents  were 
received  for  the  benefit  of  the  father 
and  mother  of  the  grantor;  Sims  v. 
Gaines,  64  Ala.  392;  Dean  v.  Skinner, 
42  Iowa,  418;  Macomber  v.  Ptek,  39 
Iowa,  351;  Scott  v.  Hartman,  26  N. 
J.  Eq.  89.  But  where  there  is  no 
secret  reservation  of  the  use  of  the 
land  in  part  consideration  for  the 
conveyance,  but  an  independent  eon- 


436 


Fraudulent  Cokveyances. 


oontemporaneouB  writing  reserved  to  himself  a  life  estate  in  the 
property,  is  proof  of  legal/ if  not  of  actual,  fraud  as  to  creditors 
of  the  grantor.^  The  general  rule  above  stated  has  also  been  ap- 
plied to  mortgages  or  deeds  of  trust  of  real  estate,^  but  a  deed  of 
trust,  to  be  valid,  need  not  be  so  certain  and  definite  in  its  terms 
as  to  exclude  the  possibility  of  a  secret  reservation  in 
favor  of  the  grantor,  fraudulent  and  inccmsistent  with  the 
avowed  purposes  of  the  parties.^  The  general  rule  above 
stated  is  also  applicable  to  absolute  transfers  of  personal  prop- 
erty^ and  to  mortgages  of  personalty/'  A  bill  of  sale  absolute 
on  its  face  is  void  as  to  subsequent  creditors  where  there  is  a 


tract  or  agreement  to  lease  based 
upon  a  new  consideration,  this  rule 
does  not  apply.  Eddy  y.  Wearin,  105 
Iowa,  387,  76  N.  W.  177;  Brown  v. 
Bradford,  103  Iowa»  378,  72  N.  W. 
648;  Stroff  v.  Swafford,  81  Iowa,  695, 
47  N.  W.  1023. 

83.  Donovan  ▼.  Dunning,  69  Mo. 
436;  Brown  v.  McDonald,  1  Hill  Eq. 
(S.  C.)  297.  See  also  Yardlcy  t. 
Sibbs,  84  Fed.  531. 

84.  N,  r.— Westfall  y.  Jones,  23 
Barb.  9. 

Ga, — Dayis  v.  Anderson,  1  Qa.  176. 

Mo. — ^Roberts  v.  Barnes,  127  Mo. 
405,  30  S.  W.  113,  48  Am.  St.  Hep. 
640. 

8.  C— Winsmith  y.  Winsmith,  16 
S.  C.  611. 

85.  Ballard  y.  Chewning,  49  W.  Va. 
508,  39  S.  E.  170. 

86.  U.  £f.— Blythe  y.  Thomas,  45 
Fed.  784. 

A  Za.— Jordan  y.  Collins,  107  Ala. 
572,  18  So.  137;  Sheppard  y.  Iyer- 
son,  12  Ala.  97.  A  sale  of  his  en- 
tire stock  of  goods  by  an  insoWent 
debtor  to  one  of  his  creditors  in  satis- 
faction of  a  debt  admitted  to  be  yalid 
is  not  fraudulent,  as  against  other 
creditors,  when  no  secret  trust  is  ro- 


seryed  for  the  benefit  of  the  debtor. 
Heyer  y.  Bromberg,  74  Ala.  524. 

/«.— Tyler  y.  Tyler,  126  Dl.  625, 
21  N.  E.  616,  9  Am.  St.  Rep.  642; 
Steere  y.  Bigelow,  39  111.  264. 

Jfd.— Franklin  y.  aafiin,  49  Md.  24. 

Mo, — First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Kaasaa 
aty  Lime  Co.,  43  Ma  App.  561. 

N,  £r.— Paul  y.  Crooker,  8  N.  H. 
288. 

Pa. — Connelly  y.  Walker,  45  Pa. 
St.  449. 

87.  Ala. — ^Roden  y.  Norton,  128 
Ala.  129,  29  So.  367.  See  also  Pugh 
y.  Harwell,  108  Ala.  486,  18  So.  535. 

DaJb.— First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Comfort, 
4  Dak.  167,  28  S.  W.  855. 

/lul.— New  y.  Sailors,  114  Ind. 
407,  16  N.  E.  609,  5  Am.  St.  R«p.  632; 
Strut  y.  Price,  24  Ind.  App.  360,  55 
N.  E.  964,  56  N.  E.  857. 

Neb, — Bacon  y.  P.  Brockman  Com- 
mission Co.,  48  Neb.  365,  67  N.  W. 
304. 

N,  J7.— Putnam  y.  Osgood,  51  N.  H. 
192,  although  the  agreement  is  made 
after  the  execution  of  the  mortgage;. 

Wash, — ^Adams  y.  Dempsey,  29 
Wash.  155,  69  Pac.  738. 

Wis, — Franzke  y.  HitchiHi,  105 
Wis.  11,  80  N.  W.  931. 


Reservations  and  Tbusts  fob  Osantob. 


437 


secret  trust  for  the  grsitaitor,  tihough  the  object  of  the  bill  of  sale 
was  to  place  the  apparent  title  in  the  grantee,  so  as  to  prevent 
the  grantor,  who  was  a  spendthrift,  from  thereafter  obtaining 
credit  on  the  ground  of  the  ownership  of  the  property  covered." 
An  assignment  of  wages  to  a  creditor,  who  collected  the  same 
and  turned  them  over  to  the  assignor,  retaining  a  small  part  to 
apply  on  his  claim,  is  fraudulenit  as  against  attaching  creditors, 
whose  claims  antedated  the  assignment"  The  fact  that  a  chattel 
mortgagee  verbally  agrees  at  the  time  the  mortgage  is  given 
that  the  mortgagor  may  sell  certain  of  the  property  covered 
thereby  for  his  own  benefit  is  held  in  some  jurisdictions  not  to 
invalidate  the  mortgage  as  to  other  property  to  which  such  agree- 
ment doesr  not  apply."  A  secret  trust  for  the  purpose  of  de- 
frauding the  grantor's  creditors  will  not  be  enforced  in  law  or 
equity.*^  That  the  interest  reserved  by  the  debtor  is  not  of  great 
value  is  immaterial;  it  is  sufficient  if  it  is  a  substantial  interest 
in  the  property  conveyed."  The  rule  as  stated  above  applies 
althou^  the  transfer  was  upon  a  valuable  consideration,"  as  a 
sherifPs  sale  of  property  on  execution.*^  A  transfer  of  goods 
even  to  a  creditor  accompanied  by  a  secret  trust  tends  to  delay 
and  defraud  creditors  and  so  is  within  the  letter  and  spirit  of 
the  statute  of  13  Elizabeth."  A  secret  trust  or  reservation  created 


88.  Miller  t.  Fune,  1  Bailey  Eq. 
(S.  C.)   187. 

89.  Lennon  v.  Parker^  22  R.  I.  43, 
46  Atl.  44.  But  the  fact  that  an 
assignor  is  permitted  hy  his  assignee, 
hy  orders  given  for  that  purpose,  to 
draw  wages  he  assigned,  which  he  im- 
mediately turned  over  to  the  assignee, 
does  not  render  the  assignment 
fraudulent  and  void.  Dolan  ▼. 
Hughes,  20  R.  I.  513,  40  Atl.  344,  40 
L.  R.  A.  735. 

90.  In  re  Soudan  Mfg.  Ck>.,  113  Fed. 
804,  51  C.  C.  A.  476;  Bamet  v.  Fer- 
gus, 51  111.  352,  99  Am.  Dec.  547; 
Lockwood  ▼.  Harding,  79  Ind.   129; 


Davenport  v.  Foulke,  68  Ind.  382,  34 
Am.  Rep.  265.  Compare  Stout  t. 
Price,  24  Ind.  App.  360,  56  N.  £.  964, 
56  N.  E.  857. 

91.  Gillum  V.  Kirksey,  29  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  422,  93  S.  W.  591. 

92.  Lukins  v.  Aird,  6  Wall.  (U. 
S.)  78,  18  L.  Ed.  750;  Sparks  ▼. 
Mack,  31  Ark.  676;  Stout  t.  Price, 
24  Ind.  App.  360,  55  N.  E.  964,  56  N. 
E.  857. 

98.  Thompson  v.  Furr,  57  Miss.  478. 

94.  Bostwick  t.  Blake,  145  111.  85, 
34  N.  E.  38. 

95.  Connelly  t.  Walker,  45  Pa.  St 
449. 


438 


Fbauditlbnt  Conveyances. 


for  the  grantor  may  be  express,  or  implied  irom  extrinsic  oircnm- 
stances,  and  may  be  proven  by  parol;  and,  where  the  trust  is 
shown,  fraud  is  an  inference  of  law  that  the  court  is  bound  to 
pronounce.**  The  burden  is  upon  the  contesting  creditor  to  es- 
tablish by  competent  evidence  the  fact  of  a  secret  trust  or  reser- 
vation for  the  benefit  of  the  debtor,*^  and  if  the  declarations  of  a 
party  can,  under  any  circumstancee,  be  received  to  raise  a 
trust  or  create  an  interest  in  land  in  another,  they  must  be  dear 
and  explicit,  and  point  out  with  certainty  the  subject  matter  and 
the  extent  of  the  beneficial  interest** 


§  15.  What  constitutes  a  secret  reservaticm  or  trusts — 
Where  a  deed  remained  for  months  uoorecorded,  the  grantor  con- 
tinuing to  occupy  and  exercise  acts  of  ownership  on  the  land, 
and  the  grantee  made  an  oral  promise  to  support  the  grantor, 
there  is  evidonoe  of  a  secret  trust,  and  the  conveyance  may  be 
avoided.**  An  assignment  of  securities  on  the  agreement  to  pay 
the  assignor  a  fixed  yearly  sum  for  his  support,  should  he  de- 
mand so  much,  accompanied  by  a  written  agreement  by  the  as- 
signee to  surrender  back  the  property  to  the  assignor  whenever 
the  latter  should  demand  it,  neither  of  the  instruments  being 
recorded,  constitutes  a  secret  trust  for  the  benefit  of  the  assignor; 
and  an  unrecorded  agreement  between  the  parties,  whereby  the 


96.  Rice  t.  Cunningham,  116  Mass. 
466;  Coolidge  ▼.  Melvin,  42  N.  H.  510. 

97.  y,  T. — Crouae  v.  Frothingham, 
97  N.  Y.  106;  Spiegel  v.  Hays,  5  St. 
Rep.  879. 

U.  8. — ^Bamberger  t.  Schoolfield, 
160  U.  8.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct.  226,  40  L. 
Ed.  374. 

Ato.-— Pugli  ▼.  Harwell,  108  Ala. 
486,  18  So.  535;  Pollak  T.  Searcy, 
84  Ala.  259,  4  So.  137. 

Iowa, — Jamison  v.  Wearer,  87 
Iowa,  72,  63  N.  W.  1076. 

Iftc^i.— Sutherland  ▼.  Danaher,  35 
Mich.  422. 


W.  Va, — ^Armstrong  t.  Bailej,  4S 
W.  Va.  778,  28  S.  E.  766. 

98.  Crouse  ▼.  Frothingham^  97  N. 
Y.  105,  112.  A  conreyanoe  by  a  hus- 
band to  the  wife  is  not  shown  to  haw 
been  in  trust  for  the  husband  by  his 
declaration,  long  after  the  oonTsy- 
ance  was  made,  that  it  was  made  for 
fear  the  husband's  grantor  might  set 
aside  the  sale  on  the  ground  of 
fraud.  Moulton  v.  Sturgis  Nat.  Bank 
(Tex.  CSv.  App.  1901),  66  S.  W. 
1114. 

99.  Eioe  v.  (Mnningham,  116 
Mass.  466. 


Besxbvations  akd  Tbubtb  fob  Qbantob* 


439 


assignor  releases  the  assignee  from  the  paymeiiit  of  the  annuity 
on  the  agreement  of  the  latter  to  maintain  the  former  for  life  ifk 
a  secret  trust  for  the  benefit  of  the  assignor.^  A  oonveyance  of 
realty  by  a  debtor  to  his  wife  without  any  consideration  there- 
ffor^  to  be  held  for  the  use  and  benefit  of  herself  and  such 
debtor/  a  private  reservation  to  a  husband,  in  a  conveyance  by 
him  to  his  wife,  of  the  use  of  the  property  and  the  rents  and 
profits  thereof  for  a  term  of  years/  constitutes  a  secret  trust  for 
the  benefit  of  the  debtor.  A  chattel  mortgage  on  the  contents  of 
a  store,  which  covers  '^  such  personal  property  as  may  hereafter 
be  in  said  premises  or  may  be  substituted  for  such  articles  as 
may  be  sold  in  the  course  of  the  business/'  creates  a  secret  trust  for 
the  use  of  the  mortgagor.^  But  a  secret  trust  or  reservution  is 
not  created  by  a  mortgagei  given  by  the  maker  of  a  note  to  his 
surely  thereon,  conditioned  that  the  former  will  pay  the  note  and 
save  the  surety  harmless,^  nor  by  a  conveyance  in  trust  for  the 
wife  and  children  of  the  grantor,  and  in  trust  for  the  grantor 
for  life  in  case  he  survive  his  wife,*  nor  by  a  valid  preferential 
conveyance,  althougjh  the  grantee  subsequently  conveys  the  prop- 
erty included  therein  to  the  wife  of  the  debtor/  Where  a  debtor 
sold  personalty  at  an  agreed  price  all  of  which  the  buyer  promised 
to  pay  to  creditors,  the  transaction  was  a  sale  and  not  a  transfer 


1.  Tyler  v.  Tyler,  126  111.  625.  21 
N.  £.  616,  9  Am.  St.  Rep.  642. 

2.  Raoek  y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  62 
Neb.  669,  87  N.  W.  642. 

3.  Deposit  Bank  of  Frankfort  ▼. 
Caffer,  135  Ala.  208,  33  So.  152.  But 
a  oonyeyance  by  a  husband  to  a  third 
person  to  aid  in  paying  the  husband's 
debts,  with  an  agreement  that  when 
they  are  paid  the  lands  shall  be  con- 
veyed to  his  wife  as  a  home  for  her 
and  the  children,  is  not  a  secret  trust, 
as  regards  subsequent  creditors  of  his, 
merely  because  he  shares  the  home 
thus  secured.  Edgerly  y.  First  Nat. 
Bank,  30  111.  App.  425. 


4.  Spies  y.  B<^,  11  N.  Y.  Jjeg. 
Obs.  64. 

Tnuuaetloaa  held  to  eoasti- 
tste  aeoret  tnuta. — See  Shepherd 
y.  lyerson,  12  Ala.  97;  Second  Nat. 
Bank  y.  Teatman,  63  Md.  443;  Kehr 
y.  Sichler,  48  Mo.  96;  Newell  y.  Wag- 
nees,  1  N.  D.  62,  44  N.  W.  1014; 
Oreen  y.  Veder  (Tenn.  Ch.  App. 
1900),  57  S.  W.  619. 

5.  Eastman  y.  Foster,  49  Mass. 
19. 

6.  Low  y.  Carter,  21  N.  H.  433. 

7.  Bamberger  y.  Schoolfield,  160 
U.  8.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct  226,  40  L.  Ed. 
374. 


440 


F&AUDULSST    CONVETANCES. 


of  goods  in  trust  for  the  use  of  the  grantor.'  But  it  has  heesk 
held  that  a  bill  of  sale,  although  absolute  on  its  f ace^  is  fraudu- 
lent against  the  grantor's  creditors,  if  there  wae  a  secret  agree- 
ment with  the  grantee  by  which  the  grantor  should  derive  an 
ultimate  benefit  out  of  the  property,  either  to  himself  individually 
or  in  payment  of  debts  other  than  his  debt  to  the  grantee.*  A 
confession  of  judgment  by  an  insolvent  debtor  in  favor  of  the 
executor  of  an  estate  in  which  he  is  interested  as  a  devisee  is 
void  as  to  existing  creditoi^  because  upon  a  secret  tirust  in  the 
debtor's  favor.** 

:§  16.  Absolute  conveyance  intended  as  security. — ^The  rule 
is  maintained  in  some  jurisdictions  that  an  absolute  conveyance 
of  lands  or  a  conveyance  absolute  on  its  faoe^  but  in  fact  in- 
tended by  secret  imderstanding  or  trust  or  secret  dause  of  de- 
feasance, written  or  verbal,  as  ai  security  for  a  debt,  either  ante- 
cedent or  contemporaneously  contracted,  when  made  by  a  debtor 
who  is  insolvent  or  in  embarrassed  circumstances,  is  fraudulent 
and  void  as  to  existing  creditors,  although  there  may  be  no  actual 
fraudulent  intent^     And  the  same  rule  is  maintained  in  cer- 


S.  Thompson  ▼.  Newland  (Mich), 
13  Det.  L.  N.  320,  108  N.  W.  93. 

9.  Ely,  etc..  Dry  Goods  Go.  t. 
Walker,  78  Mo.  App.  678.  Contra. — 
Jefferson  County  Bank  ▼.  Hnmmel, 
11  Ck>lo.  App.  337,  53  Pac.  286,  a 
deed  to  secure  a  creditor  made  in 
good  faith  before  the  Uen  or  right  of 
any  other  creditor  has  attached,  is 
not  a  conveyance  in  trust  for  the  use 
of  the  grantor  and  therefore  fraudu- 
lent, although  the  grantee  separately 
agreed  to  apply  the  surplus  in  pay- 
ment of  other  specific  debts  of  the 
grantor. 

10.  Manley  v.  Larkin,  59  Kan. 
660,  33  Pac.  869. 

11.  Ala.— McDermott  t.  Ebom,  90 
Ala.   268,   7   So.   761;    Campbell  ▼. 


Davis,  86  Ala.  66,  4  So.  140,  it  la 
fraudulent  in  law  as  to  existing 
creditors;  Tryon  v.  Floumoy,  80  Ala. 
321,  but  as  against  subsequent  cred- 
itors a  fraudulent  intent  must  be 
shown;  Proskauer  v.  People's  Sav. 
Bank,  77  Ala.  257;  Sims  v.  Gaines, 
64  Ala.  392;  Hartshorn  v.  Williams, 
31  Ala.  149;  Bryant  v.  Toung,  21 
Ala.  264. 

Fla. — ^Neubert  v.  Massman,  37  Fla. 
91. 

Minn, — Smith  v.  Conkwright,  2S 
Minn.  23,  8  N.  W.  876. 

Mi88. — ^Thompson  v.  Forr,  67 
Minn.  478. 

Jfo.— Rock  Island  Nat.  Bank  t. 
Powers,  134  Mo.  432,  34  S.  W.  869» 
36  S.  W.  1132,  a  duly  recorded  abso- 


Bessbvations  and  Tbtjbts  pob  Gbantob. 


441 


tain  jurisdictions  as  to  transfers  of  personal  property.^^  And 
the  fact  tibat  the  property  conveyed  or  transferred  is  of  less 
value  than  the  debt,  or  that  the  debt  was  for  the  purchase  price 


lute  deed,  which  was  modified  by  a 
separate  written  defeasance,  not  re- 
corded, is  void  as  against  a  creditor 
of  the  grantor,  as  creating  a  secret 
trust  in  favor  of  such  grantor.  Cotnr 
pare  Robinson  ▼.  McCune,  128  Mo. 
577,  30  8.  W.  166. 

N.  J7.— Stratton  ▼.  Putney,  63  N. 
H.  677,  4  Atl.  876,  such  secret  trust 
is  void  against  both  subsequent  and 
existing  creditors;  Quimby  ▼.  Wil- 
liams, 67  N.  H.  489,  41  Atl.  862,  68 
Am.  St.  Rep.  686;  Watkins  v.  Arms, 
64  N.  H.  90,  6  Atl.  92;  Ladd  v.  Wig- 
gins, 36  N.  H.  421,  69  Am.  Dec.  661; 
Smyth  V.  CarUsle,  16  N.  H.  464; 
Badger  ▼.  Story,  16  N.  H.  168;  Tiflft 
▼.  Walker,  10  N.  H.  160;  Smith  v. 
LoweU,  6  N.  H.  67. 

y.  C— Bernhardt  v.  Brown,  122 
N.  C.  687,  29  S.  E.  884,  66  Am.  St, 
Rep.  726;  Gulley  v.  Macy,  84  N.  C. 
434;  Holcombe  v.  Ray,  23  N.  C.  340, 
void  as  against  subsequent  as  weU  as 
prior  creditors;  Gregory  v.  Perkins, 
15  N.  C.  60, 

Cait.— See  Gillies  v.  How,  19 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  32. 

Where  the  parties  entered 
lute  a  new  eentraet  in.  writlngy 
a  few  days  after  the  execution  of  a 
conveyance  absolute  on  its  face,  by 
which  the  grantee  gave  the  grantor  a 
right  to  repurchase  the  property  at 
the  same  price,  the  conveyance  will 
not  be  rendered  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors  of  the  grantor  therein,  on 
the  ground  that  it  is  a  mortgage. 
Danner  Land,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Stonewall 
Ins.  Co.,  77  Ala.  184. 

nnderatandins    that    the 

thd  prop- 


erty when  his  circumstances  im- 
proved will  not  vitiate  a  conveyance 
in  other  respects  unobjectionable,  the 
only  effect  of  such  a  reservation  be- 
ing to  convert  an  absolute  conveyance 
into  a  mortgage,  or  to  make  an  un- 
conditional a  conditional  sale.  Glenn 
V.  Randall,  2  Md.  Ch.  220. 

12.  Ato.— Steiner  v.  Scholze,  114 
Ala.  88,  21  So.  428.  Compare  Kil- 
lough  V.  Steele,  1  Stew.  &  P.  162. 

CiU, — Chenery  v.  Palmer,  6  Cai. 
119,  66  Am.  Dec  493.  Compare  God- 
chaux  v.  Mulford,  26  Cal.  316,  86 
Am.  Dec.  178,  the  statute  only  ap- 
plies where  the  debtor  places  prop- 
erty in  the  hands  of  a  trustee  having 
no  beneficial  interest,  to  hold  solely 
for  the  debtor's  benefit  and  enable 
him  to  receive  and  enjoy  his  income 
to  the  prejudice  of  creditors. 

Ill, — ^Highley  v.  American  Exch. 
Nat.  Bank,  186  111.  565,  57  N.  E.  436, 
affg  86  111.  App.  48;  Best  v.  Fuller 
&  Fuller  Co.,  186  111.  43,  56  N.  E. 
1077,  afTg  86  111.  App.  600;  Beidler 
V.  Crane,  135  111.  92,  26  N.  E.  656,  26 
Am.  St.  Rep.  349,  assignment  of  a 
patent. 

Mo. — ^Revercomb  v.  McCuUy,  74 
Mo.  App.  675;  Pattison  v.  Letton,  66 
Mo.  App.  326;  Molaska  Mfg.  Co.  v. 
Steele,  36  Mo.  App.  496. 

^eft.— William  B.  Grimes  Dry 
Goods  Co.  V.  Shaffer,  41  Neb.  112,  69 
N.  W.  741. 

N.  fir.— Parker  v.  Pattee,  4  N.  H. 

176. 

2^.  c. — Johnson  v.  Murchison,  60 
N.  C.  286 ;  King  v.  Cantrel,  26  N.  C. 
261;  Gaither  v.  Mumford,  4  N.  C. 
600.    But  an  absolute  bill  of  sale^  ao- 


896 


Fbaudxjlbnt  Cohvetancss. 


sale  is  made  on  a  long  or  unusual  credit,^  or  for  the  puidiaser's 
unsecured  notes,^  the  fact  that  the  purchase  is  made  ivitfaout 
any  reasonably  apparent  motive,'*  the  fact  that  the  parties  cannot 
explain,  how  the  indebtedness  arose  and  how  the  amount  claimed 
is  made  up,"  or  the  fact  that  the  seller  takes  an.  active  interest 
in  the  property  and  business  after  the  transfer,**  or  retains  pos> 
session  of  real  estate  without  payment  of  rent.**  Attaohm^it, 
obtained  by  relatives  of  an  insolvent,  will  be  set  aside  as  to  other 
creditors,  on  proof  of  acts  of  collusion  between  the  relatives  and 
insolvent  to  deceive  other  creditors,  and  on  the  inability  of  the 
idatives  to  satisfactorily  explain  their  claims.^ 


^  4.  Transactions  between  husband  and  wife. — Fraud  is  one 
of  the  broadest  issues  known  to  the  law,  for  it  can  sddom  be 
proved  by  direct  evidence,  but  is  dependent  upon  circumstances 
which,  separately  cooisidered,  may  be  quite  immaterial,  but  when 
combined  are  not  only  material  but  have  great  persuasive  forca 
The  marriage  relation  affords  such  peculiar  opportunities  for 
practicing  fraud  upon  creditors,  and  fraud  is  so  easily  practiced 
and  concealed  under  cover  of  the  marriage  relation,  that  equity 
requires  that  the  courts  should  scrutinize  with  the  utmost  care 
all  conveyances  and  businiess  transactions  between  husband  and 
wife,  alleged  to  be  fraudulent  as  against  creditors  and  which 
injuriously  affect  the  rights  of  creditors.^    It  is,  therefore,  held 


S4.  Thames  v.  Rembert's  Adm'r, 
63  Ala.  561 ;  Ck>wli]ig  v.  Estes,  15  111. 
App.  255;  Bibb  y.  Baker's  Adxn'r,  56 
Ky.  292. 

36.  Helms  ▼.  Green,  105  N.  C.  251, 
11  8.  E.  470,  18  Am.  8t.  Rep.  893; 
Robinson  v.  Frankel,  85  Tenn.  475,  3 
S.  W.  652. 

36.  Bibb  V.  Baker's  Adm'r,  56  Ky.  292. 

37.  Morris  v.  Lindauer,  54  Fed. 
23,  4  C.  C.  A.  162,  6  U.  S.  App.  610; 
Marks  ▼.  Crow,  14  Or.  382,  13  Pac. 
65;  Catcbings  ▼.  Harcrow,  48  Ark. 
20,  49  Ark.  20,  3  R.  W.  884. 


3S.  American  Nat.  Bank  t.  Viter- 
bo,  46  La.  Ann.  1313,  16  So.  199. 

39.  Johnson  v.  Harrison,  6  Kj.  L. 
Rep.  592. 

40.  Rice  y.  Less,  105  Ala.  298,  16 
So.  917. 

41.  White  V.  Benjamin,  150  N.  Y. 
258;  Bennett  y.  Boshold,  123  HI. 
App.  311;  Kennedy  y.  Poirell,  34 
Kan.  22,  7  Pac.  606,  they  should  be 
closely  scrutinized  to  see  that  they 
are  honest,  that  the  ooonsideration  is 
adequate,  and  that  it  is  paid  by  the 
wife  out  of  her  separate  estate. 


BESSBVATIOlfS  AND  TbUSTS  FOB  GsANTOB. 


443 


to  oonveyauceB  of  personal  property.^^  In  some  jurisdictiona  it 
is  held  that  a  oonyeyanoe  absolute  in  fonn,  to  a  creditor  of  the 
grantor  may,  at  the  instance  of  other  creditors  of  the  grantor, 
be  treated  as  security  simply  for  moneys  advanced,  aoid  will  be 
deemed  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  balance  of  the  considera- 
tion."    An  absolute  conveyance  or  transfer  of  real  or  personal 


of  tlie  grantor  may,  at  the  instance 
of  other  ereditora  of  the  grantor,  be 
treated  as  secority  simply  for  the 
moneys  advanced. 

£o«i._First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Jaffray, 
41  Kan.  694,  21  Pae.  242. 

La. — Wang  ▼.  Finnerty,  32  La. 
Ann.  94;  Bailey  ▼.  Chase,  18  La, 
Ann.  732. 

Me. — ^Wyman  v.  Brown,  50  Me. 
139;  Stevens  v.  Hinckley,  43  Me. 
440;  Gilbert  v.  MerrUl,  12  Me.  74; 
Beed  v.  V^oodman,  4  Me.  404. 

JfoM.— Oriental  Bank  v.  Haskins, 
44  Mass.  332,  34  Am.  Dec.  140;  Cut- 
ler y.  Dickinson,  25  Mass.  386;  Harri- 
son ▼.  Phillips  Academy,  12  Mass.  456. 

iffoA.— Columbia  Bank  v.  Jacobs, 
10  Mich.  349,  81  Am.  Dec.  792. 

Minn. — ^Thompson  ▼.  Bickford,  19 
Minn.  17. 

iftM.— Bank  of  Mobile  v.  Tisho- 
mingo Say.  Inst.,  62  Miss.  250. 

B^e5.— Kemp  y.  Small,  32  Neb.  318, 
49  N.  W.  169. 

N.  J. — ^Adoue  y.  Spencer,  62  N.  J. 
£q.  782,  49  Atl.  10,  90  Am.  St.  Rep. 
484,  56  L.  R.  A.  817,  rev'g  50  N.  J. 
£q.  231,  46  Atl.  543. 

Or.— ^Haseltine  v.  Espey,  13  Or. 
301,  10  Pac.  423. 

tenn.— Jones  y.  CuUen,  100  Tenn. 
1,  42  S.  W.  873 ;  Gibbs  v.  Thompson, 
26  Tenn.  179. 

V^._9igelow  y.'Topliflf,  25  Vt.  273, 
60  Am.  Dec.  264;  Smith  y.  Onion^  19 
Vt.  427;  Gibeony.  Seymour,  4  Vt  518. 


WqbK — Samuel  y.  Kittenger,  6 
Wash.  261,  33  Pac  509. 

Wis.— Rock  y.  Collins,  99  Wis.  630, 
76  N.  W.  426,  67  Am.  St.  Rep.  886; 
McFarlane  y.  Louden,  99  Wis.  620, 
75  N.  W.  394,  67  Am.  St  Rep.  883. 

17.  N.  r.— Curtis  y.  Leavitt,  15 
N.  Y.  9,  120. 

Me, — ^Enmions  y.  Bradley,  56  Me. 
333;  Stevens  v.  Hinckley,  43  Ble. 
440;  Ulmer  v.  HiUs,  8  Me.  326; 
Reed  v.  Jewett,  5  Me.  96.  Compare 
Thompson  v.  Pennell,  67  Me.  159. 

Md. — ^Earnshaw  v.  Stewart,  64  Md. 
613,  2  Atl.  734. 

Maee. — ^Parsons  v.  Topliff,  119 
Mass.  245;  Glover  v.  Austin,  23 
Mass.  209;  New  England  Mar.  Ins. 
Co.  v.  Chandler,  16  Mass.  275. 

Mies. — Carey-Halliday  L&mber  Co. 
v.  Cain,  70  Miss.  628,  13  So.  229. 

^e5.— Kemp  v.  Small,  32  Neb.  318, 
49  N.  W.  169. 

N.  J. — Muchmore  v.  Budd,  53  N.  J. 
L.  369,  22  Atl.  518. 

Vt. — ^Barker  v.  French,  18  Vt.  460. 

Fa.— Didier  v.  Patterson,  93  Va. 
534,  25  S.  E.  661. 

Ww.— Rock  v.  Collins,  99  Wis. 
630,  75  N.  W.  426,  67  Am.  St  Rep. 
885;  Grant  v.  Lewis,  14  Wis.  487,  80 
Am.  Dec  785. 

j^n^.— Wood  V.  Dixie,  7  Q.  B.  892, 
9  Jur.  796,  53  E.  C.  L.  892;  Darvill 
v.  Terry,  6  H.  A  N.  807,  30  L.  J. 
Ezch.  355. 

18.  Keeder  v.  Murphy,  43  Iowa» 


444 


Fbaudulent  Convetancbs. 


property  intended  as  a  mortgage  or  as  security  for  a  debt,  if  it 
be  given  under  circumstanoes  showing  an  actual  fraudulent  in- 
tent on  the  part  of  the  grantor  or  transferrer  known  to  or  par- 
ticipated in  by  the  grantee  or  transferee^  such  as  concealing  the 
true  nature  of  the  transactiiHi  and  claiming  absolute  title  there- 
under, or  if  it  contains  provisions  that  will  hinder,  dday,  or 
defraud  creditors,  or  if  there  is  a  secret  agreement  between  the 
parties  which  will  hinder,  delay  or  defraud  creditors,  is  void  as 
against  creditors  for  actual  f raud.^ 

§  17.  Abscdute  sale  with  reservation  of  surplus. — ^A  convey- 
flnce  of  land  or  a  bill  of  sale  or  assignment  of  personalty  made 
by  a  person  indebted  at  the  time  to  one  of  his  creditors,  absolute 
on  its  face,  but  intended  to  enable  the  grantee  to  sell  the  property 
and  pay  the  debts  of  the  grantor,  rendering  the  surplus,  if  any, 
to  the  grantor,  or  accompanied  with  a  private  or  secret  agree- 


413;  Wang  v.  Finnerty,  32  La.  Ann. 
94;  Joseph  M.  Smith  Co.  ▼.  O^rien, 
57  N.  J.  Eq.  365,  41  Atl.  492;  Bige- 
low  V.  Topliff,  25  Vt.  273,  60  Am. 
Bee.  264. 

19.  Colo. — ^Innis  y.  Carpenter,  4 
Colo.  App.  30,  34  Pae.  1011. 

/».— Beidler  ▼.  Crane,  135  lU.  92, 
25  N.  E.  655,  25  Am.  St.  Rep.  349. 

Iowa. — Fuller  v.  Griffith,  91  Iowa, 
632,  60  N.  W.  247,  concealment  of 
true  nature  of  conveyance;  Wright  v. 
Mahaffey,  76  Iowa,  96,  40  N.  W.  112. 

Kan. — ^McCluakey  ▼.  Cubbiaon 
(App.  1899),  57  Pac.  496,  creditors 
attacking  a  bill  o£  sale  absolute  on 
its  face  as  fraudulent  may  show  by 
parol  evidence  that  it  was  intended 
as  a  mortgage  and  is  void  by  reason 
of  actual  fraud. 

j|fe._WeUington  ▼.  Fuller,  38  Me. 
61,  a  deed  given  as  security  merely, 
but  for  which  nothing  was  paid  and 
no  security  surrendered. 

Mass. — ^Hassam  v.  Barrett,  115 
Mass.  256. 


JfioA.'-Meigs  v.  Weller,  90  Mich. 
629,  51  N.  W.  681,  where  a  creditor 
took  from  his  debtor  absolute  deeds 
and  a  bill  of  sale  of  the  tatter's  prop- 
erty, giving  back  an  instrument 
whereby  he  agreed  to  reconvey  if  the 
debt  was  paid  in  one  year,  and  after 
garnishment  proceedings  were  begun 
by  other  creditors  against  him,  con- 
veyed all  of  the  property  to  a  third 
person;  and  where,  although  there 
was  evidence  that  the  property  was 
worth  twice  the  amount  of  the  debt, 
he  refused  to  state  the  value  of  the 
property,  or  what  he  sold  it  for. 

N.  J.-^WhiUi  V.  Megill  (Ch.  1899), 
18  Atl.  355. 

y.  C. — Johnson  v.  Murchison,  60 
N.  C.  286,  a  conveyance  of  property 
absolute  on  its  face,  and  declared  to 
be  made  in  payment  of  a  debt,  but 
the  supposed  debt  was  merely  an  ob- 
ligation, on  the  part  of  the  vendor, 
to  indemnify  the  vendee  against  an 
event  which  had  not  happened  and 
might  never  happen. 


Sesebvations  ajsd  Tbusts  fob  Obantob* 


445 


meaty  understmndingy  or  trust  that  the  grantee  or  assignee  shall 
dispose  of  the  property  and  pay  the  debt  to  himself  and  account 
for  the  surplus,  if  any,  or  refund  the  balance  to  the  grantor  or 
assignor  is  fraudulent  in  law  and  void  as  to  other  creditors.^  A 
deed  of  trust  executed  by  a  debtor  in  embarrassed  circumstances^ 
by  which  a  secret  trust  is  willfully  and  knowingly  created  by  the 
grantor  and  beneficiary  for  the  purpose  of  concealing  from  credi- 
tors of  the  grantor  a  portion  of  his  property,  and  ultimately  to  de- 
prive them  of  any  benefit  therefrom,  under  cover  of  a  convqrance 
to  secure  bona  fide  indebtedness,  is  fraudulent  as  against  such 
creditors.^  If  a  debtor  mtakes  a  sale  of  personal  property  to  one 
of  his  ereditorsi  with  an  understanding  that  out  of  the  proceeds 
of  a  sale  of  the  property  the  creditor  shall  retain  enough  to  pay 
his  own  debt^  and  then  pay  certain  other  creditors,  and  then 
pay  the  balance  of  the  proceeds  over  to  the  debtor,  and  this  sale 
is  made  to  prevent  other  creditors  from  attaching  the  property, 
it  is  actual  fraud,  and  vitiates  the  sale  as  to  other  creditors.'' 


F*.— Barker  v.  French,  18  Vt.  469, 
although  a  person  may  take  security 
for  a  debt  by  an  absolute  bill  of  sale 
of  property,  when  it  was  intended 
only  as  security,  yet  if  he  claim  that 
the  purchase  was  absolute,  and 
thereby  seek  to  protect  from  cred- 
itors the  property  of  the  vendor,  and 
endeavor  to  conceal  the  true  nature 
of  the  transaction,  it  is  evidence  of 
fraud. 

20.  N,  r.— Jackson  v.  Brush,  20 
Johns.  6. 

D.  C. — Smith  v.  Kenny,  1  Mackey, 
12. 

Ida. — Johnson  v.  Sage,  4  Ida.  758, 
44  Pac.  641. 

Ky, — White  v.  Graves,  7  J.  J. 
Marsh.  523. 

Miss, — ^Hunt  v.  Knox,  34  Miss. 
655. 

Mo. — Scudder  v.  Payton,  65  Mo. 
App.    314;    Molaska    Mfg.    Co.    v. 


Steele,  36  Mo.  App.  496,  even  though 
no  surplus  was  in  fact  realized  or 
oould  have  been  realized  by  reason- 
able efforts. 

Neh. — ^Baoon  v.  P.  Brockmaa 
Commission  Co.,  48  Neb.  365,  67  N. 
W.  304;  William  B.  Grimes  Dry 
Goods  Co.  V.  Shaffer,  41  Neb.  112,  59 
N.  W.  741;  Gillespie  v.  Cooper,  36 
Neb.  775,  55  N.  W.  302. 

N.  F.— Parker  v.  Pattee,  4  N.  H. 
176. 

N.  Z>.— Newell  v.  Wagness,  1  N.  D. 
62,  44  N.  W.  1014. 

Pa.— Connelly  v.  Walker,  45  Pa. 
St.  449;  McCulloch  v.  Hutchinson,  7 
Watts,  434,  32  Am.  Dec.  776. 

21.  Roberts  v.  Barnes,  127  Mo. 
405,  30  S.  W.  113,  48  Am.  St  Rep. 
640. 

22.  Menton  v.  Adams,  49  Cal.  620. 
A  similar  agreement  with  a  cred- 
itor's agent  would  render  the  tram- 


400 


Fbaudulent  Convetanobs. 


his  wife  for  a  valuable  oonsideration^  even  thoi]^  he  be 
vent,  where  there  is  an  adequate  oonsideration  paid  from  the 
separate  estate  of  the  wife,^  or  where  the  consideration  is  a 
valid  debt  owing  by  the  husband  to  the  wife  or  money  advanced 
by  the  wife  to  the  husband,  and  the  value  of  the  property  trans- 
ferred is  not  materially  in  excess  of  the  debt  or  advancement 
which  constitutee  the  consideration."  A  husband  may  pay  his 
wife  any  indebtedness  he  owes  her,  providing  it  is  done  with- 
out any  design  to  cheat  or  defraud  his  othar  creditors." 


!§  5.  Purchase  of  husband's  property  at  private  or  public 
sale, — ^The  purchase  by  a  wife  of  property  belonging  to  her 
husband  at  private  or  public  sale  does  not  of  itself  make  the 
sale  fraudulent  as  to  the  husband's  creditors,  where  it  appears 
that  she  had  separate  property,^  or  paid  for  the  property  out  of 
her  separate  estate,"  or  that  the  purdiase  was  on  her  own  credit," 


grantor,  chap.  VII,  supra;  Adequacy 
of  oonaideration,  chap.  VIII,  S  29, 
supra,  Tliompsoii  t.  Mills,  39 
Ind.  528;  Sima  r.  Ricketta,  35 
Ind.  181. 

61.  Transactiona  between  husband 
and  wife,  nature,  adequacy  and  suf- 
ficiency of  consideration,  chap.  VIII, 
S  38,  supra, 

52.  Transactions  between  husband 
and  wife,  pre-existing  liability,  chap. 
VIII,  S  46,  supra, 

58.  Tanner  ▼.  Eekhardt,  107  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  79,  94  N.  Y.  Supp.  1013. 

54.  Belcher  v.  Black,  68  Oa.  93, 
purchase  at  tax  sale. 

Contra, — Herrin  v.  Henry  (Ark. 
1905),  87  S.  W.  430,  where  an  insol- 
vent husband's  land  goes  to  tax  sale 
and  the  wife  purchases,  the  purchase 
will  be  treated,  in  favor  of  his  credi- 
tors, aa  a  redemption. 

55.  U.  fif.— Carite  v.  Trotot*  106  U. 
S.  751,  26  L.  Ed.  1223. 


•  Ky. — Howard  t.  Tennsy,  87  Ky.  62, 
10  Ky.  L.  Rep.  94,  7  8.  W.  647,  a  tax 
deed. 

tfo.— Hibbard  v.  Heekart^  88  Mo. 
App.  644. 

V,  C— Osborne  t.  Wilkes,  108  N.  C. 
651,  13  8.  E.  286. 

Pa.— Walter  ▼.  Jones,  148  Pa.  8t. 
689,  24  Atl.  119,  where  the  wife 
bought  the  goods  from  a  creditor  oi 
the  husband,  who  purchased  them  at 
execution  sale,  for  the  purpose  of  en- 
giiging  in  business  herself;  Keeney  ▼. 
Good,  21  Pa.  8t.  349,  a  purchase  by 
an  insolvent  husband  in  his  wife's 
name  of  property  formerly  his  own 
from  his  assignee's  grantee,  in  order 
to  protect  her  from  his  creditors, 
must  be  clearly  proved  to  have  been 
an  actual  purchase  out  of  her  own 
funds, 

66.  Osborne  v.  Wilkes,  108  N.  a 
661,  13  8.  E.  286;  Bollinger  v.  Gal- 
lagher, 170  Pa.  St  84,  32  Atl.  609, 


Resbbvations  and  Tbubts  fob  Obantob. 


447 


or  the  debto  due  on  the  property,"  have  been  paid  and  disdiarged, 
is  either  prima  fade  or  conclusively  fraudulent  as  against  ciedi- 
tors  of  the  gran-tor,  and  will  be  set  aside  at  the  instance  of  such 
creditors.  But  where  the  testimony  is  conflicting  as  to  whether 
an  absolute  sale  or  a  transfer  as  security  for  the  moneys  ad- 
vanced was  intended,  the  transaction  is  valid  as  against  creditors.^ 
A  stipulation  in  a  contract  for  the  sale  of  lands  that  the  vendor 
will  repurdiase  at  the  same  price,  within  a  specified  time,  if  the 
purchaser  desires  it^  does  not  show  a  secret  trust  in  his  favor, 
rendering  the  sale  void  as  against  his  creditors." 

%  19.  Employment  of  dd>tor. — ^Where  a  purchase  from  a 
debtor  in  failing  drcumstances  is  of  a  business  or  a  stock  of 
goods  m  a  store  and  an  established  trade^  the  fact  that  the  debtor 
is  employed,  at  a  fair  salary,  to  continue  in  charge  of  and  man- 
age the  business,  after  the  sale,  or  to  assist  in  a  clerical  capacity 
in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  the  goods  in  stock  and  the  col- 
lection of  accounts,  does  not,  of  itself,  prove  the  transaction 
fraudulent,  but  it  is  evidence  to  be  considered  by  the  jury  upon 
the  question  of  fraudulent  intent  and  as  to  whether  or  not  a 


Wi».— Grant  y,  Lewis,  14  Wis.  4S7, 
SO  Am.  Dee.  786. 
OomTvjaaee   by    srmmtor    wbo 

wmm  jMt  IsiteMed^— Wliere  in  an 
action  to  aet  aside  a  deed  as  giren 
to  defraud  creditors,  it  appeared  that 
tlie  grantor's  title  to  the  premises  waa 
ekraded  bj  a  tax  sale;  that  he  was 
a  non-resident  and  had  no  other  prop- 
erty; that  the  grantee,  as  considera- 
tion for  the  deed,  agreed  to  pay  the 
costs  of  litigation  necessary  to  quiet 
the  title  in  himself,  and  to  sell  the 
premises  back  to  the  grantor  at  any 
time  within  six  months  on  repayment 
to  him  of  these  costs  and  expenses, 
the  title  to  beeoms  absolute  in  the 
grantee  if  not  so  repurchased,  and 
it  was  also  shown  that  the  only  daim 
being  urged  against  the  grantor  at 


the  time  of  the  transfer  was  one 
which  his  attorney  assured  him  was 
barred  by  the  statute  of  limitations, 
it  was  held  that  the  transfer  was  not 
fraudulent.  Bobinson  v.  McCune^  12S 
Mo.  677,  30  S.  W.  166. 

27.  Jackson  ▼.  Marshall's  Adm'r,  6 
N.  C.  323,  3  Am.  Bee.  696;  Vick  v. 
Flowers,  6  N.  C.  321;  Weis  ▼.  Qni- 
nan  (Tex.  1888),  7  8.  W.  804.  Com- 
pare  Carey-Halliday  Lumber  Go.  ▼. 
Gain,  70  Miss.  628,  13  So.  239,  sale 
not  rendered  void  as  to  subsequent 
attaching  creditors. 

ZS.  Gleises  t.  McHatton,  14  La. 
Ann.  660. 

S0.  Mahler  t.  Sehloss,  7  Daly  <N. 
Y.)  291. 

80.  Barr  t.  Hatch,  8  Ohio,  627. 


448  FBAUDULBirT   CONTSYAHOBS. 

secret  tn:^t  or  benefit  was  created  or  reserved  for  the  debtor.*^ 
The  same  rule  applies  where  the  debtor  was  employed  by  a 
creditor,  to  whom  he  had  tranaferred  his  business,  to  sell  the 
entire  stock,  for  a  large  commission  if  he  could  sell  the  stock  for 
a  certain  sum.**  But  it  has  been  held  that  where  one  of  the  terms 
of  the  sale  of  his  business  by  an  insolvent  debtor  is  that  he  be 
retained  in  the  management  thereof  at  a  salary,  there  is  a  benefit 
secured  to  him  which  renders  the  transaction  fraudulent  a» 
against  creditors  ;**  but  that  the  rule  is  otherwise  where  there 
was  no  stipulation  that  he  was  to  be  paid  for  his  senrices,'^  or 
where  the  employment  was  in  a  subsequent  distinct  transaction, 
such  as  by  a  corporation  subsequently  organized  by  the  pur- 
chaser.* A  mortgage  of  a  stock  of  merchandise  given  to  secure  a 
hana  fide  indebtedness,  and  which  does  not  exceed  its  amount,  is 
not  made  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  by  the  fact  that  the  debtor 
is  left  in  charge  of  the  property  mortgaged,  with  authority  to 
sell  the  same  and  to  account  to  the  creditor  for  die  proceeds,  less 
the  actual  expenses  of  managing  the  business  and  a  salary  to  the 
debtor." 

31.  y.  r.— Griffin  T.  Cimiuton,  23  Notes  Cas.  26.  Oomfwre  Bents  t. 
N.  Y.  Super.  Ct.  1 ;  Nicholson  ▼.  Lea-      Boekey,  69  Pa.  St  71. 

▼itt,  6  N.  Y.  Super  Ct.  262.  33.  Roden  v.  Norton,  128  Ala.  129, 

U^    £r.— Bamberger    ▼.    Schoolfleld,  29  So.  637;  Birmingham  Dry  Goods 

160  U.  S.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct.  226,  40  L.  Co.  t.  Roden,  110  Ala.  611,   18  So. 

Ed.  374;  In  re  A.  L.  Robertshaw  Mfg.  136,  66  Am.  St.  Rep.  36;  Stephens  ▼. 

Co.,  133  Fed.  666.  Regenstein,  89  Ala.  661,  8  So.  68,  18 

Gk».— Oribb  t.  Baglej,  83  Ga.  106,  Am.  St.  Rep.  166;  Fuller,  etc.,  Co.  t. 

10  S.  E.  104.  ^a'l^  ^  111-  -^PP-  500,  ojf  d  Best  ▼. 

Jfuf.— Wilcoxon    V.    Annesley,    23  Fuller,  etc.,  Co.,  186  Dl.  43,  66  N.  E. 

Ind.  286.  -»-   «,  A*   •       «»  >i.-,  .- 

jrinn.-Wiloox    t.    Lundberg,    30      J*- Blmnenthal  t.  Magnus,  97  Ala. 

Minn.   93,    14  N.   W    366;    Vose  v.  ^^    ^^^^^    ^     ^^                ^^^ 

Stickney,  19  Minn.  367.  ^j^   ^^^  22  So.  24. 

Te».— Peters  Saddlery,  etc.,  Co.  t.  33  j^^  jy^^  y^y^  -^^^  ^^^  ^ 

Schoelkopf,  71  Tex.  418,  9  S.  W.  336;  North  Star  Boot  A  a  Co.,  8  N.  D. 

Van  Hook  v.  Walton,  28  Tex.  69.  432,  79  N.  W.  880,  citing  Braekett 

32.  In  re  A.  L.  Robertshaw  Mfg.  v.  Harvey,  91  N.  Y.  216;  ConUing  t. 
Co.,  133  Fed.  666;  Davis  v.  Yoder,  Shelley,  28  N.  Y.  360,  and  di^tin- 
173  Pa.  St.  138,  33  Atl.  882,  38  Wkly.    .  guiahing  Newell  v.  Wagness,  1  N.  D. 


Bbsebvatioks  and  Tbusts  fos  Obantob. 


449 


§  20.  Future  support  of  grantor. — Where  the  oonsideration 
for  a  ooQveyanoe  is  iiii  whole  or  part  a  seoret  agieemeDt^  under^ 
fitandingy  or  trust  for  the  future  support  of  the  grantor  or  hia 
family,  the  couvejance  is  either  prima  facie  or  conclusively 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  existing  creditors^  and  the  questioa  of 
the  amount  reserved  to  the  grantor  is  immaterial."^  Such  an  ar- 
rangement has  been  held  to  be  a  continuing  f  raud,  and  void  against 
subsequent  as  well  as  precedent  creditois.''  But  where  the  father 
of  certain  minor  children  conveys  them  land  to  pay  a  debt  due  by 
him  to  their  mother,  and  it  is  understood  and  agreed  that  he  shall 
look  after  the  land,  collect  the  renta^  and  apply  the  same  to  the  sup- 
port and  education  of  said  grantees,  this  does  not  constitute  the 
reservation  of  a  benefit  to  the  grantor,  such  as  will  invalidate  the 
conveyance  at  the  instance  of  an  existing  creditor."  Nor  does 
permission  by  a  father  to  his  daughter  to  live  on  a  farm,  which 
he  had  given  her  and  which  she  reconveyed  to  him,  create  a  trust 

62.  Thai  a  chattel  mortgagee  al- 
lowed the  mortgagor  to  sell  the  prop- 
erty and  allowed  the  purchaser  to  re- 
tain a  email  sum  due  him  from  the 
mortgagor,  which  might  be  a  suitable 
commission  to  the  mortgagor  for 
making  the  sale,  is  not  such  evidence 
of  fraud  or  collusion  as  will  invali- 
date the  mortgage  as  against  subse- 
quent attaching  creditors.  Bank  of 
Atchison  Counly  ▼.  Shackelford,  67 
Mo.  App.  475. 

37.  New  V.  Sailors,  114  Ind.  407, 
16  N.  E.  e09,  5  Am.  St.  Rep.  632; 
Stout  V.  Price,  24  Ind.  App.  360,  65 
N.  E.  964,  66  N.  E.  857;  Graves  v. 
Blondell,  70  Me.  104;  Egery  v. 
Johnson,  70  Me.  258;  Sidensparker 
V.  Sidensparker,  52  Me.  481,  83  Am. 
Dec.  627;  Hapgood  v.  Fisher,  34  Me. 
407,  56  Am.  Dec.  663;  Rollins  v. 
Mooers,  25  Me.  102;  Welcome  v. 
Batchelder,  23  Me.  85;  Rice  v.  Cun- 
ningham, 116  Mass.  466;  Hunt  v. 
Knox,  34  Miss.  655;  Smith  v.  Smith, 
11  N.  H.  459. 

29 


aatrfgiamemt    of    wacea    to 

secure  a  present  indebtedness  and 
future  support  is  not  valid  as  against 
creditors  of  the  assignor,  so  as  to  in- 
clude money  paid  over  to  the  assignor 
out  of  the  wages  under  an  agreement 
to  that  effect  outside  of  the  assign- 
ment. Robinson  v.  McKenna^  21  R.  I. 
117,  119,  42  Atl.  510,  79  Am.  St. 
Rep.  793,  di^approvinff  Schofidd-  ▼. 
McGonnell,  119  liass.  368. 

98.  Sidensparker  v.  Sidensparker, 
52  Me.  481,  83  Am.  Dec.  527.  But  a 
voluntary  conveyance  accompanied  by 
an  agreonent  on  the  part  of  the 
grantee  to  suj^rt  the  grantor  for 
lifd  may,  in  the  absence  of  any  in- 
tentional fraud,  be  valid  as  to  subse- 
quent creditors,  although  void  as  to 
existing  creditors.  Bowlus  v.  Shana- 
barger,  19  Ohio  Cir.  Ct.  137,  10  Ohio 
Cir.  Dec.  167. 

i39.  Enfaula  Nat.  Bank  v.  Pruett» 
128  Ala.  470,  30  So.  731. 


450  Fraudulent  Convstahges. 

for  liar  benefit^  where  tliere  was  no  fiuch  agreement  between  the 
parties^  and  no  enforceable  right,  interest,  or  privilege  was  reserved 
to  her,  and  none  would  have  been  reserved  if  the  transaction  was 
in  writing.^  Though,  at  the  time  a  lease  to  one  and  his  eon  was 
surrendered  and  a  lease  to  his  wife  and  the  son  made  in  place 
thereof,  the  son  assured  him  that  he  would  be  provided  for,  such 
agreement  for  the  support  is  too  indefinite  and  uncertain  to  be 
treated  as  part  of  the  consideration  for  the  transaction  so  aa  to 
make  it  fraudulent  as  to  his  creditors.^ 

§  21.  Purchase  at  execution  or  other  sale  for  benefit  of 
debtor. — ^Where,  at  an  execution  sale,  one  buys  property  for  the 
benefit  of  the  judgment  debtor  and  holds  it  to  defraud  his  cred- 
itors,^ or  purchases  it  at  the  request  and  with  the  means  of  the 
judgment  debtor  for  his  benefit,^  or  by  a  fraudulent  combination 
with  the  judgment  debtor  and  others,  is  enabled  to  purchase  the 
property  for  less  than  it  is  really  worth,  the  benefit  of  which  the 
judgment  debtor  is  to  reap,^  or  purchases  it  under  a  secret  under- 
standing that  the  property  shall  be  held  in  trust  for  the  execution 
debtor,^  the  transaction  is  not  valid  because  the  judgment  was^  but 
is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  debtor's  creditors.  So  where  the 
purchaser  at  a  sale  of  lands  by  a  trustee  under  a  deed  of  trust  is 
a  mens  figurehead  and  nominal  purchaser  assisting  the  judgment 
debtor  to  defraud  his  creditors,  the  sale  is  void  both  at  law  and 
in  equity,  and  may  be  attacked  by  any  person  damaged  by  the 
fraud.**  And  a  sale  by  a  trustee  of  an  insolvent's  stock  of  goods 
to  a  creditor,  who  pays  part  in  cash,  of  which  a  portion  is  the 
money  of  the  debtor's  wife,  is  fraudulent  as  to  creditors  and 
void.^    Where  a  husband,  acting  for  his  wife,  buys  in  merchan- 

40.  First  Nat.  Bonk  v.  Beasley,  12  44.  Stovall  v.  FsLrmen*,  «te.,  Bank* 
Colo.  App.  313,  66  Pac.  616.  16  Misa.  306,  47  Am,  Dec.  86. 

41.  McOormick  Harwsting  Mach.  ^^  Bostwick  ▼.  Blake,  146  IlL  86, 
Co.  V.  Ponder,  123  Iowa,  17,  98  N.  W.  34  j^  jj  33 

303. 

42.  Decker  v.  Decker,  108  N.  Y. 
128,  16  N.  E.  307. 

48.  MiUer  v.  Fraley,  21  Ark.  22;  47.    Leirine   v.    Rouss    (Tex.    (Xt. 

ClarkMn  ▼.  White,  38  Ky.  11.  App.  1899),  49  8.  W.  1061. 


46.  State  y.  McBride,  106  Ma  266, 
16  8.  W.  72. 


Besebvations  and  Tbusts  fob  Gbantob. 


451 


dise  at  a  foreclosure  sale  with  a  view  of  protecting  the  mort- 
gagor^^  and  where  there  has  been  a  simulated  and  pretended  fore- 
closure/' the  sale  is  fraudulent  and  void  as  to  creditors.  It  has 
been  held  that  a  trust  ex  male/icio  arises  because  of  the  grantor's 
prior  relation  to  the  property,  in  favor  of  the  grantor  in  a  trust 
deed,  against  one  who  purchases  the  same  under  the  deed  of 
trust,  pursuant  to  a  verbal  agreement  between  the  grantor  and 
himself  while  the  sale  waa  pending  that  he  would  purchase  the 
property  and  hold  it  for  the  former  until  he  was  reimbursed  for 
the  purchase  prica^ 

%  22.  Subsequent  disposition  of  property  by  debtor  in  credi- 
tor's favor.— ^A  bona  fide  creditor  may,  by  fair  contract,  pur- 
chase and  receive  the  effects  of  his  debtor  in  payment  of  sudi 
debt,  even  though  the  known  effect  may  be  to  hinder  or  defeat 
other  creditors.  Such  a  creditor,  after  lawfully  collecting  his 
debt,  either  in  money  or  by  the  purchase  of  property,  may,  if  he 
sees  fit,  devote  the  proceeds  to  the  debtor,  without  subjecting  him- 
self to  liability  to  other  creditors  as  a  trustee  in  his  own  wrong, 
or  may  convey  the  same  to  the  debtor  or  the  debtor's  wife  or 
children  and  the  transaction  does  not  show  a  secret  reservation 
for  the  grantor,  in  the  absence  of  proof  that  the  property  was 
sold  for  less  than  its  value,  and  the  conveyance  cannot  be  set 
aside  as  faudulent  as  against  other  creditors.^^  This  rule  is 
maintained,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  debtor  may  have 
expected  that  such  property  would  be  reconveyed  to  his  wife 


48.  Monarch  Rubber  Co.  v.  Bimn, 
78  Mo.  App.  65. 

49.  Whitn^  v.  Leominster  Sav. 
Bank,  141  Mass.  85,  6  N.  E.  551. 

50.  Richardson  v.  Champion,  143 
Ho.  638,  45  S.  W.  280. 

See  also  Collusive  and  fraudulent 
legal  proceedings,  chap.  II,  S  9> 
9upra;  Foreclosure  of  mortgages  and 
deeds  of  trust,  Execution  and  other 


judieial   salee,  chap.   II,   S§    13,    14, 
9upra, 

51.  Bamberger  v.  Schoolfield,  160 
U.  S.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct.  225,  40  L.  Ed. 
374;  Young  v.  Dumas,  39  Ala.  60; 
Solomon  v.  C.  M.  Schneider  &  Co.,  66 
Neb.  680,  9  Am.  &  Eng.  Corp.  Cas.  N. 
S.  740,  77  N.  W.  65;  McPherson  ▼. 
McPherson,  21  S.  C.  261.  But  see 
Reynolds  ▼.  Lansford,    16   Tex.    286, 


452 


FRAUDULENT   CONVEYAKCES. 


or  children,  there  being  no  agreement  for  such  reoonvejance."* 
The  same  rule  has  been  applied  vrhere  an  insolvent^  with  intent 
to  defraud  his  creditors,  induced  his  wife's  relative  to  buy  his 
land  at  an  execution  sale^  and  the  relative  actuallj  and  in  good 
faith  and  in  ignorance  of  the  debtor's  fraudulent  design  pur- 
chased it  and  had  it  conveyed  to  the  debtor'a  wife^  who  was  like- 
wise innocent  of  the  debtor's  attempt  to  defraud."  The  mere 
fact  that  a  debtor  confessing  a  judgment  for  a  bona  fide  debt 
believes  or  knows  that  the  creditor  intends  to  settle  the  principal 
part  of  the  debt  upon  the  debtor's  wife,  is  not  sufficient  evidence 
of  fraud  as  against  other  creditors.*^ 

§  23.  Discharge  of  secret  trust  by  subsequent  agreement^ 
A  conveyance,  originally  faudulent  as  against  creditors,  is  not 
thereby  void,  but  only  voidable,  and  may  be  purged  of  fraud  by 
matter  ex  post  facto  whereby  the  fraudulent  intent  is  abandoned 
and  the  grant  confirmed  for  adequate  consideration."    Where  a 


holding  such  a  oonveyanoe  prima  facie 
fraudulent  as  to  antecedent  creditors. 

52.  Hesse  v.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202, 
68  Pac.  751;  McPherson  ▼.  McPher- 
son,  21  S.  d  261. 

53.  Crawfordsville  Bank  ▼.  Carter, 
89  Ind.  317. 

"Whmof  m  father,  imdebted  to 
Ida  oUldrem  on  account  of  a  guar- 
dianship to  an  amount  exceeding  a 
legacy,  assigns  in  good  faith  such 
legacy  in  payment  pro  ianto  of  the 
demand  against  him,  and  an  indebt- 
edness for  which  a  judgment  was  ren- 
dered did  not  exist  when  the  assign- 
ment was  made,  the  assignment  will 
not  be  set  aside  as  in  fraud  of  cred- 
itors, though  the  beneficiaries  of  the 
assignment  allowed  their  father  to 
receive  the  larger  part  of  the  legacy, 
and  he,  on  signing  the  lease,  after  the 
assignment,  on  which  the  judgment 
was  obtained,  gave  complainant,  his 
landlord,  an  order  on  the  executors 


for  his  interest  to  secure  the  rent. 
Bush  V.  Downey,  195  m.  82,  62  N.  E. 
868,  alfg  96  HI.  App.  503. 

The  sale  by  a  Jmaior  mortem- 
seoy  subject  to  the  prior  mortgage, 
of  the  mortgaged  property  for  the 
amount  due  him  on  his  mortgage,  and 
the  subsequent  resale  by  the  pur* 
chaser  to  the  original  mortgagor, 
which  are  not  shown  to  have  been 
connected  in  any  manner,  are  insuffi- 
cient to  show  fraud  as  to  the  mort-. 
gagor's  creditors,  although  the  price 
received  by  the  mortgagee  was  some* 
what  less  than  the  actual  value  of 
the  property.  Pugh  v.  Harwell,  108 
Ala.  486,  18  So.  535. 

54.  Cureton  v.  Doby,  10  Rich.  Eq. 
(S.  G.)  411,  73  Am.  Dec.  96. 

55.  Oriental  Bank  v.  Haskins,  44 
Mass.  332,  37  Am.  Dec.  140;  Agri- 
cultural Bank  y.  Dorsey,  1  Freem. 
Ch.  (Miss.)  338;  Smyth  v.  Carlisle, 
17  N.  H.  417.      See  also  Stavers  t. 


BX8SBVATI0K8  AND  TeUSTS  FOB  ObANTOR. 


453 


detytor  with  a  view  to  defraud  hia  creditors  conveys  goods  to 
another  who  reoeives  them  under  suoh  circumstances  of  fraud 
as  would  have  fixed  him  as  trustee^  but  before  the  service  of 
process  upon  him,  the  purchaser  had,  by  the  order  of  the  vendor, 
bona  fide  paid  or  assumed  to  pay,  on  account  of  the  goods,  debts 
of  the  vendor  to  the  full  value  of  the  goods,  he  cannot  afterwards 
be  held  as  trustee  of  the  vendor.^  In  the  case  of  a  fraudulent 
conveyance  and  assigmnent  it  is  competent  for  the  parties  thereto 
to  subsequently  make  a  new  and  independent  agreement  for  a 
sufficient  valuable  consideration,  whereby  the  grantee  or  assignee 
shall  be  obligated  to  hold  the  property  in  trust  for  the  grantor 
or  assignor,  but  such  agreement  must  be  open  and  notorious  and 
made  in  good  faith  to  establish  a  trust  in  the  property,  otherwise 
it  will  be  but  attempting  to  create  anew  a  secret  trust  already  con- 
demned by  the  statuta^  Where  a  creditor  holds  a  chattel  mort^ 
gage  upon  the  property  of  his  debtor  which  is  void  as  against 
other  creditors  on  account  of  an  illegal  verbal  agreement  whereby 
a  benefit  is  reserved  to  the  debtor,  but  before  the  rights  of  such 
other  creditors  have  become  fixed,  or  any  action  has  been 
taken  by  them  to  disaffirm  the  mortgage  or  obtain  any  lien  upon 
the  debtor's  property,  the  debtor  voluntary  transfers  the  posses- 
sion of  his  property  to  the  creditor  as  security  for  the  indebted- 
ness, this  latter  transfer  is  not  invalidated  by  the  voidable  char- 
acter of  the  original  mortgage.^  While  a  mortgagee  cannot  en- 
force a  void  chattel .  mortgage  against  the  creditors  of  the  mort- 
gagor, yet  if  the  mortgagor  treats  it  as  void  and,  before  the 


Stayers,  69  N.  H.  168,  46  Atl.  319. 
See  Purging  conveyance  of  fraud  by 
matter  ex  post  facto,  chap.  Ill,  §  7, 

9Upf1l, 

66.  Thomas  ▼.  Goodwin,  12  Mass. 
140;  Hutchins  v.  Sprague,  4  N.  H. 
69,  17  Am.  Dee.  439.  See  also  Albee 
▼.  Webster,  16  N.  H.  362. 

67.  Tyler  ▼.  I^ler,  126  HI.  626,  21 
N.  E.  616,  9  Am.  St  Bep.  642,  Songer 
▼.    Partridge,    107    111.    629,   where. 


after  a  deed  had  been  set  aside  as 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  the  grantor 
surrendered  the  notes  given  there- 
for, the  grantee  agreeing  to  cancel 
the  deed,  this  agreement  might  be  en- 
forced in  equity,  as  it  was  not  tainted 
with  the  fraud  of  the  first  transac- 
tion. See  also  Parker  v.  Tiffany,  62 
111.  286. 

68.  Hardt  v.  Deutsch,  30  App.  Div. 
(N.  T.)  689,  62  N.  Y.  Supp.  336. 


454  FbAUDULBKT   CoNVlSYAlSrGES. 

creditors  obtain  a  lien,  transfers  the  property  to  the  mortgagee 
in  payment  of  the  debt)  the  transactiozt  will  be  legal  although 
oonstituting  a  preference."  Where  a  firm  sold  its  stock  to  the 
wife  of  a  partner,  the  business  theareaf ter  being  carried  on  for 
her  by  her  husband,  and  later  the  wife  and  husband  sold  the 
property  for  value  to  the  plaintiff,  the  joinder  of  the  hus- 
band in  the  sale  to  plaintiff  and  the  delivery  of  the  posses- 
sion to  him  destroyed  any  rights  of  creditors  to  subject  the  prop- 
erty on  the  ground  that  the  sale  thereof  by  the  firm  was  fraudu- 
lent for  lack  of  change  of  possession  and  that  plaintiff  purchased 
with  knowledge  thereof.*^ 

59.   Bowdish  v.  Page,   153  N.  Y.  128  N.  Y.  1;   Mandeville  ▼.  Aweij, 

108,  47  N.  E.  46 ;  Stephens  v.  Perrine,  124  N.  Y.  376. 

143  N.  Y.  476;  Karat  ▼.  Kane,  136  60.  Kandigo  t.  Bealej,  69  N.  H. 

N.   Y.   216;    Tranuune  r.  Mortimer,  94,  46  AtL  8ia 


Pbefsbsnoes  to  Cssditobb.  458 


CHAPTER    XL 
Pbbfssbncss  to  Cseditobs. 

Seetion  1.  Right  to  prefer  creditor  and  yalidity  of  truiMietioii  in  genenl. 

2.  Statutory  provisions. 

3.  Constitutionality  of  statutes. 

4.  What  law  go7erns. 

5.  Nature  and  form  of  preference  in  generaL 

6.  Sale  to  pay  debts  to  preferred  creditors. 

7.  Failure  to  apply  proceeds  to  debts. 

8.  Splitting  demand  to  expedite  recovery. 

9.  Delegation  of  power  to  prefer. 

10.  Nature  of  property  transferred. 

11.  Nature  of  debts  preferred  in  general. 

12.  Debts  not  due. 

13.  Contingent  debts  and  liabilites  on  behalf  of  debtor. 

14.  Usurious  interest. 

15.  Attorney's  fees. 

16.  Debts  arising  out  of  breach  of  trust. 

17.  Secured  debts  generally. 

18.  Discharge  of  mortgage  on  homestead. 

19.  Transfer  of  incumbered  property  in  payment  of  incumbranot. 

20.  Transfer  of  all  the  debtor's  property. 

21.  Knowledge  and  intent  of  parties  generally. 

22.  Participation  of  preferred  creditor  in  fraudulent  intent. 

23.  Preference  not  invalidated  by  mere  fraudulent  intent. 

24.  Secrecy  and  haste. 

25.  Preference  pending  suit  in  general. 

26.  Intent  to  defeat  judgment,  execution  or  attachment. 

27.  Agreement  to  prefer. 

28.  Transfer  partly  as  preference  and  partly  on  other  consideration. 

29.  Where  present  consideration  is  exempt. 

30.  Present  consideration  to  be  paid  by  debtor  to  other  creditors. 

81.  Other  debts  assumed  by  transferee. 

82.  Creditor's  promise  to  compound  felony. 

33.  Preferences  between  relatives  generally. 

34.  Preference  of  husband  and  wife. 

Section  1.  Right  to  prefer  creditor  and  validity  of  trans- 
action in  generaL — The  rule  is  well  settled  upon  abundant  au- 
thority that,  in  the  absence  of  statutory  restrictions,  an  insolvent 
debtor  has  the  right  to  sell  and  transfer  the  whole  or  any  portion 


456 


FBAUDIJLEirT  CONVEYANCSS. 


of  his  property  to  one  or  more  of  his  creditors  in  payment  of  or 
to  secure  his  debts^  when  that  is  his  honest  purpoee^  although  the 
effect  of  the  sale  or  transfer  would  be  to  plaoe  his  property  be- 
yond the  reach  of  his  other  creditors  and  render  their  debts  uncol- 
leetibla  A  debtor  in  failing  eircumstances,  or  insolvent,  may 
bona  fide  prefer  one  creditor  or  another,  by  paying  his  debt  or 
conveying  in  trust  so  much  of  his  property  as  will  suffice  for 
such  payment,  and  a  conveyance  of  property  by  a  debtor  in  pay- 
ment of  a  debt,  thereby  leaving  nothing  for  his  other  creditors, 
is  valid,  provided  the  debt  is  bona  fide  and  enforceable,  the  pay- 
ment absolute,  and,  if  made  in  property,  not  materially  in  ex- 
cess of  his  debt,  and  no  pecuniary  advantage  is  secured  to  the 
debtor.  This  right  of  disposition  existed  at  common  law  as  an 
incident  to  the  right  of  property,  and  was  as  complete  and  per- 
fect as  the  right  to  acquire  and  enjoy  it.  The  settled  rale  is  but 
a  restatement  of  the  doctrine  of  the  common  law.^    Under  this 


1.  y.  Y, — ^Dodgd  ▼.  McKeehnie^ 
156  N.  Y.  514,  51  N.  E.  268;  DelaiM^ 
V.  Valentine,  164  N.  Y.  692,  49  N. 
E.  65;  Tompkins  v.  Hunter,  149  N. 
Y.  117,  43  N.  E.  532;  GaHe  v.  Tode, 
148  N.  Y.  270,  42  N.  E.  673,  affg 
74  Hun,  542,  26  N.  Y.  Supp.  633; 
Haass  y.  Falk,  146  N.  Y.  34,  40  N.  E. 
504 ;  Abegg  y.  Bishop,  142  N.  Y.  286» 
36  N.  E.  1058;  Central  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Seligman,  138  N.  Y.  435,  34  N.  B. 
196;  Taloott  v.  Harder,  119  N.  Y. 
536,  23  N.  E.  1056;  Fuller  Electri- 
cal Co.  V.  Lewis,  101  N.  Y.  674,  5 
N.  E.  437;  Murphy  v.  Briggs,  89  N. 
Y.  446;  Spaulding  v.  Strange,  37  N. 
Y.  135;  S^our  y.  Wilson,  19  N.  Y. 
417;  Leayitt  y.  Blatchford,  17  N.  Y. 
521;  Lowther  y.  Rader,  102  N.  Y. 
Supp.  929;  Stackhouse  y.  Holden,  66 
App.  Diy.  423,  73  N.  Y.  Supp.  203; 
Hofltean  y.  Susemihl,  15  App.  Diy. 
405,  44  N.  Y.  Supp.  52;  Drury  y. 
Wilson,  4  App.  Diy.  232,  38  N.  Y. 
Supp.  538;   Gomez  y.  Hagaman,  84 


Hun,  148,  32  N.  Y.  Supp.  463;  Lon- 
don y.  Martin,  79  Hun,  229,  29  N. 
Y.  Supp.  396,  alfd  149  N.  Y.  586,  44 
N.  E.  1125;  Vietor  y.  Levy,  72  Hun, 
263,  25  N.  Y.  Supp.  644,  ofTd  148 
N.  Y.  739,  42  N.  E.  726;  Bishop  v. 
Stebbins,  41  Hun,  243;  Swift  y.  Hart^ 
35  Hun,  128;  Jewett  y.  Noteware,  30 
Hun,  194;  Hale  y.  Stewart,  7  Hun, 
591;  Archer  y.  O'Brien,  7  Hun,  146; 
Auburn  Exch.  Bank  ▼.  Fitch,  48 
Barb.  344;  Brett  y.  Oatlin,  47  Barb. 
404;  Carpenter  y.  Muren,  42  Barb. 
300;  Dunckel  y.  Failing,  1  Sily.  Sup. 
543,  5  N.  Y.  Supp.  504;  Sweetser  y. 
Smith,  5  N.  Y.  Supp.  378,  22  Abb. 
N.  Cas.  319;  Citizens'  Nat.  Bank  y. 
Riddell,  2  N.  Y.  Supp.  331;  Hauslet 
y.  Vilmar,  2  Abb.  N.  Cas.  222;  Laid- 
law  y.  Gilmore,  47  How.  Pr.  67 ;  Water- 
bury  y.  Sturtevant^  18  Wend.  353; 
Wilder  y.  Winne,  6  Cow.  284;  Mur- 
ray y.  Riggs,  15  Johns.  571 ;  Phoenix 
y.  Dey,  5  Johns.  412;  Wilkes  y.  Fer- 
ris, 6  Joksa.  335,  4  Am.  Dee.  364; 


Pbjsfeiubnces  to  Crbditobs* 


457 


doctrine  it  has  been  held  that  the  right  of  a  debtor  to  devote  his 


Williams  ▼.  Brown,  4  Johns.  Ch.  682; 
MoMenomy  ▼.  Roosevelt,  3  Johns.  Oh. 
446;  Hendricks  ▼.  Robinson,  2  Johns. 
Ch.  283,  17  Johns.  438. 

U.  8, — Bamberger  y.  Schoolfleld, 
160  U.  a  149,  16  Sup.  a.  225,  40  L. 
Ed.  374;  Davis  ▼.  Sdiwarts,  165  U. 
8.  631,  15  Sup.  Gt  237,  39  L.  Bd. 
289;  Huntley  v.  Kingman,  162  U.  a 
527,  14  Sup.  Ct.  688,  38  L.  Ed.  540; 
Chioago  Union  Bank  v.  Kansas  City 
Bank,  136  U.  S.  223, 10  Sup.  Ct.  1013, 
34  L.  Ed.  341 ;  Jewell  v.  Knight^  123 
U.  a  426,  8  Sup.  Ct  193,  31  L.  Ed. 
190;  Peoples'  Savings  Bank  y.  Bates, 
120  U.  a  556,  7  Sup.  Ct  679,  30  L. 
Ed.  754;  Stewart  v.  Dunham,  115  U. 
a  61,  5  Sup.  a.  1163,  29  L.  Ed.  329; 
Tompkins  v.  Wheeler,  16  Pet  106,  10 
L.  Ed.  903;  Clark  v.  White,  12  Pet. 
178,  9  L.  Ed.  1046;  Magniae  T. 
Thompson,  7  Pet  348,  8  L.  Ed.  709; 
Marbury  y.  Bnx>ks,  7  Wheat  556,  5 
L.  Ed.  522,  11  Wheat  78,  6  L.  Ed. 
423;  Foster  y.  McAleater,  114  Fed. 
145,  52  C.  C.  A.  107;  Kemp  y.  Na- 
tional Bank  of  Republic,  109  Fed.  48, 
48  C.  C.  A.  213;  Ontario  Bank  y. 
Hurst,  103  Fed.  231,  43  C.  C.  A.  193; 
Repauno  Chemical  Co.  v.  Victor  Hard- 
ware Co.,  101  Fed.  948,  42  C.  C.  A. 
106;  Voorhees  v.  Balnton,  83  Fed. 
234;  WUson  v.  Jones,  76  Fed.  484; 
Randolph  v.  Allen,  73  Fed.  23,  19  C. 
C.  A.  353;  Williams  v.  Simons,  70 
Fed.  40,  16  C.  C.  A.  628;  Strauss  y. 
Abrahams,  32  Fed.  310;  Hills  v. 
Stockwell,  etc.,  Furniture  Co.,  23  Fed. 
432;  Kellog  v.  lUchardson,  19  Fed. 
70;  Smith  v.  Craft,  12  Fed.  856,  11 
Biss.  347,  123  U.  S.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct 
196,  31  L.  Ed.  267;  Simms  y.  Morse^ 
2  Fed.  325,  4  Hughes,  579;  Walker 
V.  Adair,  29  Fed.  Gas.  No.  17,064,  1 
Bond,  158. 


Aki.— Rike  y.  Ryan  (1906),  41  So. 
959;  First  Nat  Bank  v.  Acme  White 
Lead,  etc.,  Co.,  123  Ala.  344,  26  So. 
354;  Inman  v.  Schloss,  122  Ala.  461, 
26  Sa  739;  Davidson  y.  Kahn,  116 
Ala.  427,  22  So.  539;  Goetter  y. 
Norman,  107  Ala.  585,  19  So.  56; 
Bray  v.  Ely,  105  Ala.  553,  17  So. 
180;  Goetter  v.  Smith,  104  Ala.  481, 
16  So.  534;  Schloss  y.  McGuire,  102 
Ala.  626,  15  So.  275;  Fargason  y. 
Hall,  99  Ala.  209,  13  So.  302;  Daw- 
son y.  Flash,  97  Ala.  539,  12  So.  67; 
Lathrop-Hatten  Lumber  Co.  y.  Besse- 
mer Say.  Bank,  96  Ala.  350,  11  So. 
418;  Pollock  y.  Meyer,  96  Ala.  172, 
11  So.  385;  Ellison  y.  Moses,  95  Ala. 
221,  11  So.  347;  First  Nat  Bank  y. 
Smith,  93  Ala.  97,  9  So.  548;  Harris 
y.  Powell,  93  Ala.  59,  9  So.  541;  Chip- 
man  y.  Stem,  89  Ala.  207,  7  So.  409; 
Mobile  Sav.  Bank  v.  McDonnell,  87 
Ala.  736,  6  So.  703;  Carter  v.  Cole- 
man, 84'Ala.  257,  4  So.  151;  Wood 
y.  Moore,  84  Ala.  253,  3  So.  912; 
Jefferson  County  Say.  Bank  y.  Ebom, 
84  Ala.  529,  4  So.  389;  Levy  y.  Wil- 
liams, 79  Ala.  171;  Moog  y.  Farley, 
79  Ala.  246;  Hodges  v.  Coleman,  76 
Ala.  103;  Sgealy  v.  Edwards,  75  Ala. 
411;  Heyer  v.  Bromberg,  74  Ala.  524; 
Chamberlain  v.  Dorranoe,  69  Ala. 
40;  Warren  v.  Jones,  68  Ala.  449; 
Turner  y.  MoFee,  61  Ala.  468;  Perry 
Ins.,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Foster,  58  Ala.  502, 
29  Am.  Rep.  779;  Crawford  v.  Kirk- 
sey,  55  Ala.  282,  28  Am.  Rep.  704; 
Young  y.  Dumas,  39  Ala.  60;  Bor- 
land v.  Mayo,  8  Ala.  104;  Stover  v. 
Herrington,  7  Ala.  142,  41  Am.  Dee. 
86;  Williams  v.  Jones,  2  Ala.  314. 

Ark. — Gilkerson-Sloss  Commission 
Co.  v.  Cames,  56  Ark.  414,  19  a  W. 
1061 ;  Goodbar  v.  Locke,  56  Ark.  314, 
19  a  W.  924;   Sparks  v.  Mack,  31 


458 


Fraudulent  Cokvbtances. 


whole  estate  to  the  claims  of  one  or  more  creditors  resolte  from 


Ark.  666;  Doewell  ▼.  Adler,  28  Ark. 
82;  Cox  ▼.  Fraley,  26  Ark.  20. 

CaI.~Merced  Bank  ▼.  Ivett,  127 
Cal.  134,  59  Pac.  393;  Bonney  ▼.  Til- 
ley,  109  Cal.  346,  42  Pac  439; 
Priest  ▼.  Brown,  100  Cal.  626,  35 
Pac  323;  Dyer  y.  Bradley,  89  Cal. 
557,  26  Pac.  1103;  Saunderson  y. 
Broadwell,  82  Cal.  132,  23  Pac.  36; 
Dean  y.  Orimea,  72  Cal.  442,  14  Pae. 
178;  Boss  y.  Sedgwick,  69  CaL  247, 
10  Pac.  400;  Wood  y.  Franks,  67 
Cal.  32,  7  Pac  50;  Walden  y.  Mur- 
dock,  23  Cal.  540,  83  Am.  Dec  135; 
Wheaton  y.  Neyille,  19  CaL  41 ;  Ran- 
dall y.  BufBngton,  10  Gal.  491;  Dana 
y.  Stanford,  10  Cal.  269. 

Colo, — Sutton  y.  Dana,  15  Colo.  98, 
25  Pae.  90;  Campbell  y.  Colorado 
Coal,  etc.,  Co.,  9  Colo.  60,  10  Pac 
248;  Burr  y.  Clement,  9  Oolo.  1,  7 
Pac.  633.  Compare  Schideler  y. 
Fisher,  13  Colo.  App.  106,  57  Pac 
864.  <t 

Conn, — ^Warner  Gloye  Co.  y.  Jen- 
nings, 58  Conn.  74,  19  Atl.  239;  Smith 
y.  Skeary,  47  Conn.  47;  Elirtland  t. 
Snow,  20  Conn.  23. 

Del, — Slessinger  y.  Topkis,  1  Mary. 
140,  40  Atl.  717;  Stockley  y.  Horsey, 
4  Houst.  603;  Wharton  y.  Clements, 
3  Del.  Ch.  209. 

D.  O. — ^Barnard  y.  Life  Ins.  Co.,  4 
Mackey,  63;  Clark  y.  Erause,  2 
Mackey,  559. 

Fla. — McKeown  y.  Coagler,  18 
Fla.  866;  Holbrook  y.  Allen,  4  Fla. 
87. 

Ga, — Simms  y.  Tidwell,  98  Oa. 
686,  25  S.  E.  555;  Comer  y.  Allen,  72 
6a.  1 ;  Carter  y.  Neal,  24  Qa.  346,  71 
Am.  Dec.  136;  Sayannah  Bank  y. 
Planters'  Bank,  22  Ga.  466;  Layen- 
der  y.  Thomas,  18  6a.  668;  Mc- 
Whorter    y.    Wright,    5    6a.    655; 


Cameron  y.  Seadder,  1  Ga.  204; 
Dayis  y.  Anderson,  7  6a.  176;  East- 
man y.  McAlpin,  1  6a.  157. 

/tt.— Fabian  y.  Traeger,  215  111. 
220,  74  N.  E.  131,  aff'g  117  Dl.  App. 
176;  Murray  Nelson  Co.  y.  Leiter, 
190  111.  414,  60  N.  £.  851,  83  Am.  St. 
Bep.  142,  affg  93  111.  App.  176;  Wil- 
liams y.  Andrew,  185  111.  98, 56  N.  E. 
1041,  afg  84  111.  App.  289;  Dueber 
Watch  Case  Mfg.  Co.  y.  Young,  155 
IlL  226,  40  N.  £.  582,  affg  54  lU. 
App.  383;  Young  y.  Clapp,  147  111. 
176,  32  N.  E.  187,  35  N.  E.  372; 
61oyer  y.  Lee,  140  111.  102,  29  N.  E. 
680;  Hulse  y.  Mershon,  125  111.  52, 
17  N.  E.  50;  Wood  y.  Clark,  121  Dl. 
359,  12  N.  E.  271,  afTg  21  lU.  App. 
464;  Schroeder  y.  Walsh,  120  IlL 
403,  11  N.  E.  70;  Chiooga,  etc,  R. 
Co.  y.  Watson,  113  111.  195;  Welsch 
y.  Werschem,  92  IlL  115;  Francis  y. 
Rankin,  84  111.  169;  Morris  y.  Till- 
son,  81  m.  607;  Hessing  y.  McClos- 
key,  37  lU.  341;  Funk  y.  Staats,  24 
111.  633;  Cooper  y.  McClun,  16  IlL 
435;  Cross  y.  Bryant^  3  111.  36; 
6erman-American  Nat.  Bank  y.  Hoff- 
man, 120  111.  App.  363;  Eickstaedt 
y.  Moses,  105  111.  App.  634;  Spalding 
y.  Heideman,  96  Dl.  App.  405;  Cooke 
y.  Peter,  93  111.  App.  1;  Wickler  y. 
People,  68  III.  App.  282;  Taylor  y. 
Smith,  68  111.  App.  100;  Oakford  y. 
Dunlap,  63  111.  App.  498;  Locke  y. 
Duncan,  47  IlL  App.  110;  Stain- 
brook  y.  Duncan,  45  111.  App.  344; 
Sweet  y.  Scherber,  42  111.  App.  237; 
Weir  y.  Dustin,  28  111.  App.  605; 
Chicago  Stamping  Co.  y.  Hanchett* 
25  111.  App.  198;  Holbrook  y.  First 
Nat.  Bank,  10  III.  App.  140;  Storey 
y.  Agnew,  2  111.  App.  353. 

Ind, — Owens   y.   6a8cho,    154   Ind. 
225,  56  N.  £.  224;  Leyering  y.  Bimel, 


Preferences  to  Cseditobs. 


459 


that  absolute  owntership  which  every  man  claims  over  that  which 


146  Ind.  545,  45  N.  E.  775;  Rock- 
land Co.  V.  Summerville,  139  Ind. 
695,  39  N.  £.  307;  Thomas  v.  John- 
son, 137  Ind.  244,  36  N.  E.  893;  Dice 
V.  Irvin,  110  Ind.  561,  11  N.  E.  488; 
Oa)onald  v.  Constant,  82  Ind.  212; 
O'Connor  v.  Coats,  79  Ind.  696; 
Wilcoxon  V.  Annesley,  23  Ind.  285; 
Wynne  v.  Glidewell,  17  Ind.  446; 
Jones  ▼.  Gott,  10  Ind.  240;  Stewart 
▼.  English,  6  Ind.  176;  Anderson  ▼. 
Smith,  5  Blackf.  395. 

/otuo.— Sly  V.  Bell  (1906),  108  N. 
W.227;  Atkinson  T.McNider  (1905), 
105  N.  W.  504;  Thompson  v.  Zuck- 
mayer  (1903),  94  N.  W.  476;  Mere- 
dith V.  Schaap  (1901),  85  N.  W. 
628;  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Oarretson, 
107  Iowa,  196,  77  N.  W.  856;  Cath- 
cart  V.  Grieve,  104  Iowa,  330,  73  K. 
W.  835;  Johnson  v.  Johnson,  101 
Iowa,  405,  70  N.  W.  598;  Stroff  ▼. 
Swafford,  81  Iowa,  695,  47  N.  W. 
1023;  Loomis  v.  Stewart,  75  Iowa, 
387,  39  N.  W.  660;  Southern  White 
Lead  Co.  v.  Haas,  73  Iowa,  399,  33 
N.  W.  657,  35  N.  W.  494;  Aulman  v. 
Aulman,  71  Iowa,  124,  3  N.  W.  240, 
60  Am.  Rep.  783 ;  (Barrett  v.  Burling- 
ton Plow  Co.,  70  Iowa,  597,  29  N. 
W.  395,  59  Am.  Rep.  461;  Farwell  v. 
Howard,  26  Iowa,  381 ;  Davis  v.  Gib- 
bon, 24  Iowa,  257;  Lampson  v. 
Arnold,  19  Iowa,  479;  Hutchinson  v. 
Watkins,  17  Iowa,  475;  Buell  v. 
Buckingham,  16  Iowa,  284,  85  Am. 
Dec.  516;  Johnson  v.  McGrew,  11 
Iowa,  151,  77  Am.  Dec.  137;  (Dowles 
V.  Ricketts,  1  Iowa,  582. 

Kan. — Smith-McO)rd  Dry  Goods 
Ck>.  V.  Carson,  59  Kan.  295,  52  Pac. 
880;  Hasie  v.  Connor,  53  Kan.  713, 
37  Pac.  128;  Schram  ▼.  Taylor,  51 
Kan.   547,    33   Pac.    315;    Lewis    ▼. 


Hughes,  49  Kan.  23,  SO  Pac.  177; 
First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Ridenour,  46 
Kan.  707,  718,  27  Pac  150,  26  Am. 
St.  Rep.  167;  Bliss  v.  Couch,  46  Kan. 
400,  26  Pac.  706;  Voorhis  ▼. 
Michaelis,  45  Kan.  255,  25  Pac.  592; 
Tootle  ▼.  Ck>ldwell,  30  Kan.  125,  1 
Pac.  329;  Randall  v.  Shaw,  28  Kan. 
419;  Bishop  ▼.  Jones,  28  Kan.  680; 
Am  V.  Hoersman,  26  ELan.  413; 
Campbell  ▼.  Warner,  22  Kan.  604; 
Avery  v.  Eastes,  18  Kan.  505; 
Cuendet  v.  Lahmer,  16  Kan.  527; 
Pettyjohn  v.  Newhart,  7  Kan.  App. 
64,  51  Pac.  969. 

JTy.— Whitehead  v.  Woodruff,  74 
Ky.  209;  Short  v.  Tinsley,  58  Ky. 
397,  71  Am.  Dec.  482;  Kennaird  v. 
Adams,  50  Ky.  102;  Worland  v. 
Kimberlin,  45  Ky.  608,  44  Am.  Dec 
785;  Reinhard  v.  Conunonwealth 
Bank,  45  Ky.  252;  Young  v.  Stal- 
lings,  44  Ky.  307;  Marshall  v. 
Hutchison,  44  Ky.  298;  Ford  v. 
Williams,  42  Ky.  550;  Bergen  v.  Far- 
mers', etc.,  Bank,  8  Ky.  L.  Rep.  613; 
Commonwealth  v.  Campbell,  7  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  746;  Beard  v.  Runyan,  6  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  514. 

La, — United  States  v.  United 
States  Bank,  8  Rob.  262. 

Me. — ^Hanscom  v.  Buffum,  66  Me. 
246;  Ferguson  v.  Spear,  65  Me.  277; 
French  v.  Motley,  63  Me.  326;  Hart- 
shorn V.  Eames,  31  Me.  93. 

Md, — Thompson  v.  Williams 
(1905),  60  Atl.  26;  Baltimore  City 
Com.  Bank  v.  Keams  (1905),  59  Atl. 
1010;  Stockbridge  v.  Franklin  Bank, 
86  Md.  189,  37  Atl.  645;  Nicholson 
V.  Schmucker,  81  Md.  459,  32  Atl. 
182;  Totten  v.  Brady,  54  Md.  170; 
Rich  ▼.  Levy,  16  Md.  74;  Glenn  v. 
Grover,    3    Md.    212;     Wheeler    t. 


460 


Feaubitleht  Cowktahges. 


ifl  his  own,'  and  tliat  if  ibe  ri^t  of  giving  pref eranoes  should  be 


Stoae,  4  Gill,  38;  Cole  y.  Alben,  1 
Gin,  412;  SUte  t.  8t«te  Bank,  «6iU 
ft  J.  206,  86  Am.  Dee.  561;  Hiekley 
T.  Fmrmen',  ete.,  Buik,  6  GiU 
ft  J.  377;  AnderaoB  ▼.  Tydinge,  3 
lid.  Ch.  167,  8  Md.  427,  63  Am.  Dee. 
708;  Powlee  t.  DUley,  2  Md.  Ch.  119, 
0  Gin,  222;  Stewart  ▼.  Union  Bank, 
2  Md.  Ch.  58,  7  GUI,  439;  Maleolm  y. 
Ball,  1  Md.  Ch.  172. 

Jfaetw— Traders'  Kat.  Bank  y. 
Steere,  165  Mass.  387,  43  N.  £.  189; 
Sawyer  y.  Leyy,  162  Mass.  190,  38 
K.  E.  365;  Train  y.  KendaU, 
137  Maas.  366;  Vint  Kat.  Bank  y. 
Smith,  133  Maas.  26;  Atlantie  Kat. 
Bank  y.  Tayener,  130  Maas.  407; 
Giddinga  y.  Sears,  115  Maaa.  505; 
Banileld  y.  Whipple,  96  Mass.  13; 
Bart  y.  Perkins,  75  Mass.  317; 
Green  y.  Tanner,  49  Mass.  411;  Kew 
England  Mar.  Ins.  Co.  y.  Chandler, 
16  Mass.  276;  Harrison  y.  PhOlipa 
Academy,  12  Mass.  456;  Thomaa  y. 
Goodwin,  12  Mass.  140;  Widgery  y. 
Haskell,  5  Mass.  144,  4  Am.  Dee.  41; 
Hatch  y.  Smith,  5  Mass.  42. 

jrteA.--Geer  y.  Traders'  Bank,  132 
Mich.  215,  93  N.  W.  437;  Michigan 
Trust  Co.  y.  Comstock,  130  Mich. 
572,  90  N.  W.  331 ;  Scripps  y.  Craw- 
ford, 123  Mich.  173,  81  N.  W.  1098; 
Belding  Say.  Bank  y.  Moore,  118 
Mich.  150,  76  N.  W.  368;  Beekman  y. 
Nohle,  115  Mich.  523,  73  N.  W.  803; 
Ferris  y.  McQueen,  94  Mich.  367,  54 
N.  W.  164;  Warner  y.  Littlefleld,  89 
Mich.  329,  50  N.  W.  721;  Sheldon  y. 
Mann.  85  Mich.  265,  48  N.  W.  573; 
Dalton  y.  Stiles,  74  Mich.  726,  42  K. 
W.  169;  Eureka  Iron,  etc,  Works  y. 
Bresnahan,  66  Mich.  489,  33  N.  W. 
834;  Whitfield  y.  Stiles,  57  Mich. 
410,  24  N.  W.  119;  Jordan  y.  White; 


MidL  263;  Hin  y.  Bowman,  35 
Mieh.  191;  People  y.  Bristol,  35 
Mieh.  28;  How  y.  Camp,  Walk.  427. 
iffim.— Mafkellar  y.  Pillsbnry,  48 
Minn.  396,  61  K.  W.  222;  Berry  y. 
CQmnor,  33  Minn.  29,  21  N.  W.  840; 
Smith  y.  DeidridE,  30  Minn.  60,  14 
N.  W.  262;  Vose  y.  Stickney,  19 
Minn.  367. 

Jfiis.— Harris  y.  Sledge  (1897), 21 
So.  783;  Holberg  y.  Jaffraj,  64  Miss. 
746,  2  So.  168;  Hyman  y.  Stad]er,63 
lifiss.  362;  Richardson  y.  Manfiiece, 
59  Mies.  80,  42  Am.  Rep.  353;  Eld- 
ridge  y.  Phillipeon,  58  Miss.  270; 
Sayage  y.  Dowd,  54  Misa.  728;  Sam- 
mers  y.  Roos,  42  Miss.  749,  2  Am. 
Rep.  653;  Stanton  y.  Green,  34  Miss. 
576;  Herrick  y.  Henderson,  Walk. 
485. 

If o.— Wood  y.  Porter,  179  Mo.  66, 
77  S.  W.  762;  WaU  y.  Beedy,  161  Mo. 
625,  61  S.  W.  864;  Crothers  y. 
Busch,  153  Mo.  606,  55  S.  W.  149; 
Bangs  Milling  Co.  y.  Bums,  152  Mo. 
350,  53  S.  W.  923;  Kingman  y.  Cor- 
nell-Tebbetts  Maeh.,  etc.,  Co.,  150  Mo. 
282,  51  S.  W.  727;  Alberger  y.  Na- 
tional Bank  of  Commerce,  123  Mo. 
313,  27  S.  W.  657;  Jaffrey  y. 
Mathews,  120  Mo.  317,  25  S.  W.  187; 
Alberger  y.  White,  117  Mo.  347,  23 
S.  W.  92;  Schroeder  y.  Bobbitt,  108 
Mo.  289,  18  S.  W.  1093;  Sexton  y. 
Anderson,  95  Mo.  373,  8  S.  W.  564; 
Forrester  y.  Moore,  77  Mo.  651 ;  Shel- 
ley y.  Boothe,  73  Mo.  74,  39  Am.  Rep. 
481;  Henderson  y.  Henderson,  55  Mo. 
534;  Kuykendall  y.  McDonald,  15 
Mo.  416,  57  Am.  Dec.  212;  Murray 
y.  Ckson,  16  Mo.  378;  Bell  y.  Thomp- 
son, 3  Mo.  84;  Seott  Hardware  Co. 
y.  Riddle,  84  Mo.  App.  275;  Sam- 
moDs  y.  O'Neill,  60  Mo.  App.  630; 


PsBFBBBirOBS  TO  CbBDITOBS. 


461 


■ 

denied,  while  a  man  retains  his  property  in  his  own  hands,  he 


Smitli  T.  National  R.»  etc.,  Expoeiti<A 
Assoc.,  47  Mo.  App.  462;  W.  W.  Ken- 
dall Boot»  etc..  Go.  V.  Bain,  46  Mo. 
App.  561;  Deering  ▼.  Collins,  38  Mo. 
App.  80;  State  ▼.  Excelsior  Distil- 
ling Co.,  20  Mo.  App.  21;  Gaff  ▼. 
Stern,  12' Mo.  App.  116. 

Mont. — Teitig  y.  Boesman,  12 
Mont.  404,  31  Pac.  371. 

Neh. — ^Blair  State  Bank  y.  Bunn, 
61  Neb.  464,  86  N.  W.  527;  Bennett 
y.  McDonald,  59  Neb.  234,  80  N.  W. 
826;  Tackaberry  y.  Oilmore,  67  Neb. 
450,  78  N.  W.  32;  Smitli  y.  Bowen, 
51  Neb.  245,  70  N.  W.  040;  Grand 
Island  Banking  Co.  y.  Costello,  45 
Neb.  119,  63  N.  W.  376;  Bobinson  No- 
tion Go.  y.  Foots,  42  Neb.  156,  60  N. 
W.  316;  Hunt  y.  Huffman,  41  Neb. 
244,  59  N.  W.  889;  Meyer  y.  Union 
Bag,  etc,  Co.,  41  Neb.  67,  59  N.  W. 
696;  John  V.  Farwell  Co.  y.  Wright, 
38  Neb.  445,  56  N.  W.  984;  Jones  y. 
Lores,  37  Neb.  816,  56  N.  W.  390; 
Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Co.  y. 
McPheely,  37  Neb.  800,  56  N.  W.  389; 
Kayanaugh  y.  Oberfelder,  37  N^. 
647,  56  N.  W.  316;  Costello  y.  Cham- 
berlain, 36  Neb.  45,  53  N.  W.  1034; 
Brown  y.  Williams,  34  Neb.  376,  51 
N.  W.  851;  Dayis  y.  Scott,  27  Neb. 
642,  43  N.  W.  407;  Elwood  y.  May, 
24  Neb.  373,  38  N.  W.  793;  Rothell  y. 
Grimes,  22  Neb.  526,  35  N.  W.  392. 

N.  H.-— Osgood  y.  Thome,  63  N.  H. 
375;  Buffum  y.  Green,  5  N.  H.  71,  20 
Am.  Dec.  562. 

V,  J.— Tillou  y.  Britton,  9  N.  J.  L. 
120;  Thompson  y.  Williamson,  67  N. 
J.  £q.  212,  68  Atl.  602;  Green  y. 
McCrane,  55  N.  J.  Eq.  436,  37  Atl. 
318;  Low  y.  Wortman,  44  N.  J.  Eq. 
193,  7  AU.  654,  14  Atl.  586;  Uhl  y. 


Beatty  (Ch.  1885),  3  AtL  524;  Esvsx 
y.  Lindsley,  41  N.  J.  Eq.  189,  3  Atl. 
391;  Metropolis  Nat.  Bank  y. 
Sprague^  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13;  Co^y  t. 
Coley,  14  N.  J.  Eq.  350;  Jones  y. 
Naugfarii^  10  N.  J.  Eq.  298;  Garr 
y.  Hill,  9  N.  J.  Eq.  210. 

2^.  0. — Guggenheimer  y.  Brook- 
field,  90  N.  C.  232;  Cheek  y.  Dayis, 
26  N.  C.  284;  Hafner  y.  Irwin,  23  N. 
C.  490;  SeUera  y.  Bryan,  17  N.  0. 
358. 

N.  D, — ^Lockren  y.  Rustan,  9  N.  D. 
43,  81  N.  W.  60;  Cutter  y.  Pollock,  4 
N.  D.  205,  59  N.  W.  1062,  50  Am.  BL 
Rep.  644,  25  L.  R.  A.  377. 

Ohio. — Steyenson  y.  Agiy,  7  Ohio, 
247;  Barr  y.  Hatch,  3  Ohio,  527;  Sack 
y.  Hemann,  6  Ohio  Dec.  1104,  10  Am. 
L.  Rec.  483;  Grote  y.  Meyer,  6  Ohio 
Dec.  1025,  9  Am.  L.  Rec.  623;  Hauel 
y.  Mintzer,  1  Handy,  375. 

Okla. — Brittain  y.  Bumham,  9 
Okla.  522,  60  Pac  241;  Jaffray  y. 
Wolfe,  1  Okhi.  312,  33  Pac  945. 

Or.— Hesse  y.  Barrett*  41  Or.  202, 
68  Pac  751 ;  Ladd  y.  Johnson,  32  Or. 
195,  49  Pac  756;  Sabin  y.  Wilkins, 
31  Or.  450,  48  Pac  425,  37  L.  R.  A 
465;  Inman  y.  Sprague,  30  Or.  321, 
47  Pac  826;  Marquam  y.  Sengf elder, 
24  Or.  2,  32  Pac.  676;  Kruse  y.  Prin- 
dle,  8  Or.  158. 

Pa. — Snayberger  y.  Pahl,  196  Pa. 
St.  336,  45  Atl.  1065,  78  Am.  St.  Rep. 
818;  Candee's  Appeal,  191  Pa.  St. 
644,  43  Atl.  1093;  Penn  PUte  Glass 
Oo.  y.  Jones,  189  Pa.  St.  290,  42  Atl. 
189;  Braden  y.  O'Neill,  183  Pa.  St. 
462,  38  Atl.  1023,  63  Am.  St.  Rep. 
761;  Werner  y.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa«  St^ 
360,  29  Atl.  737;  Kitchen  y.  McClos- 
key,  150  Pa.  8t  376,  24  Atl.  688,  30 


462 


Fraudulekt  Conveyakces. 


would  00  far  lose  the  dominiooi  over  hia  own  that  he  oould  not  pay 


Am.  St  Rep.  811;  Lake  Shore  Bank- 
ing Co.  ▼.  Fuller,  110  Pa.  St.  156,  1 
Atl.  731;  Walker  v.  Marine  Nat 
Bank,  08  Pa.  St.  574;  Bentz  v. 
Hockey,  69  Pa.  St.  71,  77;  Keen  ▼. 
Kleckner,  42  Pa.  St.  529;  York 
County  Bank  v.  Carter,  38  Pa«  St. 
446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494;  Uhler  v.  Maul- 
fair,  23  Pa.  St.  481;  Oovanhovan  v. 
Hart,  21  Pa.  St.  495,  60  Am.  Dec. 
57;  Worman  y.  Wolferaberger,  19  Pa. 
St.  59;  Davis  y.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St 
82;  Blakley's  Appeal,  7  Pa.  St  449; 
Russeirs  Appeal,  2  Walk.  363;  Wilt 
▼.  Franklin,  1  Binn.  502,  2  Am.  Deo. 
474;  In  re  Weldon's  Estate,  31  Pa. 
Super.  Ct  47;  Meyers  v.  Meyers,  24 
Pa.  Super.  Ct.  603;  Harman  ▼.  Reese, 
1  Browne,  11;  Hammett  v.  HJarrison, 
1  Phila.  349. 

R.  L — Coates  v.  Wilson,  20  R.  L 
106,  37  Atl.  537;  Elliott  v.  Benedict^ 
13  R.  I.  463. 

8,  (7. — ^McElwee  v.  Kennedy,  56  S. 
C.  154,  34  S.  E.  86;  Sloane  v.  Hunter, 
56  S.  C.  385,  34  S.  E.  658,  879,  76 
Am.  St  Rep.  551;  Perkins  y.  Doug- 
lass, 52  S.  C.  129,  29  S.  E.  400; 
Magovem  y.  Richard,  27  S.  C.  272,  3 
S.  E.  340;  McPherson  y.  McPherson, 
21  S.  C.  261 ;  Thorpe  v.  Thorpe,  12  8. 
C.  154;  Smith  y.  Henry,  1  HiU,  16; 
Oureton  y.  Doby,  10  Rich.  Eq.  411, 
73  Am.  Dec.  96;  Bird  y.  Aitken,  Rioe 
Eq.  73;  Maples  y.  Maples,  Rioe  Eq. 
300. 

S,  D.— Church  y.  Fol^,  10  8.  D. 
74,  71  N.  W.  759;  Jewett  y.  Doyms, 
6  S.  D.  319,  60  N.  W.  76;  Sandwich 
Mfg.  Co.  y.  Max,  5  S.  D.  125,  68  N. 
W.  14,  24  L.  R.  A.  524. 

Tenn.— Nelson  y.  EJnney,  93  Tenn. 
428,  26  S.  W.  100;  Bennet  y.  Union 
Bank,  24  Tenn.  612;  Warren  ▼.  Hin* 


son  (Ch.  App.  1899),  52  S.  W.  498; 
McGrew  y.  Hancock  (Ch.  App.  1899), 
52  S.  W.  600;  Feder  y.  Erwin  (Ch. 
App.  1896),  38  S.  W.  446,  36  L.  R.  A. 
336. 

SPftp.— Wallis  y.  Schneider,  79  Tex. 
479,  15  S.  W.  492;  Owens  y.  Clark, 
78  Tex.  547,  15  S.  W.  101 ;  Black  y. 
Vaughan,  70  Tex.  47,  7  S.  W.  604; 
Oppenheimer  v.  Halff,  68  Tex.  409, 
4  S.  W.  562;  Scott  y.  McDaniel,  67 
Tex.  315,  3  S.  W.  291 ;  Smith  y.  Whit- 
field, 67  Tex.  124,  2  S.  W.  822;  Ed- 
wards y.  Dickson,  66  Tex.  613,  2  8. 
W.  718;  EUis  y.  Valentine,  65  Tex. 
532;  Lewy  y.  Fischl,  65  Tex.  311; 
Greenleye  y.  Blum,  69  Tex.  124;  Igle- 
hart  y.  Willis,  58  Tex.  306;  Fnueer 
y.  Thatcher,  49  Tex.  26;  Thornton  y. 
Ttody,  39  Tex.  544;  Moore  y.  Robin- 
son (Ciy.  App.  1903),  76  S.  W.  890; 
Bowie  y.  Hedrick  (Ciy.  App.  1896), 
35  8.  W.  317;  Scarborough  y.  Hilliard 
(Ciy.  App.  1894),  28  8.  W.  231;  Mar- 
tin-Brown Co.  y.  Siebe,  6  Tex.  Ciy. 
App.  232,  26  S.  W.  327;  Reynolds  y. 
Weinman  (Ciy.  App.  1894),  26  8.  W. 
33;  Butler  y.  Sanger,  4  Tex.  Ciy. 
App.  411,  23  S.  W.  487;  California 
Bank  y.  Marshall,  1  Tex.  Ciy.  ApfK 
704,  23  8.  W.  246;  Loeb  y.  Leon,  2 
Tex.  Unrep.  Cas.  445;  Williams  y. 
Perry,  3  Tex.  App.  Ciy.  Gas.,  §  209; 
Numsen  y.  Ellis,  3  Tex.  App.  Ciy. 
Cas.,  S  134;  Gamble  y.  Tklbot,  2  Tex. 
App.  Ciy.  Cas.,  §  729;  Thompson  y. 
Heryey,  2  Tex.  App.  Ciy.  Cas.,  §  506. 

Utah, — ^Henderson  y.  Adams,  1$ 
Utah,  30,  48  Pac.  398. 

Fe.— Marsh  y.  Dayis,  24  Vt  363; 
Morse  y.  Slason,  13  Vt  296;  L^n  ▼. 
Rood,  12  Vt  233. 

7a. — Johnson  y.  Lneas^  108  Va. 
36,  48  8.  E.  497;  Barton  ▼.  Brent,  87 


PSEFESENCES  TO  CsEDITOBS. 


463 


anybody^  because  whoever  lie  paid  would  receive  a  preferenca' 
The  tests  of  the  validity  of  a  conveyance  are^  therefore,  said  to 
turn  not  uponi  the  right  of  a  creditor  to  prefer,  nor  on  the  failure 
of  the  nonpreferred  creditor  to  secure,  his  daim,  but  upon  the 
honesty  of  the  parties  to  the  transaction  in  simply  giving  and 
receiving  a  preference,  and  the  absence  of  any  intent  to  secure 
a  benefit  for  the  debtor  or  to  hinder  or  delay  his  other  creditors.^ 


Va.  385,  13  S.  E.  29;  Paul  v.  Baugfa, 
65  Va.  955,  9  S.  E.  329;  Lucas  y. 
Glafflin,  76  Va.  269;  VnUiams  v.  Lord^ 
75  Va.  390;  McCuUough  ▼.  Sommer- 
▼iUe,  8  Leigh,  415;  Skipwirth  ▼.  Cun- 
ningham, 8  Leigh,  271,  31  Am.  Dee. 
642. 

W<M*.— Vietor  ▼.  GloTcr,  17  Wash. 
37,  48  Pao.  788,  40  L.  R.  A.  297; 
Langert  y.  Dayid,  14  Wash.  389,  44 
Pac.  875;  West  Coast  Grocery  Co.  y. 
Stinson,  13  Wash.  255,  43  Pac.  35; 
Samuel  y.  Eittenger,  6  Wash.  261,  33 
Pac.  509;  Turner  y.  Iowa  Nat.  Bank, 
2  Wash.  192,  26  Pac.  256. 

W.  Fa.— Frank  y.  Zeigler,  46  W. 
Va.  614,  33  S.  E.  761;  BJarden  y. 
Wagner,  22  W.  Va.  356. 

Wm.— Kickbusch  y.  Corwith,  108 
Wis.  634,  85  N.  W.  148;  Haring  y. 
Hamilton,  107  Wis.  112,  82  N.  W. 
698;  Erdall  y.  Atwood,  79  Wis.  1,  47 
N.  W.  1124;  Steyens  y.  Breen,  75 
Wis.  595,  44  N.  W.  645;  Greene,  etc., 
Co.  y.  Remington,  72  Wis.  648,  39  N. 
W.  767,  40  N.  W.  643;  Ingram  y. 
Osbom,  70  Wis.  184,  35  N.  W.  304; 
Landauer  y.  Vietor,  69  Wis.  434,  34 
N.  W.  229;  Carter  y.  Rewey,  62  Wis. 
552,  22  N.  W.  129;  Allen  y.  Ken- 
nedy, 49  Wis.  549,  5  N.  W.  906; 
Gage  y.  Chesebro,  49  Wis.  486,  5  N. 
W.  881. 

Can.~7Daglish  y.  McCarthy,  19 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  578;  Atty.-Gen. 
y.  Harmer,   16  Grant  Ch.    (U.  C.) 


533;  McMaster  y.  Clare,  7  Grant  Ch. 
(U.  C.)  550;  Ashley  y.  Brown,  17 
Ont.  App.  500;  Gurofski  y.  Harris, 
27  Ont.  201,  23  Ont.  App.  717;  White 
y.  Steyens,  7  U.  C.  Q.  B.  340. 
J^njf.— Maskelyne  y.  Smith  (1902), 

2  EL  B.  158,  71  L.  J.  E.  B.  476,  86  L. 
T.  Rep.  N.  S.  832,  9  Manson,  139; 
Alton  y.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4  Ch.  622, 
38  L.  J.  Ch.  669,  21  L.  T.  Rep.  N.  S. 
282,  17  Wkly.  Rep.  1034;  Middleton 
y.  Pollock,  2  Ch.  Diy.  104,  45  L.  J. 
Ch.  293;  Wood  y.  Dixie,  7  Q.  B.  892, 
9  Jur.  796,  53  E.  C.  L.  892;  CaiUaud 
y.  Eztwick,  2  Anstr.  381,  6  T.  R. 
420;  Goss  y.  Neale,  5  Moore  C.  P.  19, 
16  E.  C.  L.  87;  Pickstock  y.  Lyster, 

3  M.  &  S.  371,  16  Rey.  Rep.  300; 
Holbird  y.  Anderson,  5  T.  R.  235; 
Meuz  y.  Howell,  4  East,  1. 

2.  Reed  y.  Mclntyre,  98  U.  S.  510; 
Mayer  y.  Hellman,  *91  U.  S.  500; 
Brashear  y.  West,  7  Pet.  (U.  S.) 
608;  Campbell  y.  Colorado  Coal,  etc., 
Co.,  9  Colo.  65,  10  Pac.  248. 

S.  Tillott  y.  Britton,  9  N.  J.  L. 
120.  See  also  Dana  y.  Stanford,  10 
Cal.  269;  Dalton  y.  Stiles,  74  Mich. 
726,  42  N.  W.  169;  Braden  y.  CNeil, 
183  Pa.  St.  462,  38  Atl.  1023,  63  Am. 
St.  Rep.  761;  Coyan-hoyan  y.  Hart, 
21  Pa.  St.  495,  60  Am.  Dec.  57,  for 
reasons  of  the  rule  set  forth  in  the 
text. 

4.  Green  y.  McCrane,  55  N.  J.  Eq. 
436,  37  Atl.  318. 


464 


FBAUDxn^NT  Conveyances. 


The  inquiry  should  he  whether  the  act  done  was  a  hana  fide 
transaction  or  a  mere  trick  or  contrivance  to  defeat  creditors.^ 
The  statutes  of  13  Elizaheth  and  other  general  statutes  avoiding; 
fraudulent  conveyances  in  hehalf  of  creditors  and  subsequent 
purchasers  do  not  apply  to  amy  conveyance  made  bona  fide  for 
valuable  consideration,  aiod  do  not  prevent  a  debtor  in  failing 
circumfftances  from  preferring  one  dass  of  creditors  to  another/ 
and  such  a  preference^  although  its  effect  will  be  to  deprive  other 
creditors  of  the  means  of  satisfying  their  daime  and  defeat 
their  entire  claim,  does  not  of  itself  ^^  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud 
creditors"  within  the  meaning  of  those  statutes,^  since  other 
creditors  alleged  to  have  been  defrauded  thereby  have  no  legal 
right  to  priority  f  and  such  preference  is  not  fraudulent  either  in 
law  or  in  fact*  A  creditor  has  a  right  to  seek  and  obtain  from 
his  debtor  a  prefer^ice  for  or  payment  of  his  debt  to  the  ex* 
elusion  of  all  other  creditors,  without  any  imputation  of  fraud 
upon  either  party,^®  and  he  may  take  payment  or  security  for 
his  demand,  though  others  are  thereby  deprived  of  all  means 
of  obtaining  satisfaction  of  their  own  equally  meritorious  claims.^ 


5.  Stewart  ▼.  Englisb,  6  Ind.  176; 
Attorney-General  ▼.  Harmaa,  16 
Grant  Ch.  (U.  C.)  633. 

6.  Skipwith's  Ex'r  ▼.  Ciuming- 
ham,  8  Leigh  (Va.),  271»  31  Am. 
Dec  642. 

7.  See  cases  generally  cited  in  first 
note  to  this  section. 

8.  Johnson  ▼.  Lucas,  103  Va.  36, 
48  S.  E.  497. 

9.  Uhler  ▼.  Maulfair,  23  Pa.  St 
481. 

10.  Mabbett  ▼.  White,  12  N.  Y. 
442;  Foster  ▼.  McAlester,  114  Fed. 
146,  52  C.  C.  A.  107;  Bangs  Milling 
Co.  ▼.  Bums,  152  Mo.  360,  53  S.  W. 
923;  Appeal  of  Candee,  193  Pa.  St. 
644,    43     Atl.     1093;     West    Coast 


Grocery  Co.  ▼.  Stinson,  13  Wash. 
255,  43  Pac.  35. 

n^e    payment    of    a    nun    ef 
mmufj  to  pvoewo  a  oon^oy— o 

of  property,  by  a  debtor  to  a  cred- 
itor by  way  of  preference,  does  not 
render  the  transaction  fraudulent  as 
to  the  other  creditors,  since  it  does 
not  withdraw  anything  from  such 
creditors  to  which  they  could  be  en- 
titled, but  increases  the  remaining 
assets  of  the  debtor.  Bangs  MiUing 
Co.  ▼.  Bums,  9upra. 

11.  Wheaton  ▼.  NeTill^  19  Cal. 
41;  Dana  ▼.  Stanford,  10  Cal.  269; 
Williams  ▼.  Andrews,  185  111.  98,  66 
N.  £.  1041,  alfg  84  111.  App.  289; 
Gray  ▼.  St  Jolm,  35  HI.  222;  Storey 
▼.  Agnew,  2  111.  App.  363;  Ellis  T. 
Valentine,  65  Tex.  532. 


PSEFESENCSS  TO  CbSDITOBS. 


465 


The  preference  may  be  by  a  judgment,  a  mortgage,  a  deed,  a 
transfer  of  securities  or  choses  in  action,  the  sale  of  personal 
property,  or  the  payment  of  money  or  otherwise."  Where  a  debtor 
•exercises  the  right  of  preference  honestly,  his  acts,  whether  the 
preference  be  created  by  sale  or  pledge,  are  unimpeachable." 
Oourts  of  equity  as  well  as  courts  of  law  recognize  the  right  of  a 
debtor  to  give  a  preference  to  one  creditor  over  another,^^  although 
preferences  by  insolvent  debtors  are  not  favored  in  courts  of 
equity."  In  the  absence  of  any  fraudulent  intent,  the  motive 
which  prompts  the  debtor  to  make  the  preference  is  not  material. 
He  may  make  it  because  he  is  under  a  legal,  equitable,  or  moral 
obligation  to  do  so,  or  he  may  do  it  from  mere  caprice  or  fancy 
and  the  law  will  uphold  it,  if  made  in  good  faith  and  in  pay* 
ment  of  an  honest  debt."    An  agreement  or  promise  by  a  debtor 


12.  Wilder  ▼.  Winnie,  6  Cow.  (N. 
Y.)  284;  Smith  ▼.  Craft,  12  Fed.  856, 
11  Bias.  (U.  S.)  340. 

18.  Essex  County  ▼.  Lindslej,  41 
X.  J.  Eq.  189,  3  Atl.  391;  York 
County  Bank  ▼.  Carter,  38  Pa.  St. 
446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494. 

14.  y,  Y. — Jackson  ▼.  Cornell,  1 
€landf.  Ch.  438;  WiUiams  v.  Brown, 
4  Johns.  Ch.  682;  Nicholl  v.  Mum- 
ford,  4  Johns.  Ch.  522;  McNenomy  ▼. 
Boosevdt,  3  Johns.  Ch.  446;  Hende- 
rieks  ▼.  Walden,  17  Johns.  438; 
Hendricks  ▼.  Robinson,  2  Johns.  Ch. 
283;  Murry  ▼.  Riggs,  15  Johns.  571, 
rwi^g  2  Johns.  Ch.  565. 

Qa, — ^Lavender  v.  Thomas,  18  Ga. 
668. 

Ifd.— -Crawford  ▼.  Austin,  34  Md. 
49. 

if «M. — ^Agricultural  Bank  v.  Dor- 
aey,  FreeuL  338. 

y.  J, — Oreen  ▼.  McCrane,  55  N.  J. 
Eq.  436,  37  Atl.  318. 

Ohio. — ^Hauel  ▼.  Mintzer,  1  Handy, 
375»  12  Ohio  Pec.  191.  See  also 
other  eases  dted  in  first  note  to  this 

80 


section. 

15.  Williams  T.  Brown,  4  Johns. 
Ch.  (N.  Y.)  682;  Woonsocket  Rub- 
ber Co.  ▼.  Falley,  30  Fed.  808. 

16.  y.  F.— National  Park  Bank  t. 
Whitmore,  104  N.  Y.  297,  10  N.  E. 
524;  Orover  ▼.  Wakeman,  11  Wend. 
187,  25  Am.  Dec.  624. 

V.  8. — ^Marbury  ▼.  Brooks,  7 
Wheat.  556,  5  L.  Ed.  522,  11  Wheat. 
78,  6  L.  Ed.  423;  Smith  v.  Craft,  12 
Fed.  856,  11  Biss.  340,  17  Fed.  705, 
123  U.  S.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct.  196,  31  L. 
Ed.  267. 

Ala.— Bray  ▼.  Ely,  105  Ala.  553, 
17  So.  180;  Bates  ▼.  Van  Diver,  102 
Ala.  249,  14  So.  631;  Kilgore  ▼. 
Stoner  (1892),  12  So.  60,  preference 
to  debtor's  wife;  First  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Smith,  93  Ala.  97,  2  So.  548. 

/U.— Wickler  v.  People,  68  111. 
App.  282. 

Ky.—Yovokg  V.  StalHngB^  6  B. 
Mon.  307. 

Md, — Grawford  ▼.  Austin,  34  Md. 
49,  preferences  are  no  doubt  always 
made  from  secret  motives  or  induce- 


466 


FbAUDULEITT   Ck>]fYETAHC£& 


for  a  fatnre  preference  in  case  of  insolvency,  or  to  make  a  pref er> 
ential  assignment  in  favor  of  a  particular  creditor  in  case  it  be- 
comes necessary  to  protect  him,  is  not  in  law  a  fraud  upon  other 
creditors,  nor  is  it  conclusive  evidence  of  fraud.^^  That  a  con- 
veyance in  honest  payment  of  a  real  debt  is  brought  about  by  the 
action  of  other  creditors  in  pressing  their  claims  will  not  render 
it  fraudulent,"  nor  will  the  fact  that  the  creditor  preferred  had 
not  demanded  payment."  A  conveyance  to  a  creditor  for  a  fair 
price  in  satisfaction  of  a  just  debt  will  not  be  set  aside  on  the 
mere  conjecture  that  the  purchaser  may  afford  to  the  debtor  fu- 
ture assistance,  or  because  the  debtor  knows  or  expects  that  the 
purchaser  will  make  some  provision  for  the  debtor's  family.** 
Since  the  law  allows  a  debtor  to  prefer  creditors,  any  conveyance 
by  a  debtor  which  has  the  effect  of  transferring  property  to  one  or 
more  creditors  at  a  fair  valuation  in  payment  of  a  debt  or  debts 
conceded  to  be  just  and  honest  is  not  fraudulent  as  against  other 
creditors.*^ 


rnents  operating  upon  the  mind  of 
the  grantor,  but  equity  does  not  in- 
quire into  them,  if  the  debts  are  pre- 
ferred in  good  faith,  and  all  the  prop- 
erty of  the  grantor,  without  reserva- 
tion, is  dedicated  to  the  use  and 
benefit  of  creditors. 

N,  D. — ^Lockren  v.  Rustan,  9  N.  D. 
43,  81  N.  W.  60. 

Ohio.—BATT  V.  Hatch,  3  Ohio,  627, 
where  the  motive  of  the  debtor  was 
to  prevent  sacrifice  of  his  property. 

8.  C— Thorpe  v.  Thorpe,  12  S.  C. 
164;  Cureton  v.  Doby,  10  Rich.  £q. 
411,  73  Am.  Dec.  96. 

Tenn, — Jones  v.  Cullen,  100  Tenn. 
1,  42  S.  W.  873. 

Tew, — Qreenleve  v.  Blum,  59  Tez. 
124. 

Can, — ^Attomey-Qeneral  v.  Harmer, 
16  Grant  Gh.  (U.  C.)  633;  McMas- 
ter  V.  Glare,  7  Grant  Gh.  (U.  G.) 
660. 


^n^.— Wood  V.  Dixie,  7  Q.  B.  892, 

9  Jur.  796,  63  E.  G.  L.  892. 

17.  National  Park  Bank  ▼.  Whit- 
more,  104  N.  Y.  297,  10  N.  E.  624; 
Smith  V.  Craft,  17  Fed.  705.  See 
also  Haydock  v.  Goope,  53  N.  Y.  68; 
Spaulding  v.  Strang,  37  N.  Y.  136, 
38  N.  Y.  1;  Walker  v.  Adair,  1 
Bond  (U.  S.),  168;  Anderson  v. 
Lachs,  59  Mass.  111. 

18.  McAIister  v.  Honea,  71  Miss. 
266,   14  So.  264. 

19.  McFadden  v.  Ross,  126  Ind. 
341,  26  N.  E.  76. 

ao.  Young  v.  Stallings,  44  Ky. 
307;  Hesse  v.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202, 
68  Pac.  761;  McPherson  t.  McPher- 
son,  21  S.  C.  261;  Gureton  ▼.  Doby, 

10  Rich.  Eq.    (S.  G.)    411,  73  Am. 
Dec.  96. 

21.  Hooker  v.  Sutdiff,  71  Miss. 
792,  15  So.  140,  the  fact  that  a  erad- 
itor  secured  by  mortgage  waives  his 


Fbefebences  to  Cbeditobs. 


467 


§  2.  Statutory  provisions. — In  several  states  the  common  law 
right  of  a  debtor  to  prefer  creditors  is  recognized  and  affirmed  by 
the  statutes."  But  provisions  limiting  and  restricting  the  right  to 
give  preferences  are  contained  in  the  federal  bankruptcy  act," 
the  insolvency  laws  of  various  states,"  the  statutes  relating  to 
assignments  for  the  benefit  of  creditors,"  and  other  statutes  de- 
signed to  enforce  just  and  equitable  distribution  of  a  debtor's 
property  to  his  creditors."     In  cases  not  within  these  statutes 


lien  upon  specific  property  m  favor 
of  a  creditor  whose  claim  is  as 
meritorious  as  that  of  any  other 
creditor  will  not  render  such 
mortgage  fraudulent;  First  Nat. 
Bank  ▼.  North,  2  8.  D.  480,  51  N.  W. 
96,  an  agreement  that  a  debtor  shall 
execute  a  chattel  mortgage  upon  his 
entire  stock  of  goods,  but  reserving 
the  right  to  withdraw  a  certain 
amount  of  such  goods  to  be  turned 
over  to  another  creditor  in  payment 
of  a  just  claim,  is  not  fraudulent  as 
against  other  creditors,  nor  is  the 
chattel  mortgage  executed  and  de- 
livered under  such  agreement;  Ten- 
nant,  etc.,  Shoe  Co.  v.  Partridge,  82 
Tex.  329,  18  S.  W.  310,  a  creditor 
who  holds  a  note  due  his  insolvent 
debtor  as  security  for  his  debt,  and 
who  surrenders  it  at  the  debtor's  re- 
quest to  another  bona  fide  creditor  of 
the  debtor,  does  not  thereby  commit 
a  fraud  on  other  creditors  that  will 
per  se  render  void  a  subsequent  turn- 
ing over  of  property  by  the  debtor  to 
him  in  payment  of  his  debts,  if  the 
note  was  not  surrendered  in  contem- 
plation of  the  property  being  turned 
over  to  him;  Martin-Brown  Co.  v. 
Siebe,  6  Tex.  Civ.  App.  232,  26  S.  W. 
327,  the  fact  that  the  insolvent  debtor 
was  induced  by  his  counsel  to  prefer  a 
creditor  also  represented  by  such 
counsel,     instead    of    another    first 


named,  in  order  that  such  other  cred- 
itor should  be  forced  to  purchase  the 
property,  does  not  invalidate  such 
preference. 

22.  Priest  v.  Brown,  100  Cal.  626, 
36  Pac.  323,  Cal.  Code  Civ.  Proc,  § 
3433;  Brittain  v.  Bumham,  9  Okla. 
522,  60  Pac.  241,  St.  1893,  S  2660; 
First  Nat.  Bank  v.  North,  2  S.  D. 
480,  61  N.  W.  96,  Comp.  Laws,  8 
4653;  Frees  v.  Barker,  81  Tex.  216, 
16  S.  W.  900,  13  L.  R.  A.  340,  Tex. 
Rev.  St.  art.  2365. 

23.  Bankr.  Act,  1898,  §  60a. 

24.  See  Statutes  of  the  several 
states. 

25.  See   Statutes. 

26.  In  Ohio  under  a  statute  pro- 
viding that  transfers  by  a  debtor 
with  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  or  de- 
fraud creditors  shall  be  declared  void 
at  the  suit  of  any  creditor,  the  intent 
to  prefer  is  made  constructively 
fraudulent,  rendering  the  transfer 
voidable,  and  it  is  not  necessary,  in 
order  to  set  aside  a  transfer,  that 
actual  fraud  or  intent  to  defraud  be 
shown.    Barber  v.  Coit,  144  Fed.  381. 

In  Iiowiriana  all  preferences  are 
prohibited  except  payments  in 
money,  under  the  provisions  of  the 
Civil  Code.  Johnson  v.  Marx  Levy 
&  Bro.,  100  La.  1036,  34  So.  68; 
Petetin  v.  His  Creditors,  51  La.  Ann. 
1660,  26  So.  471 ;  Minge  v.  Barbre,  51 


422 


FbauduiiEnt  Conveyances. 


secure  oertain  specified  debts^  directing  that  the  surplus  be  applied 
to  the  payment  of  the  school  fund  debty  it  is  a  convqrance  for  the 
use  of  the  debtor,  and  therefore  fraudulent  aiod  void  as  to  ored- 
itors.**  But  where  insolvent  debtors  have  made  a  oonvejance  of 
their  property  to  a  particular  creditor,  the  mere  fact  of  a  reservar 
tion  in  the  deed  of  the  aurplus  which  shall  remain  after  payment 
of  such  creditor's  debt  will  not  of  itself  make  the  oonveyanoe 
fraudulent,  as  being  to  the  use  of  the  grantors.*^  An  assignment 
of  property  in  trust  to  sell  part  of  it  to  pay  for  advances,  and  to 
retain  part  of  it  subject  to  the  order  of  the  assignor,  is  fraudulent 
as  against  the  creditors  of  the  assignor.** 


§  4.  Reservation  of  life  estate  in  grantor. — A  person  cannot 
place  or  settle  his  property  in  trust  with  remainder  over,  reserving 
to  himself  the  beneficial  interest  for  his  life,  subject  to  the  ex- 
penses of  the  trust,  and  thereby  put  his  life  interest  beyond  the 
reach  of  his  creditors,  either  prior  or  subsequent,  by  any  provision 
restricting  the  power  of  alienation  or  otherwisa^  A  trust  to  place 
one's  property  beyond  the  reach  of  creditors,  while  retaining  full 
enjoyment  of  the  income  and  revenue  therefrom  throu^  the  in- 


38.  Paddock-Hawlej  Iron  Co.  t. 
McDonald,  61  Mo.  App.  559. 

34.  Bigelow  ▼.  Stringer,  40  Mo. 
105.  But  see  Johnson  v.  Sage  (Ida. 
1896),  44  Pac.  641. 

35.  Hart  v.  McFarland,  13  Pa.  St. 
182. 

36t.  N.  Y, — Schenck  ▼.  Barnes,  156 
N.  Y.  316,  50  N.  E.  967,  41  L.  R.  A. 
395;  Young  v.  Heermans,  66  N.  Y. 
374. 

U.  8. — De  Hierapolis  t.  Lawrence, 
115  Fed.  761. 

Kan, — PoIIey  ▼.  Johnson,  52  Kan. 
478,  35  Pac.  8,  23  L.  R.  A.  258. 

Ifd.— Brown  ▼.  Macgill,  87  Md.  161» 
39  Atl.  613,  67  Am.  St.  Rep.  334, 
39  L.  R.  A.  806. 

lfM9.— Pacific  Nat  Bank  y.  Wind- 
ram,  133  Mass.  175. 


Mo, — ^Lambert  ▼.  Haydel,  96  Mo. 
439,  9  S.  W.  780,  9  Am.  St.  Rep.  358, 
2  L.  R.  A.  213;  Donovan  y.  Dunning, 
69  Mo.  436;  McIlYaine  y.  Smith,  42 
Mo.  45,  97  Am.  Dec.  295. 

Pa.— Ghormley  y.  Smith,  139  Pa. 
St.  584,  21  Atl.  135,  23  Am.  St.  Rep. 
215,  11  L.  R.  A.  565;  Appeal  of  Mae- 
kason,  42  Pa.  St  330,  82  Am.  Dee. 
517;  In  re  Gatherwood's  Estate,  29 
Wkly.  Notes  Gas.  344;  Andreas  y. 
Lewis,  17  Wkly.  Notes  Cas.  270,  1 
Pa.  Co.  a.  293. 

Va, — ^Lewis  y.  Caperton,  8  Gratt. 
148. 

A  deed  cenTvylas  m  alaTe  for 
a  valuable  consideration,  with  a  reser- 
Yfttion  of  possession  to  the  Tender 
during  his  life  or  pleasure,  is  valid. 
Gullett  Y.  Lamberton,  6  Ark.  109. 


Fbefebences  to  Creditobs. 


460 


mon  law  right  of  preference.^  But  a  statute  declaring  invalid 
any  preference  given  by  an  insolvent^  applies  as  well  to  a  transfer 
of  specific  property  for  particular  debts  as  to  a  general  assign- 
ment for  the  benefit  of  creditors.^  In  some  states  preferences 
given  in  contemplation  of  insolvency  are  declared  by  statute  to 
inure  to  the  benefit  of  all  the  creditors  and  provision  is  made  for 
enforcing  the  rights  of  creditors  under  the  statute.^  But  these 
statutes  have  been  held  not  to  render  conveyances  fraudulent  or 
void  as  against  creditors  on  the  ground  that  they  are  preferential, 
except  in  proceedings  under  the  act  and  where  they  are  not  at- 
tacked conveyances  making  preferences  are  valid  as  at  common 
law." 


§  3.  Constitutionality  of  statutes. —  The  right  of  a  debtor, 
when  solvent,  to  transfer  property  is  within  the  constitutional 
protection  of  property  rights,  and  is  violated  by  a  statute  declar- 
ing that  every  transfer  of  property  to  prefer  creditors,  or  which 
"would  have  that  effect,"  shall  be  void,  without  limiting  it  to 
cases  of  insolvency,  and  such  a  statute  is,  therefore,  unconsti- 
tutional." 

§  4.  What  law  governs. — The  validity  of  a  transfer  of  real 
estate  made  by  a  debtor  to  his  creditors  by  way  of  preference  is 


28.  Qomez  y.  Hagaman,  84  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  148,  32  N.  Y.  Supp.  453; 
Wharton  ▼.  Clements,  3  DeL  Ch.  209; 
Young  ▼.  Clapp,  147  111.  176,  32  N. 
E.  187,  35  N.  E.  372;  Schroeder  ▼. 
Walsh,  120  111.  403,  11  N.  E.  70; 
Berry  v.  O'Connor,  33  Minn.  29,  21 
N.  W.  840;  Eldridge  v.  Phillipson, 
58  Miss.  270;  Jaffray  ▼.  Mathews, 
120  Mo.  317,  25  S.  W.  187;  Kava- 
naugh  ▼.  Oberfelder,  37  Neb.  647,  56 
N.  W.  316. 

29.  Wolf  V.  McGergin,  37  W.  Va. 
552,  16  S.  E.  797. 

30.  See  statutes  of  the  several 
states;  Ex  parte  Jordan,  50  Mass. 
292. 


31.  Redd  v.  Redd,  23  Ey.  L.  Rep. 
2379,  67  S.  W.  367;  Hoover  v. 
Hawks,  21  Ky.  L.  Rep.  190,  51  S.  W. 
606;  Atkins  v.  Hoeberlin,  19  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1547,  43  8.  W.  711;  Rosenberg 
V.  Smith,  19  Ky.  L.  Rep.  341,  40  S. 
W.  243;  Penniman  v.  Cole,  49  Mass. 
496;  Dyson  v.  St.  Paul  Nat.  Bank, 
74  Minn.  439,  77  N.  W.  236,  73  Am. 
St.  Rep.  358;  Berry  v.  (VConner,  33 
Minn.  20,  21  N.  W.  840;  Bartles  v. 
Dodd,  56  W.  Va.  383,  49  S.  E.  414. 

32.  Third  Nat.  Bank  v.  Divine 
Grocery  Co.,  97  Tcnn.  603,  37  S.  W. 
390,  34  L.  R.  A.  445;  Stratfon  v. 
Morris,  89  Tenn.  497,  15  S.  W.  87, 
12  L.  R.  A.  70. 


424 


Fraudulent  CoiryETANoss. 


at  death. — ^A  oonveyanoe  of  property  to  be  held  m  trust  for  the 
benefit  of  the  grantor  during  his  life^  with  remainder  over,  with 
reeerved  power  of  appointment  or  devise  or  disposition  at  hia 
deaths  is  fraudnlent  and  void  both  as  to  existing  and  subsequent 
creditors,  and  both  the  principal  and  income  may  be  subjected  ta 
the  claims  of  such  creditors.^ 

§  6.  Reservation  of  power  to  revoke. — ^A  reservation  in  a 
mortgage^  deed  of  trusty  or  contract  for  the  sale  of  property  of  the 
right  or  power  to  the  maker  or  vendor  to  revoke  or  rescind  the  con* 
tract  and  resume  the  ownership  of  the  property,  in  a  certain  events 
is  inconsistent  with  a  fair,  honesty  and  absolute  disposition  of  the 
property,  and  renders  the  transfer  fraudulent  and  void  and  sub- 
ject to  be  defeated  at  the  instance, of  creditore  of  the  maker  or 
vendor.**  The  same  rule  applies  to  a  conveyance  reserving  a  power 
equivalent  in  effect  to  a  power  of  revocation.*^  The  reservation 
to  the  vendee  of  the  right  to  rescind  or  cancel  the  contract  at  any 
time  before  the  purchase  money  is  paid  and  thus  restore  the  owner- 
ship of  the  property  to  the  seller,  or  the  right  to  relinquish  the  bar- 
gain whenever  he  chooses  and  on  a  redelivery  of  the  property  be 
repaid  whatever  he  has  expended,  is  likewise  fraudulent  as  to 


4S.  Soott  V.  Keane,  87  Md.  709, 
40  Atl.  1070,  42  L.  B.  A.  359;  Brin- 
ton  ▼.  Hook,  3  Md.  Ch.  477;  Ghorm- 
1^  y.  Smith,  139  Pa.  St.  584,  21  Atl. 
135,  27  Wkly.  Notes  Gas.  331,  23  Am. 
St  Bep.  215,  11  L.  B.  A.  565;  Appeal 
of  Mackason,  42  Pa.  St.  330,  82  Am. 
Dee.  517;  In  re  Catberwood's  Estate, 
29  Wkly.  Notes  Gas.  344;  Patrick  ▼. 
Smith,  2  Pa.  Super  Ct.  113;  Hunters 
V.  Waite,  3  Gratt.  (Va.)  28. 

44.  Westfall  ▼.  Jones,  23  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  9;  Biggs  v.  Murray,  2  Johns.  Ch. 
(N.  Y.)  665;  West  v.  Snodgrass,  17 
Ala.  549;  Cannon  v.  Peebles,  26  N.  C. 
204;  Jenigm  ▼.  Vaugfaan,  3  Drew. 
419,  2  Jur.  N.  S.  109,  25  L.  J.  Ch. 
338,  4  Wkly.  Bep.  214. 


46.  Biggs  ▼.  Murray,  2  Johns.  Ch. 
(N.  Y.)  565,  an  assignment  in  trust 
to  (pay  certain  releasing  creditors, 
but  if  they  should  refuse  to  release, 
then  in  trust,  after  paying  a  debt  due 
one  of  the  assignees,  for  such  credi- 
tors as  the  assignor  should  appoint; 
Lang  ▼.  Lee,  3  Band.  (Va.)  410,  a 
deed  of  trust,  the  sum  to  be  secured 
thereby  not  being  specified  therein, 
and  it  being  therein  agreed  that  the 
goods  should  remain  in  the  possession 
of  the  debtor,  with  authority  to  make 
8ales  of  them,  but  to  account  to  the 
trustee  if  called  on;  Tarback  y.  M&r- 
buiy,  2  Vem.  Ch.  510,  23  Eng.  Re- 
print, 926,  a  reservation  of  a  power 
to  mortgage. 


Pbefsbenoes  to  Cbsditobs. 


471 


statute.''  Under  the  rules  and  principles  stated  in  the  preceding 
sections  of  this  chapter,  a  valid  preference  by  an  insolvent  debtor 
may  be  made  to  one  or  more  creditors  by  the  conveyance  by 
deed  or  other  instrument  of  transfer  of  real  or  personal  property, 
either  directly  to  the  creditor  in  payment  i^id  satisfaction  of  his 
debt  or  daim,**  or  to  a  third  person  for  the  benefit  of  such  credi- 
tor or  creditors,**  or  to  a  trustee  for  the  benefit  of  the  creditors 


38.  V,  y. — Delaney  ▼.  Valentine, 
9upra;  Wilder  v.  Winne,  6  Gow.  284. 

U,  8. — ^Rioe  Y.  Adler-Goldman  Com- 
mission Gb.,  71  Fed.  151,  18  C.  C.  A. 
15. 

Col.— ^Priest  y.  Brown,  100  Cal. 
626,  35  Pac.  323. 

III. — Chicago,  etc.,  R.  Co.  v.  Wat- 
son, 113  lU.  195. 

Ifd.— Anderson  ▼.  Tydings,  3  Md. 
Ch.  167,  8  Md.  427,  63  Am.  Dec.  708. 

y.  J, — ^Metropolis  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Spragiie,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13. 

Pa, — ^York  County  Bank  ▼.  Carter, 
38  Pa.  St.  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  404; 
Uhler  ▼.  Maulpair,  23  Pa.  St  481; 
Covanhovan  v.  Hart>  21  Pa.  St.  495, 
60  Am.  Dec  57. 

Wcw*^— Troy  ▼.  Morse,  22  Wash. 
280,  60  Pac.  648;  Victor  ▼.  Gloyer, 
17  Wash.  37,  48  Pac.  788,  40  L.  R.  A. 
297. 

89.  N.  r. — Obermeyer  ▼.  Jung,  51 
App.  Div.  247,  64  N.  Y.  Supp.  969; 
Drury  v.  Wilson,  4  App.  Div.  232,  38 
K.  Y.  Supp.  638. 

U,  8. — Bamberger  v.  Schoolfleld, 
160  U.  S.  149,  16  Sup.  Ot.  225,  40  L. 
Ed.  374;  Smith  ▼.  Craft,  12  Fed.  856, 
11  Biss.  340,  appeal  dismiaaed,  123 
U.  S.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct.  106,  31  L.  Ed. 
267. 

Ala. — Cook  v.  Thornton,  109  Ala. 
523,  20  So.  14;  Bray  ▼.  Ely,  105  Ala. 
553,  17  So.  180;  Goetter  v.  Smith, 
104  Ala.  481,  16  So.  534;  Schloss  ▼. 
McGuiie,  102  Ala.  626,  15  So.  275; 


Bates  y.  Vandiver,  102  Ala.  240,  14 
So.  631;  Fbrgason  v.  Hall,  99  Ala. 
209,  13  So.  302;  PoHock  ▼.  Meyer,  96 
Ala.  172,  11  So.  385;  Ellison  v.  Moses, 
95  Ala.  221,  11  So.  347. 

Ill^OakioTd  v.  Dunlap,  63  111, 
App.  498. 

Ind. — ^Thomas  ▼.  Johnson,  137  Ind. 
244,  36  N.  E.  893. 

Kan. — Schram  v.  Taylor,  51  Kaa. 
547,  33  Pac.  315. 

iSry.—Young  ▼.  Stallings,  44  Ky. 
307. 

Md,  —  ConmuNiwealth  Bank  t. 
Keams,  100  Md.  202,  59  Atl.  1010; 
Thompson  ▼.  Williams,  100  Md.  195, 
60  Atl.  26. 

ifo.— Kuykendall  v.  McDonald,  15 
Mo.  416,  57  Am.  Dec.  212. 

Pa. — Snayberger  v.  Fahl,  196  Pa. 
St.  336,  45  Atl.  1065,  78  Am.  Dee. 
818;  Clemens  ▼.  Dayis,  7  Pa.  St.  263. 

Tew. — Oreenleye  v.  Blum,  59  Tex. 
124. 

r*.— Lyon  ▼.  Rood,  12  Vt.  233. 

n^at  a  deMor  sold  kis  stock 
of  goods  without  inTontory  mmA 
without  laspeotioii  by  the  Ton- 
doe,  in  payment  of  a  pre-existing 
debt,  does  not  render  the  sale  fraud- 
ulent as  to  other  creditors.  Cocke  t. 
Carrington  Shoe  Co.  (Miss.  1895),  IS 
So.  683. 

40.  Delaney  v.  Valentine,  154  X. 
Y.  692,  49  N.  E.  65,  rev'g  11  App.  Dit. 
(N.  Y.)  631,  41  N.  Y.  Supp.  1123, 
and     distinguishing     Sutherland     t. 


472 


Fraudulbnt  Conveyances. 


to  be  preferred,  unless  the  deed  of  tmst  falls  within  the  prohibi-^ 
tion  of  the  assignment  laws  or  is  tainted  with  frand  ;^  by  mortgage 
of  the  real  e^ate  or  personal  property  of  the  debtor  or  both,^ 


Bradner,  116  N.  T.  410,  22  N.  E.  554; 
Ck>Uomb  ▼.  Caldwell,  16  N.  Y.  486; 
Barney  ▼.  Griffin,  2  N.  Y.  365;  Good- 
rich ▼.  Downs,  6  Hill  (N.  Y.),  438, 
a  transfer  by  a  debtor  whose  property 
is  insufficient  to  pay  his  debts  in  full, 
of  a  portion  of  his  property  to  a  third 
person  to  secure  a  part  of  his  credi- 
tors, is  not  within  the  Statute  of  Per- 
sonal Uses,  when  it  ccmtains  no  pro- 
vision for  returning  any  surplus,  and 
if  made  in  good  faith,  for  the  purpose 
of  giving  lawful  preferences  in  the 
payment  of  honest  debts,  and  so  not 
fraudulent  in  fact^  it  is  not  fraudu- 
lent in  law,  but  is  valid  as  against 
other  creditors;  Morse  v.  Slason,  13 
Vt.  296,  an  insolvent  debtor  may  pre- 
fer some  one  of  his  creditors  hy  a 
deed  of  land,  duly  executed  and  de- 
livered to  a  third  person  in  trust,  to 
be  delivered  to  the  grantee  at  the  de- 
cease of  the  grantor,  unless  he  shall 
otherwise  direct  during  his  lifetime. 

41.  V.  fif.— Union  Bank  v.  Kansas 
City  Bank,  136  U.  S.  223,'  10  Sup.  a. 
1013,  34  L.  Ed.  341,  overruling  Mar- 
tin V.  Hausman,  14  Fed.  160,  and 
cases  following  it;  Bean  v.  Patterson, 
122  U.  S.  496,  7  Sup.  Ct.  1298,  30  L. 
£d.  1126;  Ontario  Bank  v.  Hurst,  103 
Fed.  231,  43  C.  C.  A.  193. 

^to.— Stetson  v.  Miller,  36  Ala. 
642;  Miller  v.  Stetson,  32  Ala.  161; 
Evans  v.  Lamar,  21  Ala.  333. 

'  Arik.->Dews  v.  Cornish,  20  Ark.  332. 

OoZ.— Heath  v.  Wilson,  139  CaL 
362,  73  Pac.  182. 

Mom, — New  En^^d  Mar.  Ins.  Co. 
V.  Chandler,  16  Mass.  276;  Stevens  v. 
Bell,  6  Mass.  339;  Henshaw  v.  Sum- 
ner, 23  Piek.  446. 


Mich, — Geer  v.  Traders'  Bank,  132 
Mich.  215,  98  K.  W.  437. 

Miss, — ^Baldwin  v.  Flash,  58  Miss. 
593. 

ifo.^Wood  V.  Porter,  179  Mo.  66, 
77  S.  W.  762,  deed  of  trust  of  debtor's 
equity  of  redemption;  Crothers  v. 
Busch,  153  Mo.  606,  55  S.  W.  149; 
Jaffrey  v.  Mathews,  120  Mo.  317,  25 
S.  W.  187;  Crow  v.  Beardsley,  6S 
Mo.  435;  Bell  v.  Thompson,  3  Mo. 
84. 

y.  J, — ^National  Bank  of  Metropo- 
lis V.  Sprague,  20  K  J.  Eq.  13. 

Tenn, — Fidelity,  etc,  Co.  v.  CBries 
(Ch.  App.  1896),  38  S.  W.  417. 

Tea, — Johnson  v.  Robinson,  68  Tex. 
399,  4  S.  W.  625;  Iglehart  v.  Willis, 
58  Tex.  306;  Martin-Brown  Co.  v. 
Siebe,  6  Tex.  Civ.  App.  232,  26  S.  W. 
327;  Pessels  v.  Schwab  Clothing  Co. 
(Civ.  App.  1894),  25  S.  W.  814;  But- 
ler V.  Sanger,  4  Tex.  Civ.  App.  411,  2$ 
S.  W.  487. 

Eng. — ^Alton  v.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4 
Ch.  622,  38  L.  J.  Ch.  669,  21  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  282,  17  Wkly.  Rep.  1034. 

Uader  the  Qeorsla  atatnte  a 
conveyance  by  an  insolvent  debtor  in 
trust  for  a  part  of  his  creditors  was 
void  as  to  the  creditors  excluded. 
Norton  v.  Cobb,  20  Ga.  44;  Brown  v. 
Lee,  7  Ga.  267;  Ezekiel  v.  Dixon,  a 
Ga.  146. 

42.  "N,  Y, — ^Delaney  v.  Valentine, 
154  N.  Y.  692,  49  N.  E.  65 ;  Carpenter 
V.  Muren,  42  Barb.  300.  See  also  New 
York  County  Nat.  Bank  v.  American 
Surety  Co.,  69  App.  Div.  153,  74  N. 
Y.  Supp.  692,  aff'd  174  N.  Y.  644,  67 
N.  E.  1086;  Manchester  v.  Tibbetts,  4 
N.  Y.  Supp.  23. 


PSEFEBEKCBS  TO  CbEDITOBS. 


473 


unless  the  mortgage  by  its  terms  attempts  to  prevent  access  by  the 


TJ.  R— Davis  ▼.  Schwartz,  165  U. 
a  631,  15  Sup.  Ct.  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
289;  Huiskamp  v.  Moline  Wagon  Co., 
121  U.  S.  310,  7  Sup.  Ot.  899,  30  L. 
Ed.  791;  Foster  v.  McAlester,  114 
Fed.  145,  52  C.  C.  A.  107. 

Ala.— McWilliamB  ▼.  Rodgers,  56 
Ala.  87. 

Ark. — ^Marquese  ▼.  Felsenthal,  58 
Ark.  293,  24  S.  W.  493;  Huff  v. 
Roane,  22  Ark.  184;  Ooz  ▼.  Fraley,  26 
Ark.  20. 

Ool.— Wood  T.  Franks,  67  Gal.  32, 
7  Pac.  50. 

(To. — ^HollingBworth,  t.  Johns,  02 
Ga.  428,  17  S.  E.  621;  Solomon  ▼. 
sparks,  27  Ga.  385;  Lavender  v. 
Thomas,  18  Ga.  668;  Davis  v.  Ander- 
son, 1  Ga.  176. 

/{Z.— Union  Nat.  Bank  v.  State 
Nat  Bank,  168  111.  256,  48  N.  E.  169, 
aff'g  68  111.  App.  431;  Weber  v. 
Mick,  131  ni.  520^  23  N.  E.  646; 
Kahn  v.  Kohn,  35  111.  App.  437. 

Ind, — ^Ayers  v.  Adams,  82  Ind.  109. 

Iowa. — Cathoart  v.  Grieve,  104 
Iowa,  330,  73  N.  W.  835;  Southern 
White  Lead  Co.  v.  Haas,  73  Iowa, 
390,  33  N.  W.  657,  35  N.  W.  494; 
Farwell  v.  Howard,  26  Iowa,  381; 
Fromme  v.  Jones,  13  Iowa,  474. 

Kan. — ^Matthewson  v.  Caldwell,  59 
Kan.  126,  52  Pac.  104;  Connor  v. 
Hardwick,  53  Kan.  60,  35  Pac.  777; 
First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Naill,  52  Kan.  211, 
34  Pac.  797 ;  Standard  Implement  Co. 
V.  Parlin,  etc.,  Co.,  51  Kan.  632,  33 
Pac.  362;  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Ride- 
nour,  46  Kan.  707,  27  Pac.  150,  26 
Am.  St.  Rep.  167;  Randall  v.  Shaw, 
28  Kan.  419. 

JTy.— Brewer  v.  Cosby,  71  Ky.  388; 
Kennaird  v.  Adams,  50  Ky.  102; 
Robinson  v.  Collier,  50  Ky.  332,  52 
Am.  Dee.  572. 


Ma»B. — Henshaw  v.  Sumner,  40 
Mass.  446;  Harrison  v.  Phillips  Acad- 
emy, 12  Mass.  456. 

Mich. — Ferris  v.  McQueen,  94  Mich. 
367,  54  N.  W.  164;  Warner  v.  Little- 
field,  89  Mich.  329,  50  N.  W.  721; 
Whitfield  V.  Stiles,  57  Mich.  410,  24 
N.  W.  119;  Adams  v.  Niemann,  46 
Mich.  135,  8  N.  W.  719. 

MiM. — Summers  v.  Roob,  42  Miss. 
749,  2  Am.  Rep.  653. 

Mo. — Schroeder  v.  Bobbitt,  108  Mo. 

289,  18  S.  W.  1093;  Colbern  v.  Robin- 
son, 80  Mo.  541;  Donk  Bros.  Coal, 
etc.,  Co.  V.  Stevens,  74  Mo.  App.  39. 

If  eh. — Grand  Island  Banking  Co.  v. 
C6BteUo,  45  Neb.  119,  63  N.  W.  376; 
Kilpatrick-Koch  Dry  Goods  Co.  v. 
McPheely,  37  Neb.  800,  56  N.  W.  389; 
First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Lowrey,  36  Neb. 

290,  54  N.  W.  568;  Davis  v.  Scott,  27 
Neb.  642,  43  N.  W.  407;  Grimes  v. 
Farrington,  19  Neb.  44,  26  N.  W.  618. 

JV.  J. — Green  v.  McCrane,  55  N.  J. 
Eq.  436,  37  Atl.  318;  Metropolis  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13; 
Jones  V.  Naughright,  10  N.  J.  Eq. 
298. 

If.  i>.— Cutter  V.  Pollack,  4  N.  D. 
205,  59  N.  W.  1062,  50  Am.  St.  Rep. 
644,  25  L.  R.  A.  377. 

Ohio. — ^Kemp  v.  Walker,  16  Ohio, 
118. 

Ofcte.— Jaffray  v.  Wolf,  1  Okla. 
312,  35  Pac.  945. 

Pow— Lindle  v.  Neville,  13  Serg.  & 
R.  227. 

S.  C. — ^Bomar  v.  Means,  53  S.  C. 
232,  31  S.  E.  234;  McGee  v.  Wells, 

62  S.  C.  472,  30  S.  E.  602;  Central, 
etc.,  R.  Co.  V.  Claghom,  Speers  Eq. 
545. 

a.  D. — Jones  v.  Meyer,  7  S.  D.  152, 

63  N.  W.  773. 

Tenn.  —  PhiUipa     v.    Conningham 


474 


J'SAUDULENT  CoNFETANCES. 


unsecured  creditors  to  the  equity  of  redemption  ;^  by  a  confession 
of  judgment;^  by  allowing  a  judgment  to  be  taken  by  default;^ 


(Ch.  App.  1899),  58  S.  W.  463;  Me- 
Grew  y.  Hancock  (Ch.  App.  1899), 
52  S.  W.  500. 

Tew. — CJompton  ▼.  Marahall,  SS 
Tex.  60,  27  S.  W.  121,  28  S.  W.  518, 
29  6.  W.  1059;  Martin-Brown  Co.  y. 
Siebe,  6  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  232,  26  8.  W. 
327. 

F*.— McGregor  y.  Chase,  37  Vt.  225. 

Wash. — ^Turner  y.  Iowa  Nat.  Bank, 
2  Wash.  192,  26  Pac.  256. 

Wm.— Kickbiisch  y.  Corwith,  108 
Wis.  634,  85  N.  W.  148;  Steyens  y. 
Breen,  75  Wis.  595,  44  N.  W.  645; 
Chicago  Coffin  Co.  y.  Maxwell,  70 
Wis.  282,  35  N.  W.  733.  See  Berry 
y.  O'Connor,  33  Minn.  29,  21  N.  W. 
840,  as  to  effect  of  insoly^it  law. 

43.  Chafee  y.  Blatchford,  6  Mackey 
(D.  C),  459. 

44.  ^^  y.— Galle  y.  Todd,  148  N. 
Y.  270,  42  N.  E.  673,  aff'g  74  Hun, 
542,  26  N.  Y.  Supp.  633;  Columbus 
Watch  Co.  y.  Hodenpyl,  135  N.  Y. 
430,  32  N.  E.  239,  affg  61  Hun,  557, 
16  N.  Y.  Supp.  337;  Robinson  y.  Haw- 
ley,  45  App.  Diy.  287,  61  N.  Y.  Supp. 
138;  Rothchild  y.  Mannesoyitch,  29 
App.  Diy.  580,  51  K.  Y.  Supp.  253; 
London  y.  Martin,  79  Hun,  229,  29  N. 
Y.  Supp.  396,  ajfd  149  K.  Y.  586, 
44  N.  E.  1125;  Childs  y.  Latham, 
60  Hun,  578,  14  N.  Y.  Supp.  507; 
Stein  y.  Leyy,  55  Hun,  381,  8  N.  Y. 
Supp.  505;  Beards  y.  Wheeler,  11 
Hun,  539;  Williams  y.  Brown,  4 
Johns.  Ch.  682. 

U.  8, — Rice  y.  Adler-Goldman  Com- 
mission Co.,  71  Fed.  151,  18  C.  C.  A. 
15. 

Ala. — Warren  y.  Hunt,  114  Ala. 
506,  21  So.  939.  Compare  First  Nat. 
Bank  y.  Acme  White  Lead,  etc.,  Co., 
123  Ala.  344,  26  So.  354. 


(M.— Meeker  y.  Harris,  19  OaL 
278,  79  Am.  Dec.  215. 

Del, — Slessinger  y.  Toplds,  1  Mair. 
140,  40  Atl.  717. 

III. — ^Hayens,  etc.,  Co.  y.  First  Nat. 
Bank,  162  111.  35,  44  N.  E.  384; 
Young  y.  Clapp,  147  HI.  176,  32  N. 
E.  187,  35  N.  E.  372;  Chicago  Stamp- 
ing Go.  y.  Hanchett,  25  HI.  App.  198. 

Md. — Citizens'  F.,  etc,  Ins.  Co.  t. 
WaUis,  23  Md.  173. 

Miss, — ^Holberg  y.  Jaffray,  64  Miaa. 
746,  2  So.  168. 

Jfo.— Hard  y.  Foster,  98  Mo.  297, 
11  S.  W.  760. 

N.  J.— Goodwin  y.  Hamill,  26  N.  J. 
Eq.  24. 

Ohio, — Hauel  y.  Mintser,  1  Handy, 
375,  12  Ohio  Dec.  191. 

Pa, — Appeal  of  Cftndee,  191  Pa.  St. 
644,  43  Atl.  1093;  Braden  y.  O'Neil, 
183  Pa.  St.  462,  38  Atl.  1023,  68 
Am.  St.  Rep.  761;  Werner  y.  Zier- 
fuss,  162  Pa.  St.  360,  29  Atl.  737; 
Lake  Shore  Banking  Co.  y.  Fuller,  110 
Pa.  St.  156,  1  Atl.  731;  Walker  y. 
Marine  Nat.  Bank,  98  Pa.  St.  574; 
Keen  y.  Kleckner,  42  Pa.  St.  529; 
Guy  y.  McHree,  26  Pa.  St.  92;  Wor- 
man  y.  Wolfersberger,  19  Pa.  St.  59; 
Dayis  y.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St.  82;  Ap- 
peal of  Blakley,  7  Pa.  St.  449; 
Greenwalt  y.  Austin,  1  Grant,  169; 
Haldeman  y.  Michael,  6  Watts  ft  8. 
128,  40  Am.  Dec.  546;  Heiney  y.  An- 
derson,  9  Lane.  Bar,  12;  Wetmore  t. 
Wisner,  2  Luz.  Leg.  Obs.  204. 

S.  C— Sloan  y.  Hunter,  56  8.  C. 
385,  34  S.  E.  658,  76  Am.  St.  Rep. 
551;  Weinges  y.  Cash,  15  S.  C.  44; 
Beyins  y.  Dunham,  1  Speers,  39; 
Cureton  y.  Doby,  10  Rich.  Eq.  411,  73 
Am.  Dec.  96;  Bird  y.  Aitken,  Rioe  Eq. 
73 ;  Hill  y.  Rogers,  Rioe  Eq.  7. 


FSKFEBSNCES  TO  CbEDITOBS. 


476 


bj  consenting  to  an  order  in  a  creditors'  suit  requiring  the  debtor 
to  transfer  property  to  the  receiver;**  or  by  having  a  policy  of 
life  insurance  on  his  life  made  payable  to  one  or  more  creditors.*^ 
A  conveyance  absolute  in  terms  but  intended  by  the  parties  to 
operate  as  a  mortgage  is  not^  as  a  rule^  necessarily  fraudulent  as 
to  the  grantor's  creditors,  but  may  be  given  effect  as  a  mortgage.^ 
The  fraudulent  intent  of  the  debtor  cannot  be  imputed  to  the 
creditor  who  consents  to  confession  of  judgment  in  his  favor,  nor 
does  such  consent  create  the  relation  of  principal  and  agent  be- 
tween the  parties.^  Fraud  cannot  be  inferred  from  the  fact 
that  a  single  judgment  by  confession  includes  the  separate  claims 
of  several  creditors,  the  object  being  to  place  them  on  a  footing 
of  equality.  Indeed  the  practice  is  rather  to  be  commended,  in- 
asmuch as  it  gives  the  judgment  creditors  equal  rights  and  pre- 
vents a  race  of  diligence  which  might  occur  if  separate  judgments 
were  given."  Where  a  partner  desiring  to  prefer  a  creditor  of 
the  firm,  the  other  partner  being  unwilling  to  do  so,  assists  the 
creditor  in  suing  out  an  attachment  against  the  firm,  his  act 


Va, — Jobnson  ▼.  Lucas,  103  Va.  36, 
4S  S.  E.  497. 

Eng. — ^Meux  ▼.  Howell,  4  East,  1; 
Holdbird  ▼.  Anderson,  5  T.  R.  235. 

45.  Rothchild  v.  Mannesovitch,  20 
App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  580,  51  N.  Y.  Supp. 
253,  a  judgment  by  default  which 
gives  preference  to  a  certain  credi- 
tor, though  irregularly  rendered,  is 
not  to  be  deemed  on  that  account 
alone  a  fraudulent  one;  Appeal  of 
Morgan,  20  Pa.  St.  152;  Worman  v. 
Wolfersberger,  19  Pa.  8t  50. 

Contra, — ^Wright  v.  Fergus  Falls 
Nat.  Bank,  48  Minn.  120,  50  N.  W. 
1030. 

Where  a  debtor  submits  to  a  de- 
fault, and  judgment  is  taken  by  the 
creditor  for  the  whole  claim  in  suit, 
though  such  claim  has  been  partly 
satisfied,  the  judgment  is  void  in  toio 
against    attaching    creditors    of    the 


debtor.    Pierce  v.  Partridge,  44  Mass. 
44. 

46.  Young  V.  Clapp,  147  lU.  176, 
32  N.  E.  187,  35  N.  E.  372. 

47.  Dunckel  v.  Failing,  52  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  615,  5  N.  Y.  Supp.  504. 

48.  Doswell  ▼.  Adler,  28  Ark.  82; 
Cathcart  ▼.  Grieve,  104  Iowa,  330,  73 
N.  W.  835;  Harrison  ▼.  Phillips 
Academy,  12  Mass.  456.  Compare 
Fuller  y.  Griffith,  91  Iowa,  632,  60  N. 
W.  247;  Ellis  ▼.  Musselman,  61  Neb. 
262,  85  N.  W.  75.  See  also  Absolute 
oonyeyance  as  security,  chap.  VI,  $ 
15,  supra;  Secret  reservations  of 
trusts,  chap.  X,  §  14,  supra. 

49.  Hard  v.  Foster,  98  Mo.  297, 
11  S.  W.  760.  See  Preference  not  in- 
validated by  mere  fraudulent  intent 
§  23,  infra, 

50.  Harris  v.  Alcock,  10  Gill  &  J. 
(Md.)  226,  32  Am.  Dec.  158. 


476 


Fraudulbnt  Oonveyawcbs. 


does  not  neoessarilj  render  the  suit  a  collusive  one  as  against 
other  firm  creditors."  A  valid  preference  may  be  effected  by 
the  debtor's  organizing  a  corporation,  transferring  his  property 
to  the  company,  and  having  stock  issued  to  pay  or  secure  certain 
of  his  creditors." 


§  6.  Sale  to  pay  debts  to  preferred  creditors. — An  insolvent 
or  failing  debtor,  who  has  the  right  to  prefer  certain  creditors,  is 
not  required,  in  the  exercise  of  that  right,  to  convey  his  property 
directly  to  such  creditors,  but  he  may  sell  and  transfer  his  prop- 
erty at  a  fair  valuation  to  a  responsible  third  person,  and  pay 
the  proceeds  to  certain  creditors  to  the  exclusion  of  others,"  al- 
though the  purchaser  knows  of  the  insolvency  of  the  debtor  and 


61.  Hyinan  y.  Stadler,  63  Miss. 
3S2.  See  also  CoIlusiTe  attachment, 
cliap.  II,  S  15,  8upra. 

52.  Fisher  ▼.  CampbeU,  101  Fed. 
156,  41  C.  C.  A.  256;  Scripps  T. 
Crawford,  123  Mich.  173,  81  N.  W. 
1098;  Troy  ▼.  Morse,  22  Wash.  280, 
60  Pac.  648.  Compare  Colorado 
Trading,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Acres  Commis- 
sion Co.,  18  Colo.  App.  253,  70  Pac. 
954.  See  also  Organization  of  cor- 
poration, chap.  II,  §  16,  supra, 

63.  N,  r.— Ruhl  V.  Phillips,  48  N. 
Y.  125,  8  Am.  Rep.  522;  Bedell  t. 
Chase,  34  N.  Y.  386. 

U,  B. — Clements  v.  Moore,  6  WaU. 
299,  18  L.  Ed.  786. 

Ato.— Fargason  ▼.  Hall,  99  Ala. 
209,  13  So.  302. 

Oal.— Priest  ▼.  Brown,  100  Cal. 
626,  35  Pac.  323.  Compare  Mamlodc 
▼.  White,  20  Cal.  598. 

ilL— Holbrook  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
10  111.  App.  140. 

Ind.^W\\coTon  v.  Annesky,  23 
Ind.  285,  where  a  creditor  bought  the 
debtor's  goods  and  paid  his  own  debt 
and  debts  of  other  preferred  credi- 


tors; Anderscm  ▼.  Smith,  5  Bladcf. 
395. 

Kan, — ^Bishop  ▼.  Jones,  28  Kan. 
680. 

P«.— York  Oounty  Bank  v.  Carter^ 
38  Pa.  St.  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494. 

re».— Ellis  V.  Valentine,  66  Tex.  532. 

Vt — Gregory  ▼.  Harrington,  33  Vt. 
241. 

B«t  vader  statutea  prohibit* 
ins  pref ereaoes  by  a  debtor  when 
insolvent  or  contemplating  insolvency^ 
a  sale  to  pay  preferred  creditors  is 
unlawful.  King  v.  Moody,  79  Ky. 
63;  and  the  preferred  creditor  must 
bring  in  the  money  so  received  to  be 
distributed  ratably  in  payment  pro 
tanto  of  the  debts  due  to  him  and  the 
creditors  at  whose  instance  the  trans- 
action is  set  aside.  Powers-Taylor 
Drug  Co.  V.  Faulooner,  52  W.  Va.  581. 
44  S.  £.  204;  Wolf  v.  McGugin,  37 
W.  Va.  552,  16  S.  E.  797.  The  rem- 
edy of  a  creditor  who  suffers  by  such 
preferential  act  is  to  institute  & 
suit  to  have  it  treated  as  an  assign- 
ment for  the  benefit  of  all  the  credi* 
tors.  Hoover  v.  Hawks,  21  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  190,  51  8.  W.  606. 


Preferences  to  Creditors. 


477 


of  his  intent  to  make  a  pref  erenoe,^  and  although  the  sale  is  made 
on  credit^  the  vendor  taking  the  purchaser's  notes,"^  unless  the 
purchaser  knows  of  the  vendor's  fraudulent  intent  to  hinder, 
delay  and  defraud  his  creditors.^  An  insolvent  or  failing  debtor 
may  sell  his  property  to  a  third  person  in  consideration  that  the 
purchaser  pay  certain  debts  owing  by  the  debtor  to  certain  speci- 
fied creditors  in  the  absence  of  any  fraudulent  intent.^  Thus, 
deeds  executed  by  one  who  was  largely  indebted  as  endorser  of 
notes  of  a  corporation  in  which  he  was  a  stockholder,  conveying 
property  to  his  children,  for  a  consideration  which  was  not  inade- 
quate, and  which  was  fully  paid  by  taking  up  such  of  the  obliga- 
tions upon  which  the  father  was  endorser  as  he  directed,  are 


54.  N.  Y.— Ruhl  V.  PhiUips,  4S  N. 
T.  125,  8  Am.  Bep.  522. 

U.  8, — Clements  v.  Moore,  6  Wall. 
299,  18  L.  Ed.  786. 

Oal — Priest  v.  Brown,  100  Cal. 
626,  35  Pac.  323. 

Pa, — ^York  County  Bank  v.  Carter, 
38  Pa.  8t.  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494. 

Tew. — Ellis  y.  Valentine,  65  Tex. 
532. 

Vt, — Gregory  v.  Harrington,  33 
Vt.  241. 

55.  Buhl  V.  Phillips,  48  N.  T.  125, 
8  Am.  Bep.  522;  Bedell  v.  Chase,  34 
N.  Y.  386;  Clements  v.  Moore,  6 
Wall.  (U.  S.)  299,  18  L.  Ed.  786; 
Priest  ▼.  Brown,  100  Cal.  626,  36 
Pac.  323;  Gregory  v.  Harrington,  33 
Vt.  241.      • 

56.  Buhl  ▼.  Philips,  48  N.  Y.  125, 
8  Am.  Bep.  522. 

57.  U.  S. — Blackmore  v.  Parkes, 
81  Fed.  899,  26  C.  C.  A.  670. 

Ind, — ^Wilcoxon  v.  Annesley,  23 
Ind.  285;  Anderson  v.  Smith,  5 
Blackf.  395. 

Ky, — ^Bosenberg  y.  Smith,  19  Ky. 
L.  Bep.  341,  40  8.  W.  243,  such  a 
sale  is  yalid  unless  attacked  under 
the  statute. 


Or.— Hesse  y.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202, 
68  Pac  751. 

Pa.— Uhler  y.  Maulfair,  23  Pa.  St. 
481. 

Tea?.— Ellis  y.  Valentine,  65  T^x. 
532. 

Wi8. — Greene,  etc.,  Co.  y.  Beming- 
ton,  72  Wis.  648,  39  S.  W.  767,  40 
N.  W.  643;  Ingram  y.  Osbom,  70 
Wis.  184,  35  N.  W.  304. 

Asswmption  of  debts  hj 
sraatee. — When  an  insolyent  mer- 
cantile firm  sells  its  stock  of  mer- 
chandise to  a  disinterested  party, 
such  purchaser  may,  as  a  part  of  the 
purchase  money,  make  a  note  pay- 
able directly  to  a  bank  that  holds 
the  note  of  said  firm  for  a  bona  fide 
pre-existing  debt,  and  substitute 
such  note  for  the  note  of  said  firm 
held  by  the  bank,  under  Code,  chap. 
74,  S  2,  as  amended  by  Acts  1895, 
chap.  4,  making  preferential  trans- 
fers by  an  insolyent  fraudulent  as  to 
sreditors,  but  proyiding  that  nothing 
in  said  section  shall  affect  any  trans- 
fer of  any  "eyidence  of  debt  in  pay- 
ment of  or  as  collateral  security  for 
the  payment  of  a  bona  fide  debt," 
whether  made  at  the  time  such  debt 


478 


FbAUDULEWT   CoNVEYAirCES. 


not  fraudulent  as  to  other  creditors  of  the  grantor,  where  prefer* 
enoes  were  permitted  bj  the  laws  of  the  state." 

§  7.  Failure  to  apply  proceeds  to  debts. — A  purchaser  of  prop- 
erty from  an  insolvent  debtor,  who  believed  at  the  time  that 
the  purchase  money  notes  were  to  be  used  in  a  valid  preference 
of  certain  creditors,  is  not  boimd  to  see  that  they  are  in  fact  so 
applied  and  is  not  guilty  of  any  fraud  because  they  are  not  ap- 
plied in  payment  of  such  creditors,  or  are  subsequently  used  for 
a  fraudulent  or  invalid  purpose,  and  the  sale  cannot  be  impeached 
by  reason  of  such  facts."  But  if  the  property  is  bought  by  the 
purchaser  partly  with  a  view  of  aiding  the  debtor  in  preferring 
certain  creditors,  preferences  of  creditors  being  allowed  by  the 
lex  loci,  the  purchaser  is  in  equity  responsible  to  the  unpreferred 
creditors  for  so  much  of  the  purchase  price  as  was  applied  by  the 
debtor  to  his  own  use  and  not  to  the  payment  of  creditors." 

§  8.  Splitting  demand  to  expedite  recovery. — The  parties  to 
a  large  demand  may,  by  agreement,  divide  it,  and  several  con- 
fessions of  judgment  by  the  debtor,  before  a  justice,  for  the 
parts,  are  lawful.^  It  is  lawful  for  a  debtor,  owing  a  large  debt, 
to  divide  it  into  smaller  sums,  in  order  to  enable  his  creditor  to 
sue  immediately  before  a  magistrate  and  in  that  manner  obtain 
judgments  more  speedily  than  his  other  creditors  could,  and  thus 
give  such  creditor  a  preference.  A  transaction  by  a  debtor  is  not 
fraudulent  for  merely  baffling  one  creditor  in  order  to  pay  an- 
other." 


18  contracted  or  in  payment  of  a  pre- 
existing debt.  Merchant  &  Co.  ▼. 
Whitescarver,  47  W.  Va.  861,  34  8. 
E.  813.  See  also  Annatrong  v.  Oil 
Well  Supply  Co.,  47  W.  Va.  466,  35 
8.  E.  967. 

58.  Corwine  t.  Thompson  Nat. 
Bank,  105  Fed.  196,  44  C.  C.  A.  442. 

59.  Priest  t.  Brown,  100  Cal.  626, 
35  Pac.  323.  See  also  Gist  v.  Bar- 
row, 42  Ark.  521.     See  Duty  to  see 


to    application    of    prooeeds,    chap. 
XIII,  §  16,  infra, 

60.  Clements  y.  Moore,  6  Wall. 
(U.  S.)  209,  18  L.  Ed.  786. 

61.  Cornell  ▼.  Cook,  7  Cow.  (N. 
Y.)   310. 

62.  Andrews  v.  Kaufmans,  60  Ga. 
669;  Alexander  ▼.  Young,  23  Ga. 
616;  Bank  of  SaTannah  v.  Planters' 
Bank,  22  Ga.  466;  Lavender  ▼. 
Tbomaa,   18  Ga.  668;   Newdigate  ▼. 


Fbbfebences  to  Cbsditobs. 


479 


§  9.  Delq^ation  of  power  to  prefer.— The  delegation  of  the 
debtor's  power  of  preference  in  an  instrument  conveying  property 
for  the  benefit  of  creditors  renders  the  instrument  void  as  to 
his  creditors,  since  the  right  to  give  preference  to  creditors  is  a 
personal  privilege  of  the  debtor  which  cannot  be  delegated  by 
him  to  another  to  be  exercised  at  the  latter's  discretion.^  If 
preferences  are  to  be  given,  the  relative  interest  of  the  creditors 
in  the  assigned  property  must  be  fixed  by  the  assignment  itself.  A 
clause  giving  assignees  power  to  give  preferences  in  their  dis- 
cretion avoids  the  assignment  for  it  might  be  used  to  coerce  credi- 
tors into  compromising.^ 

§1  10.  Nature  ot  prc^erty  transferred.— The  nature  of  the 
property  transferred  by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  by  way  of  preference 
to  pay  or  secure  the  debt  is  immaterial.^  A  debtor  may  pay  a 
creditor  his  just  debt  in  land  at  a  fair  valuation,^  by  the  assign- 
ment of  a  judgment,*^  or  a  contract,"  by  the  assignment  of  wages 


Jacobs,  9  Dana  (Ky.)  17.  But  see 
Beach  y.  Atkinson,  87  Ga.  288,  13 
8.  E.  691,  collusion  between  a  non- 
resident debtor  and  a  creditor  by 
which  the  former  enables  the  latter 
to  obtain  judgments  in  advance  of 
the  time  in  which  another  creditor 
who  has  previously  commenced  pro- 
ceedings can  obtain  judgment,  for 
the  purpose  of  defeating  the  latter's 
rights,  will  invalidate  the  judg- 
ments so  obtained. 

69.  Harvey  v.  Mix,  24  Conn.  406; 
Wagoner  v.  Ckx>ley,  17  HI.  239; 
8eger  v.  Thomas,  107  Mo.  635,  18  8. 
W.  33;  Hargardine-McKittrick  Dry 
Goods  Co.  V.  Camahan,  79  Mo.  App. 
219.  Compare  Dubose  v.  Dubose,  7 
Ala.  235,  42  Am.  Dec.  588,  a  discre- 
tion given  to  a  trustee,  for  whose 
indemnity  the  trust  is  created,  to  pay 
first  either  of  two  debts,  for  which 
he  is  liable  as  surety,  warrants  no  in- 
ference of  fraudulent  intention. 


64.  Strong  v.  8kinner,  4  Barb.(N. 
T.)  646;  Boardman  v.  Halliday,  10 
Paige  (N.  T.),  223;  Bamum  v. 
Hempstead,  7  Paige   (N.  Y.),  668. 

66.  See  cases  cited  in  first  note  to 
first  section  of  this  chapter. 

66.  Thomas  v.  Johnson,  137  Ind. 
244,  36  N.  E.  893;  Covanhovan  v. 
Hart»  21  Pa.  St.  495,  60  Am.  Dec. 
67. 

67.  Langert  v.  David,  14  Wash. 
389,  44  Pac.  875,  an  attorney 
although  knowing  of  a  judgment 
against  his  client,  may  secure  him- 
self for  service  rendered  and  money 
advanced  by  taking  an  assignment  of 
a  judgment  against  a  third  person, 
which  he  procures  in  the  client's 
favor,  and  it  is  immaterial  that  to 
do  so  he  is  obliged  to  purchase  the 
entire  judgment,  crediting  thereon 
the  amount  of  his  claim. 

68.  Ingram  v.  Osbom,  70  Wis. 
184,  35  N.  W.  304. 


480 


Fbaudulent  Conveyanoes. 


or  salary,**  or  by  the  transfer  of  a  promissory  note,™  or  other 
personal  property.  A  failing  debtor  may  use  property  bought  on 
credit  of  one  to  pay  another.^  The  doctrine  that  the  capital  of 
a  corporation  is  a  trust  fund  for  the  payment  of  its  debts  can- 
not be  so  extended  as  to  subject  such  capital  appropriated  in  pay* 
ment  of  a  claim  for  the  construction  of  a  plant  for  the  company 
to  a  trust  in  favor  of  the  contractors  on  account  of  supplies  fur- 
nished the  latter  for  the  plant.  And  a  creditor  of  the  contractor 
to  construct  the  plant  of  the  corporation,  on  account  of  supplies 
furnished  for  the  plant,  is  not  entitled  to  subrogation  under  an 
agreement  to  which  it  is  not  a  parly,  by  which  the  contractor 
while  he  is  insolvent  in  effect  turns  over  the  bonds  and  capital 
stock  of  the  corporation,  which  had  been  turned  over  to  him 
under  his  contract,  to  persons  who  advanced  the  money  which 
enabled  him  to  perform  his  contract.^ 

§  11.  Nature  of  debts  preferred  in  generaL — ^The  debt  pre- 
ferred must  be  a  valid  and  subsisting  demand  of  the  creditor 
against  the  debtor  capable  of  being  enforced  by  action;  otherwise 
the  preference  is  a  mere  gift  which  may  be  set  aside  by  other 
creditors.'*  Where  an  insolvent  debtor  executes  a  chattel  mort- 
gage to  secure  an  antecedent  debt  of  his  wife  the  conveyance  is 
fraudulent.'*  Any  transfer  of  the  assets  of  a  corporation  not 
made  in  the  usual  course  of  business  and  for  value  will  be  set 
aside  in  equity  at  the  suit  of  creditors.'^  But  any  legal  indebted- 
ness of  the  debtor  or  any  legal  liability  incurred  by  a  third  per- 
son on  his  behalf  may  become  the  subject  of  a  preference.'*    A 


69.  Hax  V.  Acme  Cement  Plaster 
Co.,  82  Mo.  App.  447. 

70.  Marsh  v.  Davis,  24  Vt.  363. 

71.  (VDonald  ▼.  Constant,  82  Ind. 
212 ;  Baldwin  v.  Flash,  58  Miss.  593. 
Compare  Krippendorf  ▼.  Hyde,  28 
Fed.  788. 

72.  McNeal  Pipe  &  F.  Co.  v.  Bul- 
lock, 174  Pa.  93,  34  Atl.  594. 

73.  See    Pre-existing    liability    as 


oonsideration— cases  eited  in  note  97» 
chap.  Vm,  S  18. 

74.  Lippitt  ▼.  Gilmartin,  37  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  411,  55  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1042. 

75.  Banton    ▼.    Smith,    113    HI. 

481. 

76.  See  cases  cited  in  the  follow- 
ing notes:  Sloan  y.  Hunter,  56  S.  C. 
385,  34  S.  E.  658,  76  Am.  St.  Rep. 


Pbefsbences  to  Cbeditoss. 


481 


sale  by  a  debtor  to  his  creditor  in  payment  of  an  aooonnt  is  not 
invalid  because  a  portion  of  the  account  was  for  charges  for 
tobacco  and  liquors,  although  the  debtor  may  have  used  them 
lavishly.'^ 

§  12.  Debts  not  due.— An  insolvent  debtor  may  prefer  a 
creditor  by  paying  or  securing  his  debt,  though  the  debt  is  not 
due."  The  law  does  not  forbid  a  debtor  to  pay  and  a  creditor  to 
receive  a  debt  before  it  is  due,  provided  the  creditor's  purpose  is 
to  receive  his  own  debt  and  not  to  defeat  or  delay  another.'''  Where 
there  are  two  debts  owing  to  the  same  creditor,  one  already  due 
and  payable  and  the  other  payable  at  a  distant  date,  the  creditor 
may  take  from  his  debtor  security  for  the  payment  of  both  with- 
out inference  or  imputation  of  fraud,  although  the  debtor  is  in 
failing  circumstances.^  An  attorney  may  always  demand  and 
receive  a  reasonable  compensation  before  rendering  services,  and 
the  payment  will  be  valid,  even  in  the  case  of  one  contemplating 
bankruptcy.'* 


561,  a  debt  contracted  for  the  pnr- 
ehafle  of  slaves  was  not  inyalidated 
by  the  abolition  of  slavery. 

77.  Iley  v.  Niswanger,  1  McCord 
Eq.  (S.  C.)   618. 

78.  U,  fif.— Smith  v.  Craft,  12  Fed. 
866,  11  Biss.  340,  appeal  dismisMed, 
123  U.  8.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct.  196,  31  L. 
Ed.  267. 

Oa. — ^Alexander  ▼.  Toung,  23  Gki. 
616. 

722.— Cipher  y.  McFall,  69  lU.  App. 
228. 

ifo.— State  y.  Excelsior  Distilling 
Co.,  20  Mo.  App.  21. 

Ohio, — ^Hauel  y.  Mintser,  1 
Handy,  376,  12  Ohio  Dec.  (Reprint) 
191,  an  accommodation  endorser  who 
has  assumed  the  payment  of  the 
notes  not  yet  due,  and  thereby  made 
himadf   absolutely   liable   for   their 

31 


payment,  may'  in  good  faith  take  a 
mortgage  or  other  security  from  the 
debtor  to  indemnify  him  from  ulti- 
mate loss. 

Pa, — Commonwealth  y.  Smith,  1 
Brewst.  347. 

Tenn, — ^McOrew  y.  Hancock  (Ch. 
App.  1899),  62  S.  W.  600. 

Tea, — Frees  y.  Baker,  81  Tex.  216, 
16  S.  W.  900,  13  L.  R.  A.  340; 
Mayer  y.  Templeton  (Ciy.  App. 
1899),  63  S.  W.  68,  rent;  Butler  y. 
Sanger,  4  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  411,  23  S. 
W.  487. 

79.  McElwee  y.  Kennedy,  56  S.  C. 
164,  34  S.  E.  86. 

80.  Carpenter  y.  Mnren,  42  Barb. 
(N.  Y.)   300. 

81.  Lyon  y.  Marshall,  11  Barb. 
(K.  T.)  241;  Reed  y.  Mellor,  6  Mo. 
App.  667. 


482 


FbAUDULBNT   CoirVETANCES. 


§  13.  Contingent  debts  and  liabilities  on  bdialf  of  debtor. — 

A  contingent  liability  on  behalf  of  a  debtor,  as  well  as  an  existing 
indebtedness,  is  a  good  and  valid  consideration  for  a  preferential 
transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor."  A  confession  of 
judgment  by  a  debtor  to  secure  a  contingent  liability  is  not  a 
fraud  in  law,  and  whether  it  is  fraud  in  fact  depends  upon  the 
attendant  circumstances."  The  endorser  of  commercial  paper  has 
full  power,  with  the  consent  of  the  person  discounting  the  paper, 
to  use  it  as  a  debt  due  him,  and  to  protect  his  endorsement  by 
obtaining  a  conveyance  from  the  debtor  to  the  amount  of  such 
paper.^  A  bill  of  sale,  executed  to  secure  the  vendee  from  his 
liability  as  endorser  of  a  promissory  note  made  for  the  accommo- 
dation of  the  vendor,  is  not  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  credi- 
tors under  the  statute  of  frauds."  A  debtor  may  secure  a  surety 
who  is  liable  for  him,  in  preference  to  paying  other  creditors,  if 
he  does  so  in  good  faith  and  without  any  design  to  conceal  his 
property  from  his  creditors."    The  liability  of  an  acceptor  of  a 


82.  Curtis  y.  Fox,  191  Pa.  8t.  644, 
48  Atl.  1093. 

83.  Braden  y.  (yNeil,  183  Pa.  St. 
462,  38  Atl.  1023,  63  Am.  8t  Rep. 
761. 

84.  Bamberger  v.  Schoolfield,  160 
U.  8.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct.  225,  40  L.  Ed. 
374.  See  also  eases  cited  in  last  two 
preceding  notes. 

85.  Weller  y.  Wayland,  17  Johns. 
(N.  Y.)  102.  See  also  Hauel  y. 
Mintzer,  1  Handy  (Ohio),  376. 

86.  TJ,  8. — ^Leggett  y.  Humphreys, 
62  U.  S.  66,  16  L.  Ed.  60. 

Ala, — Ck>ker  y.  Shropshire,  69  Ala. 
542;  Hopkins  y.  Scott,  20  Ala.  179,  a 
deed  of  trust  by  a  defaulting  guar- 
dian to  indemnify  his  sureties;  Pen- 
nington y.  Woodall,  17  Ala.  685. 

Del. — ^TunneU  y.  Jefferson,  5  Harr. 
206. 

(?a.— Alexander  y.  Toung,  23  Ga. 
616. 


/IL— Wood  y.  aark,  121  HI.  350, 
12  N.  E.  271,  affg  21  HI.  App.  464; 
Frank  y.  Welsh,  89  lU.  38;  Cipher  y. 
McFall,  69  111.  App.  228. 

Ind. — Owens  y.  Qaseho,  154  Ind. 
225,  66  K.  E.  224. 

iTy.— Beatty  y.  Dudley,  80  Ky. 
381. 

Mass, — Steyens  y.  Bell,  6  Mass. 
339. 

Mich, — ^Adams  y.  Niemann^  46 
Mich.  135,  8  N.  W.  719. 

Mo. — ^Albert  y.  Besel,  88  Mo.  150. 

"N.  J, — ^Essex  County  y.  Lindsl^^ 
41  N.  J.  Eq.  189,  3  Atl.  391. 

Ohio. — ^Hauel  y.  Mintzner,  1 
Handy,  375. 

Tew, — Frees  y.  Baker,  81  Tex.  216, 
16  S.  W.  900,  13  L.  R.  A.  340;  But- 
ler y.  Sanger,  4  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  411, 
23  S.  W.  487. 

y^.— Spaulding  y.  Austin,  2  Vt 
555. 


Pbefebences  to  Cbeoitobs. 


483 


bill  of  exchange,"  or  of  bail,"  may  be  the  subject  of  a  valid  prefer- 
ence by  a  debtor.  But  merely  nominal  liability,  as  that  of  the 
sureties  on  a  debtor's  official  bond  as  executor,  is  insufficient  to 
support  a  preference.** 

§  14.  Usurious  interest. — An  agreement  for  usurious  interest 
in  the  inception  of  a  debt  otherwise  bona  fide  with  no  view  to 
its  ulterior  use  for  a  fraudulent  purpose,  will  not  render  a  trans- 
fer of  the  debtor's  property  in  payment  thereof  assailable  by 
another  creditor,**  nor  will  the  validity  of  a  conveyance  of  prop- 
erty by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  to  prefer  a  debt  be  afPected  by  the 
fact  that  one  of  the  items  of  the  debt  consists  of  usurious  interest 
which  the  creditor  was  compelled  to  pay  to  a  third  person  for  the 
purpose  of  replacing  money  which  the  debtor  had  borrowed  and 
failed  to  return.'^  But  if  there  is  no  previous  agreement  as  to 
the  rate  of  interest,  and  usurious  interest  is  allowed  for  the  pur- 
pose of  swelling  the  debt  to  an  amount  not  materially  less  than 
the  value  of  the  property,  the  transaction  should  be  pronounced 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors." 

§  15.  Attorney's  fees. — A  transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  to 
his  attorney,  in  payment  of  services  rendered,  is  not  invalid  as 
against  a  judgment  creditor,  against  whose  claim  the  attorney  had 
defended  the  debtor.**  Attorney's  fees  which  by  lawful  stipulation 
are  made  a  part  of  the  debts,  in  a  mortgage  given  for  the  benefit 
of  certain  creditors,  are  properly  awarded  where  the  contingen- 


Bnt  see  Sanford  ▼.  Wheeler,  13 
Conn.  166,  33  Am.  Dec.  389,  where  a 
mortgage  given  both  lor  an  existing 
debt  and  to  indemnify  the  mortgagee 
against  his  liability  as  surety  pur- 
ports on  its  face  to  be  given  solely 
for  the  existing  debt,  it  cannot  as 
against  creditors  be  supported  fur- 
ther than  to  secure  the  amount 
actually  due. 

•  87.  Perry  Ins.,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Foster, 
58  Ala.  602,  29  Am.  Rep.  779. 


88.  Davis  v.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St.  82. 

89.  Crawford  v.  Kirksey,  60  Ala. 
690,  66  Ala.  282,  28  Am.  Rep.  704. 

90.  Harris  v.  Russell,  93  Ala.  69, 
9  So.  641. 

91.  Pennington  v.  Woodall,  17 
Ala.  686. 

92.  Harris  v.  Russell,  95  Ala.  69, 
9  So.  641;  Lehman  v.  Greenhut,  88 
Ala.  478,  7  So.  299. 

98.  Barker  v.  Archer,  49  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  80,  63  N.  Y.  Snpp.  298. 


484 


Fbaudulbi!7t  Conveyances. 


cies,  upon  which  they  were  to  become  a  part  of  the  demand,  have 
occurred.**  The  fees  of  an  attorney  for  services  for  advice  given 
and  for  preparing  and  drafting  a  preferential  deed  of  trust  or 
other  conveyance^  for  advising  the  trustee  as  to  his  duties,  and  for 
defending  any  attacks  that  may  be  made  on  the  conveyance,  may 
be  included  in  a  preference.^  The  inclusion  of  attorney's  fees  in 
judgment  notes  given  by  an  insolvent  is  fraudulent  and  void  as 
to  other  creditors  not  preferred,  but  only  vitiates  the  notes  pro 
tanto,  and  equity  will  follow  the  fund  realized  thereon  as  fees 
for  the  benefit  of  other  judgment  creditors.** 

§  16.  Debts  arising  out  of  breach  of  trust. — Where  an  in- 
solvent debtor  has  misapplied  money  placed  in  his  hands  as  a 
trustee  and  afterwards  replaces  the  money  from  his  own  funds,*' 
or  gives  security  to  the  beneficiaries  to  protect  the  payment  of  the 
same,"*  the  transaction  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.  A  note 
and  mortgage  executed  by  a  guardian  to  his  ward  for  money  or 
property  of  the  latter  which  the  former  had  appropriated  and 
for  which  he  was  personally  responsible  is  not  invalid  as  against 
his  creditors  for.  want  of  consideration  because  the  money  was 
secured  by  the  guardian's  bond.**  But  where  a  debtor,  acting  as 
trustee  for  his  minor  children,  has  exercised  the  discretion  im* 
posed  on  him  by  the  trust,  and  supported  them  out  of  the  trust 
fund,  he  will  not  be  permitted  to  restore  the  sum  so  expended  to 
the  trust  estate  on  a  plea  that  it  is  his  personal  duty  to  support 


94.  Martin-Brown  Co.  v.  Siebe,  6 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  232,  26  S.  W.  327. 

95.  Mayer  y.  Templeton  (Tex. 
Civ.  App.  1899),  63  8.  V^.  68;  Ham- 
ilton-Brown Shoe  Co.  V.  Lastinger 
(Tex.  Civ.  App.  1894),  26  8.  W.  924; 
Butler  V.  Sanger,  4  Tex.  Civ.  App. 
411,  23  8.  W.  487. 

96.  Young  V.  aapp,  147  III.  176, 
32  N.  B.  187,  36  N.  B.  372;  Hulse  v. 
Mershon,  126  111.  62,  17  N.  K  60, 
aff*9  Merehon  v.  Hulse,  26  lU.  App. 


292;  Bauer  Grocer  Co.  v.  McKee 
Shoe  Co.,  87  HI.  App.  434;  Fanners', 
etc..  Bank  v.  Spear,  49  111.  App.  500. 

97.  Jackson  v.  Spivey,  63  N.  C. 
261. 

98.  McLaughlin  v.  (Tarter,  13  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  694,  37  8.  W.  666;  Middle- 
ton  V.  Pollock,  2  C;h.  D.  104,  46  L.  J. 
Ch.  293. 

99.  Jennings  v.  Jennings,  104  CaL 
160,  37  Pac  794. 


Pbefessncbs  to.  Cbsditobs. 


485 


his  children,  when  by  so  doing  he  will  evade  the  payment  of  his 
honest  debts.^ 

§  17.  Secured  debts  generally.— The  payment  of  a  debt  for 
which  the  creditor  holds  security  cannot  be  held  fraudulent,  as 
by  the  discharge  of  the  debt  the  security  will  be  released  and 
will  become  liable  to  the  claims  of  other  creditors.'  The  giving 
of  additional  security  for  the  payment  of  a  claim  otherwise  se* 
cured  is  held  by  some  authorities  not  to  be  fraudulent/  while 
others  hold  that  the  taking  of  additional  security  by  one  who 
is  otherwise  abundantly  secured  is  in  itself  evidence  of  fraud,  as 
the  creditor  will  not  be  permitted  to  heap  security  on  security 
unnecessarily  to  the  injury  of  other  creditors/  The  burden  of  up- 
holding such  a  transaction  is  on  the  creditor.^  But  the  fact  that 
a  creditor  accepts  additional  security  and  releases  to  the  debtor 
the  collateral  he  has  been  holding  does  not  invalidate  the  con- 
veyance, as  against  unsecured  creditors,  in  the  absence  of  proof 
of  fraud,  or  that  the  collateral  surrendered  was  negotiable  and 
so  not  to  be  reached  by  creditors.* 

§  18.  Discharge  of  mortgage  on  homestead.— An  insolvent  or 
failing  debtor  has  a  right  to  pay  by  way  of  preference  a  debt 
secured  by  a  mortgage  on  his  homestead,  and  the  fact  that  he 
can  afterwards  hold  the  premises  clear  of  all  claims  of  creditors 
does  not  aifect  that  right.^     Where  a  debtor  in  failing  circum- 


1.  National  Valley  Bank  ▼.  Han- 
cock, 100  Va.  101,  40  S.  E.  611,  98 
Am.  8t  Rep.  983,  67  L.  R.  A.  728. 

2.  Lucas  ▼.  Claflin,  76  Va.  269. 
S.  Plummer  ▼.  Green,  49  Neb.  316, 

68  N.  W.  600;  Padgitt  v.  Porter 
(Tex.  Civ.  App.  1894),  26  8.  W.  429; 
West  Coast  Grocery  Co.  v.  Stinson, 
13  Wash.  266,  43  Pac.  36. 

4.  Lombard  v,  Dows,  66  Iowa,  243, 
28  N.  W.  649;  Crapster  v.  Williams, 
21  Kan.  109;  Jaffray  v.  Wolf,  4 
Okla.  803,  47  Pac.  496. 


5.  Lombard  y.  Dows,  66  Towa, 
243,  23  N.  W.  649. 

6.  Compton  ▼.  Marshall,  88  Tex. 
60,  27  S.  W.  121,  28  8.  W.  618,  29 
8.  W.  1069,  26  8.  W.  441 ;  McGregor 
V.  Chase,  37  Vt.  225;  Bradley  ▼.  Got- 
zian  &  Co.,  12  Wash.  71,  40  Pac. 
623. 

7.  Randall  v.  Bnfflngton,  10  Cal. 
491;  Bradley  y.  Gotzian  &  Co.,  12 
Wash.  71,  40  Pac.  623.  See  Purchase 
of  homestead  and  payment  of  liens, 
chap.  IV,  S  46,  9upra.        • 


486  Fbauduleitt  Cokveyances. 

stances  sold  to  a  creditor,  already  secured  by  a  mortgage  on  the 
debtor's  homestead,  his  stock  of  goods  and  fixtures,  the  balance 
above  the  debt  to  be  paid  to  trustees  for  the  benefit  of  creditors 
in  consideration  of  his  releasing  the  mortgage  on  the  homestead, 
it  was  not  a  fraudulent  conveyance.' 

§  19.  Transfer  of  encumbered  property  in  payment  of  en* 
cumbrance* — A  transfer  of  mortgaged  property  to  the  mortgage 
creditor  in  settlement  of  a  debt  much  larger  in  amount  than 
the  fair  value  of  the  mortgaged  property,'  or  where  the  fair  value 
of  the  property  is  not  greater  than  the  debt,^'  is  not  fraudulent 
as  against  the  debtor's  other  creditors,^^  since  it  is  not  a  convey- 
ance to  the  exclusion  or  prejudice  of  the  other  creditors.^  And 
the  substitution  of  other  property,  on  which  there  was  no  specific 
lien  in  favor  of  other  creditors,  in  lieu  of  a  part  of  the  mortgaged 
chattels,  will  not  render  the  transaction  invalid,  if  the  substi- 
tuted property  was  received  by  the  mortgagee  at  a  fair  valua- 
tion." 

§  20.  Transfer  of  all  the  debtor's  property.— The  statute  in 
I^ew  York  prevents  an  insolvent  debtor,  by  a  general  assignment, 
from  devoting  more  than  one-third  in  value  of  his  estate  to  the 
payment  of  preferred  creditors.  But  he  may  accomplish  that 
result  and  practically  prefer  his  creditors  to  as  great  an  extent  as 
his  property  permits,  by  omitting  to  make  a  general  assignment, 
and  instead,  giving  mortgages  and  bills  of  sale  or  confessing 
judgments  to  the  more  highly  favored  creditors,  in  an  amount 
sufficient  to  exhaust  his  entire  estate.  The  statute  only  con- 
demns such  preferences  when  made  in  a  general  assignment.^* 

8.  Flask  y.  TindaH,  39  Ark.  571.  the  mortgagee  had  no  knowledge  that 

9.  Campodonico    v.    Oregon    Imp.      the    mortgagor    had    debts    dne    to 
Co.,  S7  Cal.  666,  25  Pac.  763  ^  Jack-      others  than  himself. 

son  V.  Miller,  32  La.  Ann.  432.  18.  Johnson  v.  Riley,  41   W.  Va. 

10.  Wiggins    V.    Tumlin,    96    Ga.       140,  23  S.  E.  698. 

763,  23  S.  E.  76.  13.  Smith  v.  Hardy,  36  Wis.  417. 

11.  Morse  v.  Velzy,  123  Mich.  532,  14.  Manning  y.  Beck,  129  N.  T.  1, 
82  N.  W.  225,  under  a  finding  that      29  N.  £.  90,  14  L.  R.  A.  198;  London 


Pbefsrences  to  Cbeditobs. 


487 


But  such  other  means  of  transfer  to  preferred  creditors  cannot  be 
used  and  employed  as  a  shield  so  as  to  hold  off  all  other  creditors, 
while  practically  returning  the  property  to  the  possession,  and 
subjecting  it  to  the  control  of  the  debtor."  As  a  general  rule  a 
transfer  of  all  the  debtor's  property  lo  pay  or  secure  a  valid 
debt  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  oiher  creditors  if  the  value  of  the 
property  does  not  materially  exceed  the  amount  of  the  indebted- 
ness for  which  it  is  given  in  payment  or  security,  and  there  is  no 
reservation  of  any  trust  or  benefit  for  the  debtor  beyond  that 
which  the  law,  in  the  absence  of  contract,  would  allow  him.^* 
Under  the  statute  in  some  states  a  preferential  transfer  of  sub- 


▼.  Martiii,  79  Hun,  229,  29  N.  Y. 
Supp.  396,  a/r'd  149  N.  T.  686,  44  N. 
E.  1126;  Victor  v.  Levy,  72  Hun,  263. 
26  N.  Y.  Supp.  644,  aff'd  148  N.  Y. 
739,  42  N.  E.  726;  Auburn  Exch. 
Bank  v.  Fitch,  48  Barb.  344. 

15.  Billings  y.  Russell,  101  N.  Y. 
226,  4  N.  £.  631;  Stimson  v.  Wrig- 
ley,  86  N.  Y.  332:  Victor  ▼.  Levy, 
supra;  Abegg  v.  Schwab,  9  N.  Y. 
Supp.  681. 

16.  N.  Y. — See  cases  cited  in  note 
14,  this  section. 

U.  8, — Stewart  v.  Dunham,  116  U. 
S.  61,  6  Sup.  Ct  1163,  29  L.  Ed.  329; 
Foster  v.  McAlester,  114  Fed.  146, 
62  C.  G.  A.  107;  Repauno  Chemical 
Co.  y.  Victor  Hardware  Co.,  101  Fed. 
948,  42  C.  C.  A.  106. 

Ala. — ^Russell  v.  Davis,  133  Ala. 
647,  31  So.  614,  91  Am.  St.  Rep.  66. 
though  a  failing  debtor,  prior  to  the 
enactment  of  Code  1896,  S  2168. 
which  requires  general  assignments 
by  debtors  to  be  for  the  benefit  of  all 
creditors,  had  a  right  to  prefer  a 
creditor  to  the  extent  of  conveying 
his  entire  estate,  such  conveyance 
was  invalid  if  not  absolute,  or  if  any 
benefit  was  reserved  to  the  grantor, 
or  if  the  property  conveyed  was  ma- 
terially in  excess  of  the  debt,  or  if  the 


debt  or  a  portion  thereof  was  ficti- 
tious, or  if  cash  was  received  as  a 
part  consideration  for  the  convey- 
ance; Cook  V.  Thornton,  109  Ala.  623, 
20  So.  14;  Chipman  v.  Stem,  89  Ala. 
207,  7  So.  409;  Carter  v.  Coleman, 
84  Ala.  266,  4  So.  161;  Hodges  v. 
Coleman,  76  Ala.  107;  Chamberlain 
V.  Dorrance,  69  Ala.  40. 

Co<.— In  re  MuUer,  118  Cal.  432, 
60  Pae.  660;  Dana  v.  Stanford,  10 
OU.  269. 

Del. — Stockley  ▼.  Honey,  4  Hoost. 
603. 

C7a.— -McWhorter  v.  Wright,  6  Qa. 
666. 

Iowa. — Southern  White  Lead  Co.  v. 
Haas,  73  Iowa,  399,  33  N.  W.  667,  36 
N.  W.  494;  Aulman  v.  Aulman,  71 
Iowa,  124,  32  N.  W.  240,  60  Am.  St. 
Rep.  783;  Gage  v.  Parry,  69  Iowa, 
606,  29  N.  W.  822;  Farwell  v.  How- 
ard, 26  Iowa,  381;  Johnson  v.  Mc- 
Grew,  11  Iowa,  161,  77  Am.  Dec.  137; 
Cowles  V.  Ricketts,  1  Iowa,  682. 

jran.->-8chram  ▼.  Taylor,  61  E[an. 
647,  83  Pac.  315;  First  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Ridenour,  46  Kan.  707,  27  Pac.  160, 
26  Am.  St.  Rep.  167. 

Maaa. — Stephens  v.  Bell,  6  Mass. 
339. 

ifo.— ^affrey  v.  Mathews,  120  Mo. 


488 


Fbaudulbnt  Conveyanoes. 


stantially  all  the  debtor's  property  inures  to  the  benefit  of  all 
his  creditors/^  while  in  others  the  statute  does  not  prevent  a  debtor 
from  pledging  property  for  the  security  of  part  of  his  creditors 
only."  An  agreement  by  a  debtor  who  is  insolvent,  and  known 
to  be  insolvent  by  a  certain  creditor,  not  to  make  a  general  assign- 
ment, lest  it  might  invalidate,  as  an  unlawful  preference,  a  trans- 
fer of  the  debtor's  entire  property  to  the  said  creditor,  shows  a 
fraudulent  intent,  and  renders  void  the  transfer  as  to  other  credit- 
tors,  though  made  in  payment  of  a  bona  fide  indebtedness." 


§  21.  knowledge  and  intent  of  parties  generally. — A  convey- 
ance or  transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  to  pay  or 
secure  only  his  own  debt  is  valid,  and  a  creditor  may  take  pay* 
ment  or  security  for  his  demand,  although  others  are  thereby  de- 
prived of  aU  means  of  obtaining  satisfaction  of  their  equaUy 
meritorious  daims.^  In  the  absence  of  a  statute  making  it  in- 
valid, to  render  such  a  preferential  transfer  invalid,  it  must  have 
been  made  with  the  actual  intent  to  hinder,  delay  or  defraud  other 


317,  25  S.  W.  187;  Crow  v.  Bardsley, 
68  Mo.  435;  Murry  y.  Oason,  15  Mo. 
378. 

^6&.— Blair  State  Bank  ▼.  Bunn, 
61  Neb.  464,  85  N.  W.  527;  Bennett 
▼.  McDonald,  59  Neb.  234,  80  N.  W. 
825. 

Oibto.— Jaffraj  v.  Wolfe,  1  Okla. 
312,  33  Pae.  945. 

R.  /.— EUiott  ▼.  Benedict,  13  R.  I. 
463. 

8,  C. — ^McElwee  ▼.  Kennedy,  56  S. 
C.  154,  34  S.  E.  86. 

Tenn. — ^McGrew  ▼.  Hancock  (Ch. 
App.  1899),  52  8.  W.  500;  Fidelity, 
etc.,  Co.  V.  O'Brien  (Ch.  App.  1896), 

38  S.  W.  417. 

WcwA.— Turner  ▼.  Iowa  Nat.  Bank, 
2  Waah.  192,  26  Pac.  256. 

Wt«.— Gage  V.  Chesebro,  49  Wis. 
486   5  N.  W.  881. 


Can. — Brown  ▼.  Sweet,  7  Ont.  App. 
725. 

Bug. — ^Alton  ▼.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4,  Oh. 
622,  38  L.  J.  Ch.  669,  21  L.  T.  Rep.  N. 
S.  282,  17  Wkly.  Rep.  1034;  Ex  parte 
Games,  12  Ch.  D.  314,  40  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  789,  27  Wkly.  Rep.  744. 

17.  Baxley  y.  Simmons,  132  Ala. 
117,  31  So.  76.  See  Statutes  of  the 
several  States. 

18.  Jaffrey  y.  Mathews,  120  Mo. 
317,  25  S.  W.  187;  Crow  y.  Beards- 
ley,  68  Mo.  435;  Union  Bank  y.  Kan- 
sas City  Bank,  136  U.  S.  223,  10  Sup. 
Ct.  1013,  34  L.  Ed.  341,  ovemdinff 
Martin  y.  Hausman  14  Fed.  160,  and 
cases  following  it. 

10.  Tompkins  y.  Hunter,  65  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  441,  20  N.  Y.  Supp.  355. 

20.  Wheaton  v.  Neville,  19  G^l.  46 ; 
Dana  v.  Stanford,  10  Oal.  269. 


Fbxferehces  to  Cbsditors. 


489 


creditors,^  with  the  actual  design  to  prevent  the  application  of  the 
whole  or  a  part  of  the  debtor's  property  to  the  payment  of  his 
debts."  The  intent  to  satisfy  or  secure  one  creditor  at  the  expense 
of  others  is  not  enough.''  Where  there  is  an  actual  debt  or  lia- 
bility to  be  discharged  or  secured  a  bona  fide  preference  is  valid, 
although  such  preference  hinders,  delays,  or  defeats  other  credi- 
tors, and  fraud  is  not  to  be  imputed  nor  any  inference  of  a  fraud- 
ulent intent  to  be  drawn  from  the  fact  that  the  debtor  desired 
to  and  did  prefer  the  creditor,  or  that  the  creditor  sought  to  and 
did  obtain  a  preference  to  the  exclusion  of  other  creditors,  or 
from  the  fact  that  it  tends  to  hinder,  delay,  ot  defeat  creditors.  It 
is  not  enough  that  the  effect  of  a  conveyance  is  to  delay  credi- 
tors. It  must  be  executed  with  such  an  intent  and  purpose.'* 
Where  a  sale  of  property  by  a  debtor  is  made  professedly  for 
the  purpose  of  preferring  certain  creditors,  it  is  presumed  to  be 


21.  U,  8. — ^Hiuflkamp  v.  Moline 
Wagon  Co.,  121  U.  8.  310,  7  Sup.  Ct 
899,  30  L.  Ed.  971;  Dniry  v.  Cross, 
74  U.  8.  299,  19  L.  Ed.  40;  Foster  v, 
McAlester,  114  Fed.  146,  62  C.  C.  A. 
107. 

Col. — ^DaiUL  V.  8taiiford,  10  Cal. 
269. 

Del, — 8tockl«7  ▼.  Horsey,  4  Honst. 
603. 

/n.— Ewing  ▼.  Runkle,  20  HI.  448, 
to  render  a  conTojance  void  under 
our  statute  of  frauds  and  perjuries, 
both  partiee  must  intend  to  practice 
a  fraud. 

y.  J, — Green  ▼.  McCrane,  66  N.  J. 
Eq.  436,  37  Atl.  318. 

N.  (7.— Hafner  ▼.  Irwin,  23  N.  C. 
490. 

Pa.— Candee'ft  Appeal,  191  Pa.  8t. 
644,  43  Atl.  1093;  Werner  v.  Zier- 
fuss,  162  Pa.  8t.  360,  29  Atl.  737; 
Jaroslawski  v.  Simon,  3  Brewsi.  37. 

22.  Alabama  L.  Ins.,  ete.,  Co.  ▼. 
Pettway,  24  Ala.  544;  Roberto  v. 
Burr,  136  Cal.  166,  67  Pac.  46,  tbe 


fraud  contemplated  is  an  actual 
fraud  of  which  intent  is  a  neoessaty 
element;  Wheaton  y.  Nerille,  19  Cal. 
46;  Lucas  v.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269. 

23.  Lucas  ▼.  GlafOin,  76  Va.  269. 

24.  N,  F.—Bishop  v.  Stebbins,  41 
Hun,  243;  Auburn  Exch.  Bank  ▼. 
Fiteh,  48  Barb.  344. 

17.  £r.-~Dayis  ▼.  Schwartz,  166  U.  S. 
631,  15  Sup.  Ct.  237,  39  L.  Ed.  289; 
Tompkins  v.  Wheeler,  41  U.  S.  106, 
10  L.  Ed.  903;  Foster  y.  McAIester, 
114  Fed.  145,  52  C.  C.  A.  204;  Re- 
pauno  Chemical  Co.  y.  Victor  Hard- 
ware Co.,  101  Fed.  948, 42  C.  C.  A.  106. 

Ala. — ^Warren  y.  Hunt,  114  Ala, 
506,  21  So.  939. 

CoZ.— Randall  y.  BuflOngton,  10  Cal. 
491. 

6a. — Carter  y.  Neal,  24  Ga.  346, 
71  Am.  Dec.  136. 

722.— Nelson  y.  Leiter,  190  111.  414, 
60  K.  E.  851,  83  Am.  St.  Rep.  142, 
afTg  93  111.  App.  176;  Wood  y.  aark, 
121  Hi.  359,  12  N.  E.  271,  affg  21 
111.  App.  464. 


490 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


fair  and  honest.^  Where  a  debtor  has  in  good  faith  transferred 
property  to  a  preferred  creditor  in  payment  of  an  antecedent 
debt,  without  reserving  to  himself  any  trust  or  benefit^  or  exer- 
cising any  intention  to  defraud  creditors,  the  fact  that  he  was  in- 
solvent at  the  time  and  that  the  effect  of  the  conveyance  is  to 
leave  the  debtor  without  property  to  pay  his  other  debts  or  to 
&o  diminish  his  assets  as  to  actually  obstruct  or  defeat  other  credi- 
tors in  the  collection  of  their  daims,  does  not  make  the  convey- 
ance fraudulent.  This  is  only  the  necessary  effect  of  giving  a 
preference.^     The  criterion  in  determining  fraud  is  not  the 


JTy. — 'Kennaird  y.  Adaiii8»  60  Kj. 
102. 

Me, — Gardner  Nat.  Bank  ▼•  Hagar, 
65  Me.  359. 

ifd.— Rich  y.  Lery,  16  Md.  74. 

MicK — ^Ferris  y.  MoQueen,  94  Mich. 
367,  54  N.  W.  164. 

Mo, — Bell  V.  ThompBon,  3  Mo.  84; 
Derring  v.  Collins,  38  Mo.  App.  80. 

"Neb, — ^Dempster  Mill  Mfg.  'Co.  y. 
First  Nat.  Bank,  49  Neb.  321,  68  N. 
W.  477;  J.  T.  Bobinson  Notion  Co. 
y.  Foot,  42  Neb.  156,  60  N.  W.  316; 
John  V.  Farwell  Co.  v.  Wright,  38 
Neb.  445,  56  N.  W.  984;  Jones  y. 
Loree,  37  Neb.  816,  56  N.  W.  390. 

V,  H.— Osgood  y.  Thome,  63  N.  H. 
375. 

jV.  J.— Uhl  y.  Beatty  (Ch.),  3  Atl. 
524. 

Ohio, — Sack  y.  Hemann,  6  Ohio 
Dec.  1104,  10  Am.  Law  Rec.  483. 

Pa.— Candee^B  Appeal,  191  Pa.  St 
644,  43  Atl.  1093 ;  Werner  y.  Zierfuss, 
162  Pa.  St.  360,  29  Atl.  737;  York 
County  Bank  y.  Carter,  38  Pa.  St. 
446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494;  Uhler  y.  Maul- 
fair,  23  Pa.  St.  481;  Covanhovan  y. 
Hart,  21  Pa.  St.  495,  60  Am.  Dee. 
57;  Dayis  y.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St.  82; 
Meyers  y.  M^ers,  24  Pa.  Super.  Ct. 
603;  Peck  y.  Spruks,  6  Lack.  Leg. 
N.  132. 


Ifmuk— McOrew  y.  Hancock  (Ch. 
App.  1899),  58  S.  W.  500. 

7*e0.— Owens  y.  CUrk,  78  Tex.  547, 
15  S.  W.  101 ;  BlUs  y.  Valentine,  65 
Tex.  532;  Lewy  y.  Fischl,  65  Tex. 
311;  Greenleye  y.  Blum,  59  Tex. 
124;  Iglehart  y.  Willis,  58  Tex.  306. 

Fa.— Lucas  y.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269. 

Woslk— West  Coast  Grocery  C6.  y. 
Stinson,  13  Wash.  255,  43  Fac.  35. 

Wi«.— Haben  y.  Hanhaw,  49  Wis. 
379,  5  N.  W.  872. 

£H^.— Middleton  y.  Pollock,  2  Ch. 
D.  104,  45  L.  J.  Ch.  293. 

Cotitra, — La, — ^De  Blanc  y.  Martin, 

2  Bob.  38;   Taylor  y.  Knox,  2  La* 
16;  Misotiere's  Syndecs  y.  Coignard, 

3  Mart.  (O.  S.)  561. 

»5.  Wood'  y.  CUrk,  121  111.  359,  12 
N.  E.  271,  a/Tsr  21  111.  App.  464. 

26.  U.  8,— Foster  y.  McAlester, 
114  Fed.  145,  52  C.  C.  A.  107. 

Ato.-^rawford  y.  Kirks^,  55  Ala. 
282,  28  Am.  Bep.  704. 

CoZ.— Dana  y.  Staafords,  10  Oal. 
269. 

Ind. — ^Leyering  y.  Bimel,  146  Ind. 
545,  45  N.  £.  775. 

/oioa. — Southern  White  Lead  Co.  y. 
Haas,  73  Iowa,  399,  33  N.  W.  657,  35 
N.  W.  494. 

MicK—<^T  y.  Trader's  Bank,  132 
Mich.  215,  93  K.  W.  437. 


Pbefesences  to  Cseditobs. 


491 


effect  of  the  preference  but  the  intent  with  which  it  was  made.*' 
A  debtor  has  a  right  to  prefer  one  creditor  to  another  and  to  so 
dispose  of  his  property  that  one  creditor  will  receive  his  pay  in 
full  and  another  will  receive  nothing.*^  For  a  debtor  to  dispose 
of  his  properly  so  as  to  prevent  one  creditor  from  reaching  it  is 
not  void  on  the  principles  governing  conveyances  in  fraud  of 
creditors,  if  the  property  is  wholly  and  unreservedly  appropriated 
to  the  demands  of  another  creditor.*  A  person  in  failing  cir- 
cumstances may  prefer  a  creditor  by  conveying  to  him  a  part 
or  all  of  his  property,  to  the  exclusion  of  other  creditors,  pro- 
vided it  is  done  in  good  faith,*  and  where  a  debtor  gives  a 
preference  to  one  or  more  of  his  creditors,  to  the  exclusion  of 
others,  such  disposition  of  his  effects  is  not  impeachable  on  the 
ground  of  fraud,  even  though  it  embraces  all  his  property,  and 
by  the  exhaustion  of  all  the  property  of  the  debtor  to  pay  the 
honest  debt  of  the  preferred  creditor  absolutely  prevents  the  other 
creditors  from  collecting  any  part  of  their  claims.*^    A  preference 


Mo, — Gaff  ▼.  stern,  12  lib.  App. 
116. 

Neh, — ^Blair  State  Bank  y.  Bunn, 
61  Neb.  464,  86  N.  W.  527 ;  Jones  v. 
Loree,  37  Neb.  816,  56  N.  W.  390. 

2V.  J, — ^National  Bank  of  Ketropo- 
lis  y.  Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13. 

Pa. — Werner  v.  Zierfuss,  162  Pft. 
St.  360,  29  Atl.  737;  Lake  Shore 
Banking  Co.  y.  Fuller,  110  Pa.  St. 
166,  1  Atl.  731;  Bentc  y.  Rocky,  69 
Pa.  St.  71;  York  County  Bank  y.  Car- 
ter, 38  Pa.  St.  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  404. 

8,  C— Thorpe  y.  Thorpe,  12  S.  C. 
164;  Maples  y.  Maples,  Rice  Eq.  300. 

Tew, — Edwards  y.  Dickson,  66  Tex. 
613,  2  S.  W.  718;  Ellis  y.  Valen- 
tine, 66  Tex.  632;  Lewy  y.  Fischl,  66 
Tex.  311;  Iglehart  y.  Willis,  68  Tex. 
306;  Noyes  y.  Sanger,  8  Tex.  Ciy. 
A]^  388,  27  S.  W.  1022. 

Fa.— Lucas  y.  Claffiin,  76  Va.  260. 

W.  Fa.— Harden  y.  Wagner,  22  W. 
Va.  366. 


TFis. — Steyens  v.  Breen,  76  WU. 
506,  44  N.  W.  646. 

27.  Werner  y.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa.  St 
360,  29  Atl.  737. 

28.  Sdiroeder  y.  Walsh,  16  HI. 
App.  690,  afTd  120  Dl.  403,  11  N.  E. 
70. 

29.  Hauselt  y.  Vilmar,  2  Abb.  N. 
C.   (N.  Y.)  222. 

90.  Thorton  y.  Tandy,  89  T^ 
544. 

31.  N,  T, — ^Auburn  Exeh.  Bank  ▼. 
Fitch,  48  Barb.  344. 

U,  8. — Foster  y.  McAlester,  Mipra/ 
Repauno  Chemical  Co.  y.  Victor 
Hardware  Co.,  sKpro. 

Oal.— Dana  y.  Stanfords,  10  CbtL 
269. 

JTofi.— Schram  y.  Taylor,  61  Kan. 
547,  33  Pac  315;  First  Nat.  Bank  r. 
Ridenour,  46  Kan.  707,  27  Pae.  160, 
26  Am.  St.  Rep.  167. 

Jfeb, — ^Blair  Stare  Bank  y.  Bvim, 
61  Neb.  464,  86  N.  W.  627. 


492 


Fbauduijcnt  Conveyances. 


by  an  insolvent  debtor  of  a  valid  debt  and  the  acceptance  thereof 
by  a  creditor  in  satisfaction  of  his  claim  is  not  rendered  fraudu- 
lent, so  as  to  enable  other  creditors  to  avoid  the  conveyance,  al- 
though the  creditor  knows  of  the  debtor's  insolvency  and  both  par- 
ties know  that  the  effect  of  such  preference  will  be  to  deprive  the 
other  creditors  of  the  power  of  satisfying  their  claims,  or  to  delay 
or  defeat  collection  thereof.''    Since  the  debtor  when  he  exercises 


Wis, — Gkige  v.  Oheaebro,  49  Wis. 
486,  6  N.  W.  881. 

32.  N.  y.— New  York  County  Nat. 
Bank  y.  Ameriican  Surety  Co.,  69 
App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  163,  74  N.  Y. 
Supp.  692,  aiTd  174  N.  Y.  644,  67  N. 
E.  1086;  Beards  v.  Wheeler,  11  Hun, 
539;  Auburn  Exch.  Bank  v.  Fitch, 
48  Barb.  344. 

U.  8. — Bamberger  v.  Schoolfleld, 
160  U.  8.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct.  225,  40  L. 
Ed.  374;  Hinskamp  v.  Moline  Wagon 
Co.,  aupra;  McCartney  v.  Earle,  115 
Fed.  462;  53  C.  C.  A.  392,  affg  112 
Fed.  372;  Wilson  ▼.  Jones,  76  Fed. 
484;  Repauno  Chemical  Co.  ▼.  Vic- 
tor Hardware  Co.,  »upra. 

Ala, — Cook  ▼.  Thornton,  109  Ala. 
523,  20  So.  14;  Bray  v.  Ely,  105  Ala. 
553,  17  So.  180;  Goetter  v.  Smith, 
104  Ala.  481,  16  So.  534;  Bates  ▼. 
Vandiyer,  102  AU.  249,  14  So.  631; 
Pollock  V.  Meyer,  96  Ala.  172,  11  So. 
386;  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Smith,  93 
Ala.  97,  9  So.  548;  Chamberlain  y. 
Dorranoe,  69  Ala.  40;  Crawford  ▼• 
Kirksey,  aupra, 

CaZ.— Wheaton  v.  Neville,  19  Cal, 
41;  Dana  v.  Stanfords,  10  Cal.  269. 

/ZZ.— Nelson  v.  Leiter,  190  111.  414, 
60  N.  E.  861. 

7ffid.— Dice  ▼.  Irwin,  110  Ind.  561, 
11  N.  E.  488. 

Iowa. — ^Aulmaa  ▼.  Aulman,  71 
Iowa»  124,  32  N.  W.  240,  60  Am.  Rep. 
783.    And  see  Johnson  v.  McGrew,  11 


Iowa,  151,  77  Am.  Dec.  137;  Cowles 
y.  Ricketts,  1  Iowa,  582. 

Mass, — Giddings  ▼.  Sears,  115 
Mass.  605;  Banfield  v.  Whipple,  96 
Mass.  13. 

Ifioik.— Webber  v.  Webber,  109 
Mich.  147,  66  N.  W.  960;  Ferris  ▼. 
McQueen,  94  Mich.  367,  64  N.  W. 
164;  Sheldon  y.  Mann,  85  Mich.  265, 
48  N.  W.  573. 

Ifo.— Crothers  y.  Busch,  153  Mo. 
606,  55  S.  W.  149,  where  a  debtor 
transferred  her  property  to  a  trustee* 
to  secure  and  prefer  one  of  her  cred- 
itors, and  to  hinder  others  in  the 
collection  of  their  claims,  and  the 
trustee  and  the  preferred  creditor 
knew  of  such  purpose,  and  that  such 
would  be  the  effect  of  the  transfer* 
but  acted  only  to  secure  the  prefer- 
ence, the  transfer  was  not  yoid  as  to 
the  other  creditors. 

OAio.— Walker  y.  Walker,  6  Ohio 
S.  &  C.  PL  Dec.  355,  4  Ohio  N.  P. 
324. 

Or, — Marquam  y.  Sengfelder,  24 
Or.  2,  32  Pac  676. 

Pa.--Penn  Plate  Glass  Co.  y. 
Jones,  189  Pa.  St.  290,  42  Atl.  189; 
Werner  y.  Zierfuss,  supra;  Uhler  y. 
Maulfair,  23  Pa.  St.  48;  Coyanhoyan 
y.  Hart,  21  Pa.  St.  495,  60  Am.  Dec 
57. 

S.  C— McElwee  y.  Kennedy,  56  S. 
C.  154,  34  S.  E.  86. 

Tenn. — ^McGrew  y.  Hancock,  supm; 


Pbbfbjksncbs  to  Cbbditobs. 


493 


the  right  to  prefer  one  of  his  creditors  must  be  conscious  that 
his  act  of  preference  will  hinder  and  delay,  and  possiblj  defeat, 
the  collection  of  other  demands  against  him,  it  may  always  be 
said  his  intention  is  to  hinder  and  delay  the  unpreferred  credi- 
tors, but  he  cannot  be  deprived  of  his  right  of  preference  on  that 
ground.  The  test  to  be  applied  is  simply  whether  the  debtor,  in 
exercising  that  right  or  privilege,  acts  in  good  faith,  with  the 
intent  to  pay,  or  secure  the  payment  of  a  just  indebtedness  against 
him.*  Fraud  is  not  to  be  imputed  to  an  honest  creditor,  who 
is  preferred  by  a  failing  debtor  as  against  another  creditor,  who 
had  been  promised  payment  by  the  debtor  out  the  proceeds  of 
the  same  property  assigned  to  the  former  to  secure  him,*^  even 
though  he  had  knowledge  of  this  fact" 


§  22.  Pjarticipation  of  preferred  creditor  in  fraudulent  intent. 
— A  failing  debtor  has  a  right  to  protect  certain  of  his  creditors  in 
preference  to  others ;  and  even  though  the  debtor  is  actuated  by  an 
intent  to  hinder,  delay,  and  defraud  other  creditors,  one  creditor 
has  the  right  to  accept  payment  of  his  claim  in  full,  or  security 
by  a  confession  of  judgment  therefor,  so  long  as  this  is  done  with- 
out knowledge  on  his  part  of  the  fraudulent  intent  of  the  debtor, 
or  participation  therein.**     And  the  fact  that  the  creditor  has 


Johnson  ▼.  Goldaton  (Ch.  App.  1899), 
62  S.  W.  474;  Feder  ▼.  Erwin  (Ch. 
App.  1896),  38  8.  W.  446,  36  L.  R. 
A.  335. 

760.— Smith  ▼.  Whitfield,  67  Tex. 
124,  2  S.  W.  822;  Lewy  v.  Fischl, 
supra;  Greenleye  ▼.  Blum,  supra; 
Tglehart  v.  Willi»,  9Upra. 

Va, — Johnson  v.  Lucas,  103  Va.  86, 
48  S.  K  497. 

Wm.— Gage  y.  Chesebro,  49  Wis. 
486,  6  K.  W.  881.  See  also  Ingram 
▼.  Osborn,  70  Wis.  184,  35  N.  W. 
304. 

38.  Nelson  ▼.  Leiter,  190  HI.  414, 
60  N.  £.  851,  83  Am.  St.  Bep.  142, 
afg  93  111.  App.  176. 


84.  McKeown  ▼.  Coogler,  18  Fla. 
866. 

85.  Langert  v.  David,  14  Wash. 
389,  44  Pac  876.  See  Beldipg  Sav- 
ings Bank  ▼.  Moore,  118  Mich.  150, 
76  N.  W.  368,  where  a  mortgge  to  a 
creditor  was  left  for  delivery  with  a 
third  person,  to  be  delivered  when 
directed  by  the  mortgagor,  and  be- 
fore delivery  debtor  conveyed  the 
same  premises  to  another  creditor, 
the  deed  was  held  not  to  be  fraudu- 
lent. 

86.  Oalle  v.  Tode,  148  N.  T.  270, 
42  N.  E.  673;  Manning  v.  Beck,  129 
N.  Y.  1,  29  N.  E.  90,  14  L.  R.  A. 
198;  Starin  v.  Kelly,  88  N.  Y.  421. 


494 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


knowledge  that  the  purpose  of  the  debtor  is  to  defeat  other  credi- 
tors does  not  invalidate  the  preference,  if  the  pre-existing  debt 
is  the  sole  consideration  and  the  value  of  the  property  trans- 
ferred is  not  materially  in  excess  of  the  debt,  provided  the  credi- 
tor does  not  actually  participate  in  the  fraud."  Knowledge  on  the 
part  of  the  creditor,  however,  of  the  debtor's  fraudulent  purpose, 
is  held  to  be  equivalent  to  participation  in  the  fraud  where  the 
pre-existing  debt  is  only  part  of  the  consideration."  Where  the 
creditor  does  not  participate  in  the  fraudulent  intent  of  his  debtor, 
but  takes  the  property  as  security  for  the  sole  purpose  of  satis- 
fying or  securing  an  honest  debt,  it  has  been  held  that  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  fraudulent  intent  of  the  debtor  is  immaterial.^ 

§  23.  Preference  not  invalidated  by  mere  fraudulent  intent. — 
A  conveyance  of  property  to  an  existing  creditor  in  satisfaction 
of  his  .debt,  which  was  an  adequate  consideration,  and  with  an 
expressed  purpose  of  keeping  it  from  being  subjected  to  another 
creditor's  claim,  is  not  in  itself  fraudulent.*^  A  preferential  con- 
veyance of  property  to  or  a  judgment  obtained  by  a  creditor  in 
payment  of  or  as  security  for  an  actual  and  honest  debt,  not 
greater  in  value  or  amount  than  is  reasonably  sufficient  for  that 
purpose,  and  which  has  no  other  effect  between  the  parties  than 
to  pay  or  secure  such  debt,  no  interest  or  benefit  being  reserved 
for  the  debtor,  is  not  void  as  against  other  creditors,  although 
the  intention  of  the  debtor  and  the  effect  of  the  conveyance  or 
judgment  is  to  hinder  and  delay  other  creditors,  and  the  preferred 
creditor  knows  that  it  will  have  that  effect  and  that  the  debtor 


37.  Dudley  v.  Danforth,  61  N.  Y. 
226.  See  also  Participation  in 
fraudulent  intent  where  debt  is  sole 
consideration,  chap.  XIII,  §  9,  infra, 

88.  Levi  ▼.  Hamilton,  68  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  277,  74  N.  Y.  Supp.  159. 
See  also  Participation  in  fraudulent 
intent  where  debt  is  only  part  of 
consideration,  chap.  XIII,  §  10,  infra, 

89.  Dudley  y.  Danforth,  61  N.  Y. 


626;  Hasie  t.  Connor,  63  Kan.  713, 
37  Pac  128;  Carr  t.  Briggs,  166 
Mass.  78,  30  N.  E.  470;  Banfleld  ▼. 
Whipple,  96  Mass.  13;  State  ▼. 
Mason,  112  Mo.  374,  20  S.  W.  629,  34 
Am.  St.  Rep.  390;  Sexton  t.  Ander- 
son, 96  Mo.  373,  saw.  664. 

40.  Wilson  ▼.  Berger,  6  St.  Bep. 
(N.  Y.)  822;  Clements  ▼.  Davia,  7 
Pa.  St.  263. 


PbSF£BSNC£8  to  CsEDITOBS. 


495 


has  the  intent  that  it  shall  have  that  effect^  and  he  obtains  such 
judgment  or  conveyance  to  aid  such  intent  as  well  as  to  protect 
himself.  The  act  of  preference  being  a  lawful  act  and  the  end 
accomplished  lawful,  there  is  nothing  from  which  fraudulent 
motives  can  be  inferred,  and  any  fraudulent  motives  the  parties 
may  actually  have  or  whatsoever  be  the  motives  of  the  parties 
are  immaterial.*^    The  law  condemns  motives  and  intents,  only 


41.  v.  r.— Auburn  Bxch.  Bank  ▼. 
Fitch,  4S  Barb.  344 ;  Brett  ▼.  Catlin, 
47  Barb.  404;  WUson  ▼.  Berger,  5  St 
Rep.  822.  And  see  Archer  v.  CBricn, 
7  Hun,  146,  a  hona  fid€  creditor  who 
takes  a  transfer  of  property  to  secure 
his  debt,  and  reduces  it  into  his  pos- 
session, is  not  affected  by  an  undis- 
dosed  intent  on  the  part  of  the 
debtor  to  hinder  and  delay  other 
creditors,  of  which  he  had  no  notice. 

j7,  j8f. — Bamberger  v.  Schoolfleld, 
1«0  U.  S.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct.  225,  40  L. 

Ed.  374. 

^{(i._Beddow  v.  Sheppard,  118 
Ala,  474,  23  So.  662;  Pollock  ▼. 
Meyer,  96  Ala.  172,  11  So.  386;  El- 
lison ▼.  Moses,  96  Ala.  221,  11  So. 
347;  First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Smith,  93 
Ala.  97,  9  So.  648 ;  Harris  v.  Russell, 
93  Ala.  69,  9  So.  641;  Chipman  v. 
Stem,  89  Ala.  207,  7  So.  409;  Carter 
Coleman,  84  Ala.  266,  4  So.  161; 
Levy  ▼.  Williams,  79  Ala.  171; 
Hodges  T.  Coleman,  76  Ala.  103.  And 
see  Dawson  v.  Flash,  97  Ala.  539,  12 
So.  67,  a  conveyance  by  an  insolvent 
debtor  in  payment  of  an  antecedent 
indebtedness  honestly  due  and  not 
materially  less  than  the  value  of  the 
property  conveyed,  without  reserving 
any  interest  or  benefit,  is  valid,  al- 
though it  was  made  without  solicita- 
tion and  was  accepted  as  a  payment 
only  to  the  extent  of  the  amount 
realised  from  the  property. 


7U.— Holbrook  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
10  HI.  App.  140. 

Pa. — Snayberger  v.  Fahl,  195  Pa. 
8t.  336,  46  Atl.  1066,  78  Am.  St.  Rep. 
818;  Werner  v.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa.  St. 
360,  29  Atl.  737;  Covanhovan  v. 
Hart,  21  Pa.  St.  496,  60  Am.  Dec. 
67;  Peck  v.  Sprucks,  6  Lack.  Leg.  N. 
132. 

But  see  Bunn  v.  Ahl,  29  Pa.  St. 
387,  72  Am.  Dec  639,  where  a  debtor 
confessed  judgment  for  an  amount 
honestly  due,  for  the  purpose  of  forc- 
ing his  other  creditors  into  a  com- 
promise of  their  claims,  it  is  void- 
able by  such  creditors,  even  though 
not  used  for  that  purpose.  The  giv- 
ing and  receiving  judgment  is  some- 
thing more  than  a  fraudulent  inten- 
tion; it  is  something  done  in  pur- 
suance of  the  intention,  and  it  is 
voidable  by  any  person  in  a  position 
to  question  it. 

Tex. — Ellis  V.  Valentine,  66  Tex. 
532;  Texas  Drug  Co.  v.  Baker,  20 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  684,  50  S.  W.  167; 
Scarborough  v.  Hilliard  (Civ.  App. 
1894),  28  S.  W.  231;  Reynolds  v. 
Wienman  (Civ.  App.  1894),  25  S. 
W.  33. 

Can. — ^McMaster  v.  Clare,  7  Grant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  550.  And  see  Attorney- 
General  V.  Harmer,  16  Grant  Ch.  (U. 
C.)   533. 

Eng.^SM  Wood  v.  Dixie,  7  Q.  B. 
892,  9  Jur.  796,  53  £.  C.  L.  892. 


496 


FBATTDUUfiirT   CoNVETAKCES. 


when  they  are  carried  into,  allied  to,  or  accompanied  by,  an  act 
which  is  itself  illegal.  If  the  end  accomplished  be  lawful,  it  is  im- 
material what  may  have  prompted  it,  provided  the  intent  itself 
inflict  no  personal  or  pecuniary  wrong,  and  does  not  aggravate  the 
result  A  mere  intent  accompanied  by  no  illegal  act  will  not  givo 
a  ground  of  action.^  It  has  been  held  that  where  a  preferential 
sale  or  conveyance  of  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  one  or 
more  of  his  creditors  is  attacked  by  other  creditors  as  fraudulent 
the  only  questions  for  consideration  are:  (1)  The  existence,  bona 
fides  and  amount  of  the  purchasing  creditors'  claims ;  (2)  whether 
the  sale  or  conveyance  was  in  absolute  payment  and  satisfaction 
of  the  debts  at  a  fair  valuation  of  the  property;  and  (3)  whether 
any  benefit  or  interest  was  reserved  or  inured  to  the  debtor,^  and 
that  if  these  questions  are  determined  in  favor  of  the  preference 
the  facts  absolutely  rebut  all  inferences  that  might  be  drawn 
from  attendant  badges  of  fraud,  and  impart  validity  to  the  con- 
veyance as  an  allowable  preference  of  the  particular  creditor.^ 
And  in  an  action  of  replevin  by  the  grantee  of  a  bill  of  sale 
given  as  security  for  a  precedent  debt,  against  the  sheriff  hold- 
ing an  attachment  at  the  suit  of  a  creditor  of  the  common  debtor, 
it  has  been  held  that  the  plaintiff  is  entitled  to  recover  on  showing: 
(1)  that  there  was  a  valid  subsisting  indebtedness;  (2)  that  the 
property  was  transferred  to  secure  it;  and  (3)  that  it  was  reduced 
to  possession,  and  that  the  burden  is  on  the  attaching  creditor  to 
show  notice  of  fraudulent  intent  on  the  part  of  the  debtor  if  he 
relies  on  that.^    There  are  authorities  which  hold  that  a  transfer 


42.  WUson  ▼.  Berger,  5  St.  Rep. 
(N.  Y.)  822;  Carter  v.  Coleman,  84 
Ala.  556,  3  So.  151.  See  also  Ellis  v. 
Valentine,  65  Tex.  532. 

The  fact  that  the  tnatniBiemt 
of  traaasf er  eontains  proTisloma 
that  would  otherwise  tend  to  hinder 
or  delay  unsecured  creditors  in  col- 
lecting their  claims  is  immaterial 
where  the  value  of  the  property  con- 
veyed to  pay  or  secure  a  preferred 
creditor  does  not  equal  the  amount  of 


the  debt.    Wade  v.  Odle,  21  Tex.  Civ. 
App.  656,  54  S.  W.  786. 

43.  Fargerson  v.  Hall,  99  Ala. 
Ala.  209,  13  So.  302;  Harris  v.  Rus- 
seH,  93  Ala.  59,  9  So.  641;  Carter  v. 
Cohen,  84  Ala.  256,  4  So.  151 ;  Hesse 
V.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202,  68  Pac.  751. 

44.  Hodges  v.  Coleman,  76  Ala. 
103. 

45.  Archer  v.  0^rieii»  7  Hun  (K. 
y.)   146. 


Pbefsbsncbs  to  Cbsditobs. 


497 


of  property  given  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  pay  or  secure  a  valid 
debt  actually  owing  by  the  debtor,  in  order  to  be  valid,  must  be 
made  in  good  faith  and  with  no  purpose  of  defrauding  those  who 
are  not  preferred,  and  that,  if  made  and  accepted  with  the  intent 
to  hinder,  delay,  or  defeat  other  creditors  of  the  debtor,  it  is 
fraudulent  and  void  as  against  such  other  creditors.^  The  fact 
of  the  payment  of  a  valuable  consideration  upon  the  transfer  of 
the  property  is  not,  it  is  held,  as  a  proposition  of  law,  inconsis- 
tent with  the  existence  of  an  intent  to  defraud,  and  in  the  applica- 
tion of  this  principle,  it  is  held,  no  distinction  can  be  made  be- 
tween the  consideration  furnished  by  an  existing  debt  and  a  pres- 
ent consideration,  or  one  arising  in  any  other  manner.  Henoe 
proof  that  the  conveyance  or  transfer  was  made  to  pay  or  secure 
a  debt  actually  owing  by  the  debtor  does  not,  as  a  matter  of 
law,  disprove  the  existence  of  a  fraudulent  intent  on  the  part  of 
the  debtor  sufficient  to  enable  a  creditor  to  set  it  aside.^  But  it 
is  also  held  that  a  mere  intent  to  hinder  or  prevent  another  credi- 
tor from  reaching  the  property  is  not  enough  to  vitiate  a  trans- 
fer in  satisfaction  of  other  actual  indebtedness  to  a  creditor  to 
whom  the  debtor  desires  to  give  a  preference ;  that  there  must  be 
something  shown  more  than  a  preference  given  to  and  accepted 
by  a  creditor  with  the  intent  to  defeat  another,^  as,  for  example^ 
an  intent  to  enable  the  debtor  to  continue  in  possession  and  retain 


4«.  2^.  r.— BiUings  v.  RubmU, 
101  N.  Y.  226,  4  N.  E.  631,  rwfg  31 
Hun,  65;  New  York  Joe  Co.  v. 
Cousins,  23  App.  Div.  660,  4S  N.  Y. 
8upp.  709;  Howe  ▼.  Sommers,  22 
App.  Div.  417,  48  N.  Y.  Supp. 
162. 

G^. — Bigby  T.  Wamock,  116  Ga. 
386,  41  8.  E.  622,  67  L.  R.  A.  764; 
Monroe  Mercantile  Co.  ▼.  Arnold, 
108  Ga.  449,  34  8.  £.  176;  Conley  ▼. 
Buck,  100  Ga.  187,  28  8.  £.  97; 
Phinizy  v.  Clark,  62  Ga.  623. 

/nd.— Wynne  ▼.  Glideweil,  17  Ind. 
446. 

£y.— Ward  ▼.  Trotter,  19  Ky.  1. 

32 


Ma89. — Crowinshield  v.  Kittridge, 
48  Mass.  520. 

Mo, — Crow  ▼.  Beardsley,  68  Mo. 
436;  Scott  Hardware  Co.  ▼.  Riddle, 
84  Mo.  App.  275;  Roea  ▼.  Ashton,  73 
Mo.  App.  254. 

47.  Billings  ▼.  RiisseU,  101  N.  Y. 
226,  4  N.  £.  531. 

48.  Wilson  t.  Berger,  5  N.  Y.  St. 
Rep.  822,  oiiing  Auburn  Ezch.  Bank 
▼.  Fitch,  48  Barb.  344;  Waterbury  v. 
Sturtevant,  18  Wend.  353,  and  dM- 
ting%iii9hing  Billings  ▼.  Russell,  101 
N.  Y.  226,  4  N.  £.  531;  BiUings  ▼. 
Billings,  31  Hun,  65.  See  also 
cited  in  note  46,  mpro. 


498 


Fbaudulsnt  Cokysyakcss. 


the  use  and  benefit  of  the  property.^  It  may  be  said  as  a  general 
rule  that  to  impeach  the  payment  or  securing  of  an  actual  debt 
there  should  be  evidence  tending  to  show  either:  (1)  some  other 
advantage  or  benefit  to  the  debtor  beyond  the  discharge  of  his 
obligation;  or  (2)  some  other  benefit  to  the  creditor,  beyond 
mere  payment  of  his  debt;  or  (3)  some  injury  to  the  other  credi- 
tors beyond  mere  postponement  to  the  debt  preferred.^ 

§  24.  Secrecy  and  haste. — In  the  absence  of  a  bankrupt  or 
insolvent  law,  a  debtor  may  lawfully  pay  one  creditor  to  the 
exclusion  of  others,  and  the  fact  that  the  preference  is  accom- 
plished quickly  or  secretly,  in  order  to  prevent  interference,  is 
immaterial.^^    One  may  be  hasty  in  paying  an  honest  debt  and 


40.  BillingB  ▼.  Russell,  101  N.  Y. 
226. 

50.  Snayberger  ▼.  Fahl,  196  Pa. 
St.  336,  46  Atl.  1066,  78  Am.  8t.  Bep. 
818;  Werner  ▼.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa.  St. 
3C0,  29  Atl.  737;  Dalley's  EsUte,  13 
Pa.  Super.  Ct.  606.  See  also  Re- 
pauno  Chemical  Co.  ▼.  Victor  Hard- 
ware Co.,  101  Fed.  948,  42  C.  C.  A. 
106. 

51.  y.  r. — ^Thompson  ▼.  Fuller,  8 
N.  Y.  Supp.  62,  6  Sily.  Sup.  41. 

17.  JSf.— Davis  v.  Schwartz,  166  U. 
S.  631,  16  Sup.  Ct.  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
289;  Foster  ▼.  McAlester,  114  Fed. 
146,  62  C.  C.  A.  107,  instructions 
which  convey  to  a  jury  the  impres- 
sion that  secrecy  or  haste  in  a  trans- 
action by  which  a  debtor  secures  one 
of  his  creditors,  or  the  fact  that  the 
giving  of  such  security  operates  to 
hinder  and  delay  other  creditors, 
are  badges  of  fraud  which  place  the 
burden  on  a  secured  creditor  to  sus- 
tain the  validity  of  his  security,  are 
misleading  and  erroneous  without  a 
full  explanation  of  the  legal  right  of 
a  bona  fide  creditor  to  obtain  secur- 
ity for  his  debts  to  the  exclusion  of 


others,  if  done  in  good  faith;  and 
such  instructions  are  not  warranted 
in  any  case  unless  there  is  other  evi- 
dence tending  to  impeach  the  good 
faith  of  the  transaction,  since  such 
facts  are  entirely  consistent  with 
the  exercise  by  the  creditor  of  his 
legal  rights;  Repauno  Chemical  Co. 
V.  Victor  Hardware  Co.,  101  Fed. 
948,  42  C.  C.  A.  106;  Rice  v.  Adler- 
Goldman  Commission  Co.,  71  Fed. 
161,  18  C.  C.  A.  16. 

Ala. — Carter  v.  Coleman,  84  Ala. 
266,  4  So.  161,  BO  long  as  the  law 
allows  a  failing  debtor  to  prefer 
some  of  his  creditors  at  the  expense 
of  others,  it  permits,  if  it  does  not 
invite,  a  race  of  diligence,  and  no 
presumption  of  fraud  arises  from 
haste  in  the  transaction;  Hodges  v. 
Coleman,  76  Ala.  103.  See  also  War- 
ren V.  Hunt,  114  Ala.  606,  21  So. 
939. 

Mist, — ^Holberg  v.  Jaffray,  64  Miss. 
746,  2  So.   168. 

Pa.— Candee's  Appeal,  191  Pa.  St. 
644,  43  Atl.  1093. 

Tenn. — Reeves  v.  John,  96  Teuu 
434,  32  S.  W.  312. 


Pbefbbenoes  to  Cbeditobs. 


499 


be  18  not  boTUid  to  explain  what  he  is  doing.  The  great  question 
isy  was  the  debt  an  honest  one,  and  was  there  an  honest  transac- 
tion intended  to  pay  it^  That  a  creditor  seeking  to  induce  the 
debtor  to  convey  to  him  goods  for  his  protection  attempts  to  keep 
the  other  creditors  from  finding  out  his  purpose  will  not  render 
the  sale  fraudulent."  But  it  has  been  held  that  a  preference,  to 
be  valid,  must  not  be  secret,  but  must  be  open  and  fair,  without 
any  other  object  than  the  act  on  its  face  imports.^  That  a  debtor 
keeps  secret  and  fails  to  disclose  to  his  other  creditors  the  fact  of 
his  indebtedness  to  the  preferred  creditor,  or  the  fact  that  he  has 
entered  into  an  agreement  to  prefer  such  creditor,  does  not  consti- 
tute a  fraud  on  the  other  creditors."  But  a  secret  arrangement 
by  a  debtor,  who  compounds  with  his  creditors,  to  pay  one  more 
than  he  does  the  others,  is  a  fraud  upon  the  others,  and  a  mortgage 
given  to  carry  out  such  an  arrangement  is  void." 

§  26.  Preference  pending  suit  in  general. — A  preferential 
conveyance  by  a  debtor  of  property  at  a  fair  value,  in  payment 
of  a  bona  fide  debt,  is  not  rendered  fraudulent  and  void  by  the 
fact  that  it  was  made  during  the  pendency  of  an  action  by  an- 
other creditor  against  the  debtor."  In  the  absence  of  fraud,  a 
judgment  by  confession  for  a  just  and  l^al  debt  will  not  be  set 


58.  Thompson  ▼.  Fuller,  8  N.  Y. 
Supp.  62,  5  SilT.  Sup.  41. 

53.  Rice  ▼.  Wood,  61  Ark.  442,  33 
S.  W.  636,  31  L.  R.  A.  609. 

54.  McNeal,  etc.,  Co.  ▼.  Plows,  S3 
111.  App.  186;  Hancock  ▼.  Horan,  16 
Tex.  607;  Edrington  ▼.  Rogers,  15 
Tex.  188. 

55.  Robinson  ▼.  Hawley,  46  App. 
Div.  (N.  y.)  287,  61  N.  Y.  Supp. 
138;  Smith  ▼.  Munroe,  1  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)  77,  37  N.  Y.  Supp.  62;  Mc- 
Elwee  T.  Kennedy,  66  S.  C.  164,  34 
S.  E.  86. 

56.  Harvey  t.  Hunt,  119  liass. 
279;  Feldman  v.  Qamble,  26  N.  J.  Bq. 
494. 


57.  N.  y.— Waterbury  v.  Sturte- 
Tant,  18  Wend.  353. 

U,  fif.— DaTis  V.  SchwartB,  155  U.  S. 
631,  15  Sup.  Ct.  237,  39  L.  Ed.  289; 
Vansickle  ▼.  Wells,  105  Fed.  25. 

Ala, — Crawford  t.  Kirksey,  50  Ala. 
590;  Stetson  v.  Miller,  36  Ala.  642; 
Williams  ▼.  Jones,  2  Ala.  314. 

/iM^.— Dice  V.  Irvin,  110  Ind.  561, 
11  N.  E.  488. 

Kan. — ^Randall  y.  Shaw,  28  Kan.  419. 

Ky, — ^Kennaird  ▼.  Adams,  11  B. 
Mon.  102. 

Minn, — Ferguson  ▼.  Kumler,  11 
Minn.  104. 

Miaw, — ^Donoghue  v.  ShuU,  85  Misa. 
404,  37  So.  817. 


500 


Fbaubulent  Cokvstanoss. 


aside  simply  because  it  was  given  bj  the  defendant  after  obtain- 
ing from  plaintiff  an  extention  of  time  to  answer  in  an  action 
then  pending."  But  where  such  extention  was  obtained  by  promis- 
ing to  pay  plaintiff's  claim,  and  that  in  the  meantime  there  should 
be  no  change  in  the  defendant's  property,  and  that  no  judgment 
should  be  entered  against  him  and  that  plaintiff  should  not  in 
any  way  be  prejudiced  by  the  delay,  a  judgment  so  confessed  is 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  plaintiff."  The  fact  that  when  a 
preference  is  made  by  an  insolv^it  debtor  there  are  bankruptcy 
proceedings  pending  against  him  and  that  the  transfer  is  in  viola- 
tiontion  of  the  federal  bankruptcy  act  is  not  material  and  does 
not  affect  the  validity  of  the  conveyance  in  a  jurisdiction  which 
permits  a  preference  to  be  given.* 


§'  26.  Intent  to  defeat  judgment,  execution,  or  attachment. — 
A  transfer  of  property  at  a  fair  value,  in  payment  of  a  bona  fide 
debt,  is  not  fraudulent  under  the  statute  as  against  an  execution 
subsequently  issued  by  a  judgment  creditor,^  and  when  taken 
by  a  creditor  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  himself  and  not  with 
intent,  on  his  part  at  least,  of  defeating  the  lien  of  a  judgment 
to  be  entered  on  a  verdict  secured  against  the  debtor,  of  which 
he  had  knowledge,  is  not  fraudulent."    Conveyances  in  good  faith 


Mo. — ^Knykendall  v.  MeDonald,  16 
Mo.  416,  57  Am.  Dec.  212. 

N,  J, — Doremus  ▼.  Daniels  (Ch. 
1890),  20  Atl.  147;  Goodwin  ▼.  Ha- 
miU,  26  N.  J.  £q.  24. 

O^to.— Barr  t.  Hatch,  3  Ohio»  527. 

Pa.— Snayberger  ▼.  Fahl,  196  Pa. 
8t.  336,  45  Atl.  1065,  78  Am.  St.  R.  818. 

8.  C— Weinges  ▼.  Gash,  15  S.  O. 
44;  Bevins  ▼.  Dunham,  1  Speen,  39. 

Utah.  —  Henderson  ▼.  Adams 
(1897),  48  Pac.  398. 

Fa.— Lucas  ▼.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269; 
Williams  ▼.  Lord,  75  Va.  390. 

See  also  Transfers  in  antidpatioii 
of  or  pending  suit,  chap.  VI,  §  7, 
sttpnk 


SS.  Wood  V.  Mitchell,  17  N.  Y. 
Supp.  782,  affg  14  N.  Y.  Supp.  7,  26 
Abb.  N.  Gas.  129. 

59.  H.  B.  Claflin  Co.  ▼.  Amheioii, 
87  Hun  (N.  Y.)  236,  33  N.  Y.  Sapp. 
1037,  1  N.  Y.  Annot  391. 

60.  Taloott  ▼.  Harder,  119  K.  Y. 
536,  23  N.  E.  1056. 

61.  Wilder  ▼.  Winne,  6  Oow.  <K. 
Y.)  284;  Ludlow  t.  Hurd,  19  Johns. 
(N.  Y.)  218;  Weller  ▼.  Wayland,  17 
Johns.   (N.  Y.)    102. 

62.  Hall  ▼.  Arnold,  15  Barb.  (K. 
Y.)  599;  Waterbury  ▼.  Sturterant, 
18  Wend.  (N.  Y.)  353.  Oompaire 
Stoddard  ▼.  Butler,  20  Wend.  (K. 
Y.)  507. 


Pbepesences  to  Cbeditobs* 


501 


to  paj  or  secure  a  valid  debt  by  waj  of  preference  are  not  ren- 
dered fraudulent  by  the  fact  that  they  were  executed  under  in- 
stant apprehension  of  attachment  suits  or  were  made  and  accepted 
with  the  intent  to  defeat  judgments  or  executions  against  the 
debtor  and  thus  prevent  other  creditors  from  collecting  their 
claims."  A  conveyance  from  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  is  not  in- 
valid because  the  debtor  made  it  with  the  intention  of  delaying 
other  creditors,  although  the  creditor  taking  the  conveyance  knows 
this,  if  he  took  it  with  the  honest  purpose  of  securing  his  debt. 
If,  however,  his  purpose  was  not  honest,  or  if  he  participated  in 
a  fraudulent  purpose  of  the  debtor,  the  rule  is  otherwise.^  A 
conveyance  by  a  debtor  on  the  eve  of  judgments  being  obtained 
against  him  is  a  badge  of  fraud  only  and  does  not  necessarily  ren- 
der the  conveyance  inoperative.*^  Circumstances  may  be  admitted 
to  explain  and  justify  such  a  transfer,  and  when  it  appears  that 
the  transfer  was  of  property  for  a  full  and  fair  price  to  a  credi- 
tor, in  payment  of  a  just  and  valid  debt,  and  that  the  debt  is 
thereby  discharged,  any  presumption  of  fraud  arising  from  the 
pendency  of  the  suit  is  removed.*  But  a  preference  secured  by 
a  creditor  over  other  creditors  by  obtaining  payment  of  his  debt 
by  suit  commenced  or  judgment  secured  by  collusion  with  the  in- 
solvent debtor,  whereby  other  creditors  of  the  debtor  are  hindered. 


69.  U,  8. — ^Davis  ▼.  Schwarte,  165 
U.  S.  631,  15  Sup.  Ci.  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
2S9. 

CaL^Walden  ▼.  Murdock,  23  Cal. 
540,  83  Am.  Dec.  135;  Wheat<«  ▼. 
Neville,  19  Cal.  41. 

Flo.— Gassett  t.  Wilson,  3  Fla.  235. 

/{I.— Funk  y.  Staata,  24  HI.  633. 

Ind. — Steele  v.  Moore,  54  Ind.  52. 

Ma88, — Carpenter  ▼.  Cushman,  121 
Mass.  265. 

ifo.— Kuykendall  ▼.  McDonald,  15 
Mo.  416,  57  Am.  Dec.  512. 

y.  /.— Ck>odwin  ▼.  Hamill,  26  K. 
J.  Eq.  24. 

Pa, — Clemena  ▼.  Davis,  7  Pa.  St. 
268. 


Tev.— Moore  ▼.  Robinson  (CSv. 
App.  1903),  75  S.  V7.  890;  Eraser  ▼, 
Thatcher,  49  Tex.  26. 

Fa.— Lucas  ▼.  CIa£Bin,  76  Va.  269. 

Cafk— Gurofski  ▼.  Harris,  27  Ont. 
201,  aff'd  23  Ont.  App.  717;  White 
V.  Stevens,  7  U.  C.  Q.  B.  340. 

Eng, — ^Alton  v.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4 
Ch.  622,  38  U  J.  Oh.  669,  21  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  282,  17  Wkly.  Rep.  1034; 
Wood  V.  Dixie,  7  Q.  B.  892,  9  Jur. 
796,  53  E.  C.  L.  892. 

64.  Shelley  ▼.  Boothe,  73  Mo.  74, 
39  Am.  Rep.  481. 

66.  Williams  ▼.  Jones,  2  Ala.  314. 

66.  Barr  v.  Hatch,  3  Ohio^  527. 


502 


^ 

Fbaudui*ekt  Conveyances. 


delayed,  and  defrauded,  is  a  fraudulent  preference  and  void.* 
And  a  preference  given  will  be  held  fraudulent  in  fact,  as  against 
the  judgment  of  a  creditor,  where  the  transfer  was  made  by  the 
debtor  in  violation  of  his  agreement  with  such  creditor,  and  with 
the  obvious  intent  to  deprive  the  latter  of  the  benefit  of  a  security 
previously  given,  or  after  such  creditor  had  been  induced  to  re- 
frain from  entering  judgment  by  the  fraudulent  representations 
of  the  debtor  that  there  would  be  no  change  in  the  property  and 
that  the  creditor's  right  should  not  be  in  any  way  prejudiced  by 
the  delay.** 


i; 


§  27.  Agreement  to  prefer.— Inasmuch  as  a  failing  debtor 
may  l^ally  prefer  one  or  more  creditors  and  the  law  will  uphold 
such  a  preference  honestly  made,  and  he  may  make  such  prefer- 
ence without  any  antecedent  promise,  it  will  not  be  invalidated 
because  made  in  pursuance  of  a  valid  or  invalid  agreement  hon- 
estly made,^  nor  because  such  agreement  for  preferential  trans- 
fer was  conditional,  as,  for  example,  to  secure  the  indebtedness 
whenever  demanded,^  or  to  protect  the  creditor  if  it  should  be- 
come necessary  to  do  so,  or  if  the  debtor  should  become  insolvent.^ 
Such  facts  are  merely  circumstances  from  which  fraud  may  be 


67.  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Acme 
White  Lead,  etc.,  Co.,  123  Ala.  344,  26 
So.  354. 

68.  Robinson  ▼.  Hawley,  45  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  287,  61  N.  Y.  Supp.  138; 
H.  B.  Claflin  Co.  v.  Arnheim,  87  Hun 

(N.  Y.)  236,  33  N.  Y.  Supp.  1037,  1 
N.  Y.  Annot.  Cas.  391,  dittinguishinff 
Wood  ▼.  Mitchell,  17  N.  Y.  Supp.  782. 

69.  National  Park  Bank  v.  Whit- 
more,  104  N.  Y.  297,  10  N.  E.  524; 
Foster  v.  McAlester,  114  Fed.  145,  52 
C.  C.  A.  107;  Fechheimer  v.  Baum, 
43  Fed.  719,  2  L.  R.  A.  163;  Smith  ▼. 
Craft,  17  Fed.  705,  appeal  dismisBed 
123  U.  S.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct.  196,  31  L. 
Ed.  267;  Marquese  ▼.  Felsenthal,  58 
Ark.  293,  24  S.  W.  493;  First  Nat. 
Bank  v.  North,  2  8.  D.  480,  51  N.  W. 


96.     See  also  Cooper  ▼.  Perdue,  114 
Ind.  207,  16  N.  E.  140. 

70.  Foster  ▼.  McAlester,  114  Fed. 
145,  52  C.  C.  A.  107. 

71.  Nati(mal  Park  Bank  ▼.  Whit- 
more,  104  N.  Y.  297,  10  N.  E.  524; 
Robinson  ▼.  Hawley,  45  App.  Div. 
CN.  Y.)  287,  61  N.  Y.  Supp.  138; 
Smith  ▼.  Monroe,  1  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.) 
77,  37  N.  Y.  Supp.  62 ;  Fechheimer  ▼. 
Baum,  43  Fed.  719,  2  L.  R.  A.  153; 
Smith  ▼.  Craft,  17  Fed.  705.  But 
compare  Krippendorf  v.  Hyde,  28  Fed. 
788. 

A  s^meral  AoslciuneAt  is  not  in* 
valid  because  it  was  not  filed  until 
four  days  after  it  was  signed,  where 
it  was  signed  with  the  understanding 
that  it  was  not  then  to  be  delivered* 


Pbefebeitgss  to  Cseditobs. 


503 


inferred  as  a  fact  and  are  proper  to  be  submitted  to  the  jury  on 
the  question  of  f raud.^  An  agreement  providing  for  the  immedi- 
ate maturity  of  a  debt  in  case  the  debtor  becomes  involved  is  not 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  in  the  absence  of  a  fraudulent  intent." 
But  an  agreement  by  a  debtor  that,  in  case  he  becomes  insolvent, 
he  will  turn  over  his  property  to  a  creditor,  is  fraudulent  as  to 
his  other  creditors  under  local  insolvency  laws.^^  And  a  mortgage 
given  to  secure  advances  is  none  the  less  an  unlawful  preference 
because  given  in  pursuance  of  an  agreement  to  prefer.^ 


"§  28.  Transfer  partly  as  preference  and  partly  on  other  con- 
sideration.— Where  an  insolvent  debtor  conveys  or  transfers  prop- 
erty to  a  creditor,  partly  in  payment  of  an  antecedent  debt  and 
partly  for  money  paid  or  loaned  at  the  time,  the  validity  of  the 
transaction  as  against  other  existing  creditors  is  to  be  determined 
by  the  rules  applicable  to  a  purchase  on  an  entirely  new  considera- 
tion.^ The  creditor  in  such  a  case  must  pay  a  reasonably  fair 
price  for  the  property  conveyed  or  transferred  and  the  debtor 
must  not  secure  or  reserve  any  benefit  by  the  transaction  which 
the  law  would  not  secure  to  him  in  the  absence  of  a  contract.^  If 
these  requirements  are  complied  with,  in  the  absence  of  actual 


but  only  in  case  the  assignors  were 
unable  to  procure  an  extension  from 
their  creditors.  Pierce  Steam  Heat- 
ing Co.  ▼.  Ransom,  16  App.  Div.  (N. 
Y.),  258,  44  N.  Y.  Supp.  S23. 

The  f ailwe  to  veeord  an  agree- 
ment by  a  debtor  to  prefer  a  certain 
creditor  in  case  of  insolvency  does 
not  render  it  fraudulent,  where  such 
an  agreement  is  not  required  by  law 
to  be  recorded,  as  its  record  in  such 
caee  would  not  constitute  notice. 
Fechheimer  ▼.  Baum,  43  Fed.  710. 

72.  Marquese  v.  Felsenthal.  58 
Ark.  293,  24  S.  W.  493;  Smith  v. 
Craft,  123  U.  S.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct  196, 
31  L.  Ed.  267. 


73.  Teitig  v.  Boesman,  12  Mont. 
404,  31  Pac.  371. 

74.  Chevalier  ▼.  Commins,  106  Cal. 
580,  39  Pac.  929. 

75.  Forbes  v.  Howe,  102  Mass.  427, 
3  Am.  Rep.  476. 

76.  Owens  v.  Hobbie.  82  Ala.  467, 
8  So.  145.  See  Transfer  to  creditor 
where  debt  is  only  part  of  considera- 
tion, chap.  XIII,  S  10.  infra. 

77.  Leinkauff  ▼.  Frenkle,  80  Ala. 
136,  where  a  creditor,  with  a  demand 
for  $5,700,  purchases  his  insolvent 
debtor's  entire  stock  at  the  gross  sum 
of  $6,200  for  which  he  pays  $1,000  in 
cash,  leavincir  $500  of  his  debt  tmsat- 
isfied,  tiie  transaction  is  fraudulent 
as  to  other  creditors. 


504 


Fbauduubnt  Cokvsyanobs. 


fraud,  a  transfer  by  an  insolvent  debtor  of  his  property  to  one  of 
bis  creditors  for  a  fixed  consideration,  wbich  the  creditor  pays  in 
part  by  discharging  his  daim,  and  in  part  by  paying  other  debts 
of  the  grantor  or  by  the  payment  of  money,  will  be  valid  as 
against  other  creditors."  A  conveyance  of  land  to  one  creditor, 
to  the  exclusion  of  others,  the  price  paid  being  more  than  the 
land  with  a  perfect  title  is  worth,  is  not  rendered  fraudulent  by 
the  fact  that  the  grantee  agreed  to  pay  a  sum  of  money  to  the 
wife  of  the  grantor  for  her  separate  use,  for  her  relinquishment 
of  her  right  of  dower."  A  transfer  of  property  by  an  insolvent 
debtor  however,  to  a  creditor,  who  gives  a  time  note  for  the 
excess  over  the  amount  of  his  debt  thus  providing  for  payment 
of  the  balance  of  the  consideration  in  the  future,  is  invalid,  its 
effect  being,  as  to  such  excess,  to  hinder  and  delay  creditors  in 
their  lawful  actions."^  And  the  same  rule  has  been  held  to  apply 
where  the  effect  of  the  transfer  is  to  give  the  transferee  time  within 
which  to  repay  a  conceded  surplus  over  the  amount  of  the  debt^ 
thereby  hindering  and  delaying  creditors  of  their  lawful  actions, 
the  parties  being  held  to  have  intended  that  effect  as  the  natura], 
probable,  and  necessary  result  of  their  vohmtary  act.**  While  a 
bona  fide  creditor  may,  with  knowledge  that  the  debtor  intend, 
to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  other  creditors,  take  the  property 
of  the  debtor  in  satisfaction  of  his  claim,  and  if  necessary  for 


78.  Ala.— Gist  v.  Barrow,  42  Ark. 
521. 

louM. — Adams  v.  Ryan,  61  Iowa» 
783,  17  N.  W.  159;  Johnwrn  v.  Mo- 
Grew,  11  Iowa,  151,  77  Am.  Dec.  137. 

Mo. — Cahn  ▼.  Groves,  46  Mo.  App. 
263. 

7t,_Lyoii  V.  Rood,  12  Vt.  233. 

Wash.— iMngiTt  ▼.  David,  14  VSTaah. 
380,  44  Pac.  876. 

In  Texas,  tliough  a  failing  debtor 
may  prefer  a  ereditor,  be  cannot 
transfer  his  property  to  such  creditor, 
reoeiving  a  partial  money  considera- 
tion  therefor,   and   so   eut  off   the 


rights  of  other  creditors.  Sach  m 
transfer  will  be  set  aside  not  only  aft 
to  the  excess  in  value,  but  as  to  all 
the  property  transferred.  BUudc  v. 
Vaughan,  70  Tex.  47,  7  S.  W.  604; 
Seligaon  v.  Brown,  61  Tex.  180; 
Greenleve  v.  Blum,  59  Tex.  124. 

70.  Marshall  v.  Hutchinson,  44 
Ky.  298. 

80.  Brinson  v.  Edwards,  94  Ala. 
447,  10  So.  219;  Elser  v.  Graber,  69 
Tex.  222,  6  8.  W.  560. 

But  see  Langert  v.  David,  14  Wash. 
389,  44  Pac.  875. 

81.  Seger  v.  Thomas,  107  Mo.  635,. 
18  S.  W.  33. 


Pbxfebences  to  Cbxditobs.  605 

this  purpose  make  a  cash  payment  to  the  debtor  of  the  difference 
between  the  debt  and  the  value  of  the  property,  yet  the  transaction 
must  not  be  for  the  purpose  of  conferring  a  benefit  upon  the 
debtor,  and  the  cash  payment  made  must  be  necessary  in  order  to 
effectuate  the  transfer  or  the  collection  of  the  debt." 


§  29.  Where  present  consideration  is  exempt — Where  a; 
debtor  sells  his  property  at  a  fair  value  and  receives  payment 
partly  in  the  discharge  of  an  antecedent  debt  and  partly  for  a 
present  consideration,  either  in  money  or  notes  of  the  purchaser, 
if  the  present  consideration,  together  with  the  remaining  prop- 
erty of  the  debtor,  do  not  exceed  in  value  the  amount  of  the  exemp- 
tion to  which  he  is  entitled,  the  effect  of  the  transaction  is  to  make 
an  authorized  preference  among  the  seller's  creditors,  and  secure 
to  him  a  sum  of  money  which  is  not  liable  to  his  other  debts; 
and  the  fact  that  the  money  or  notes  were  taken  in  part  payment 
of  the  purchase  does  not  render  the  transaction  fraudulent,  since, 
as  the  money  or  notes  were  included  in  the  exemption,  the  change 
was  merely  in  the  form  of  the  property  exempted,  and  did  not 
therefore  involve  any  prejudice  to  the  rights  of  creditors."  The 
debtor  in  such  case  must  be  shown  to  be  a  resident  of  the  state 
and  thus  entitled  to  the  exemption.** 

§  30.  Present  conrideration  to  be  paid  by  debtor  to  otlier 
creditors. — ^A  sale  by  an  insolvent  debtor  of  his  property  at  a 
fair  valuation  partly  in  absolute  payment  of  a  bona  fide  debt,  no 
benefit  being  reserved  to  himself,  and  partly  for  a  present  con- 
sideration, is  not  rendered  fraudulent  by  the  fact  that  it  was 
stipulated  that  the  present  consideration  should  be  applied  on 
the  debts  of  another  bona  fide  creditor,  and  that  it  was  so  ap- 

82.  Sly  y.  Bell  (Iowa,  1906),  108  some  of  the  property,  oonsiflting  of 

N.  W.  227,  where  a  transaetion  was  cattle,  horses  and  farm  implements, 

held  voidable  at  the  suit  of  the  cred-  from  the  sale. 

itors,  inasmuch  as  the  cash  payment  88.  Fargerson  ▼.  Hall,  99  Ala.  209, 

was   unnecessary  because  the  differ-  14  So.  302;  Brinson  ▼.  Edwards,  94 

enoe   covered   1^   the   cash    payment  Ala.  447,  10  So.  219. 

could  have  been  avoided  by  omitting  84.  Brinson  v.  Edwards,  9Upn^ 


506 


Fkaudulent  Conveyances. 


plied.*    Such  a  stipulation  is  not  objectionable  as  being  a 
vation  of  a  benefit  to  the  debtor.** 


§  81.  Other  debts  assumed  by  transferee.— A  bona  fide  prefer- 
ential sale  or  transfer  of  property  by  an  insolvent  or  failing  debtor 
to  a  creditor,  in  consideration  of  the  cancellation  of  a  debt  dne 
by  the  debtor  to  the  creditor,  or  to  secure  the  payment  of  such  a 
debt,  is  valid,  as  against  the  unpreferred  creditors,  although  the 
vendee  or  grantee  also  agrees,  as  part  of  the  consideration  or  as 
further  consideration,  to  pay,  or  assumes  the  payment  of,  debts 
owing  by  the  debtor  to  certain  other  creditors,  or  to  pay  a  certain 
sum  on  such  debts  as  the  debtor  may  direct*^  The  rule  applies 
although  the  conveyance  is  of  all  the  debtor's  property,**  and  al- 


as. Fargeraon  ▼.  Hall,  99  Ala.  209» 
13  So.  302;  Carter  v.  Coleman,  S4 
Ala.  266,  4  So.  161;  Moog  v.  Farley, 
79  Ala.  246,  when  it  is  not  shown 
that  the  grantee  had  knowledge  of 
the  grantor's  insolvency;  Rankin  ▼. 
Vandiver,  78  Ala.  562. 

86.  Rankin  v.  Vandiver,  78  Ala. 
662.  See  Reservation  of  power  to 
direct  application  of  surplus  pro- 
ceeds, chap.  X,  §  9,  9upra. 

87.  y.  r.— Hine  v.  Bowe,  114  N. 
Y.  350,  21  N.  E.  733,  afg  46  Hun, 
196;  Carpenter  v.  Muren,  42  Barb. 
300,  mortgage. 

17.  £f.— Randolph  v.  Allen,  73  Fed. 
23,  19  C.  C.  A.  353. 

Ala.— Goetter  v.  Smith,  104  Ala. 
481,  16  So.  534;  Dixon  v.  Higgins, 
82  Ala.  284,  2  So.  289. 

Cat. — Saunderson  v.  Broadwell,  82 
Cal.  132,  23  Pa.  36. 

Conn, — ^Koster  v.  Merritt,  82  Conn. 
246,  such  a  sale  is  not  void  as  pre- 
ferring creditors,  if,  under  the  laws 
of  the  State  where  the  sale  is  made 
such  preferenoes  are  not  invalid. 

/IZ.— Ewing  V.  Runkle,  20  111.  448, 
where  such  a  transfer  was  made  with 


the  consent  of  other  creditors,  the 
consenting  creditors  were  bound  by  it. 
Ind, — ^WilcoxBon    ▼.    Annesley,    23 
Ind.  285. 

/otoo.-— Lyooming  Rubber  Co.  v. 
King,  90  lowfi,  343,  57  N.  W.  864, 
mortgage;  Johnson  v.  McGrew,  11 
Iowa,  151,  77  Am.  Dec.  137. 

N,  J. — ^Esaez  County  ▼.  Luidaley,  41 
N.  J.  Eq.  189,  3  Atl.  391. 

Pa.— York  County  Bank  v.  Otrter, 
38  Pa.  St.  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494. 

Tenn.— Johnson  v.  Coldstmi  (Ch. 
App.  1899),  61  S.  W.  474,  where  aU  of 
the  transferrer's  debts  were  assumed 
by  the  transferee,  who  paid  some  of 
them  and  became  liable  for  the  rest. 

Tea. — Jacobs  v.  Totty,  76  Ter.  343, 
13  S.  W.  372;  Noyes  v.  Sanger,  8 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  388,  27  S.  W.  1022. 

Va. — Janney  V.  Bumes,  11  Lei.  100. 

Wis.— Ingram  v.  Osbom,  70  Wis. 
184,  36  N.  W.  304. 

Compare  Foster  v.  Grigsby,  64  Ky. 
86;  Smith  v.  Conkwright,  28  Minn. 
23,  8  N.  W.  876. 

88.  Chipman  v.  Stem,  89  Ala.  207, 
7  So.  409;  Johnson  ▼.  McOrew,  II 
Iowa,  151. 


PSEFBBENOES  TO  CbEDITOBS. 


607 


though  the  transaction  results  in  the  preference  of  the  creditors 
the  payment  of  whose  claims  is  thus  assumed^  or  such  preference 
is  stipulated  for  by  the  parties,  since  the  debtor  has  a  legal  right 
to  direct  the  application  of  the  surplus  and  to  give  preferences 
therefrom,®  There  is  no  reason  why  the  debtor  may  not  as  well 
direct  the  payment  of  the  surplus  of  the  consideration  by  the 
purchaser  upon  his  debts,  as  to  take  the  money  and  pay  it  on 
them  himself.^  Where  there  is  a  complete  novation,  the  substi- 
tution of  a  new  obligation  for  an  old  one,  which  is  thereby  ex- 
tinguished, the  debtor  being  released  and  the  other  creditors  ac- 
cepting the  obligation  of  the  purchasing  creditor  in  the  place  of 
that  of  the  debtor,  the  transaction  is  not  fraudulent.*^  A  stipula- 
tion whereby  the  right  is  reserved  to  the  debtor  to  direct  what 
claims  shall  have  preference  as  to  payment  from  the  surplus  is 
not  objectionable  as  being  a  reservation  of  a  benefit  to  him.**  But 
a  stipulation  that  the  transferee  or  vendee  shall  have  power  to 
prefer  creditors  of  the  debtor  at  his  discretion  will  render  the  con- 
veyance or  transfer  invalid,* 

§  32.  Creditor's  promise  to  compound  felony. — ^A  transfer  of 
property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  in  payment  of  a  debt  is  not  fraud- 
ulent in  law,  within  a  statute  providing  for  the  reaching  of  prop- 
erty fraudulently  conveyed  by  a  debtor  with  intent  to  defeat,  delay 
or  defraud  creditors,  merely  because  the  compounding  of  a  felony 
was  a  part  of  the  transaction.*^ 


80.  N.  r.— Hine  v.  Bowe,  supra. 

U.  8. — ^Randolpli  ▼.  Allen,  9Upra. 

Ala. — Goetter  ▼.  Smith,  tupm. 

Ind. — ^WilooxBon  ▼.  Annesley,  tupra. 

Iowa. — Lycoming  Rubber  Co.  v. 
King,  supra. 

Wis. — Ingram  v.  Osborn,  supra. 

90.  Hine  y.  Bowe,  supra;  Royer 
Wbeel  C6.  v.  Fielding;  101  N.  Y.  504. 

01.  McCUin  V.  Dillabaugh,  117 
Mich.  446,  75  N.  W.  029,  distinguish- 
ing  HiU  v.  IfaUory,  112  Mich.  387, 
70  N.  W.  1016;  Allen  ▼.  Stingel,  95 


Mich.  195,  54  N.  W.  880. 

98.  Hine  ▼.  Bowe,  supra;  Goetter 
V.  Smith,  supra.  See  also  Reeenra- 
ticm  of  power  to  direct  application 
of  surplus  proceeds,  chap.  X,  §  9, 
supra. 

98.  Strong  ▼.  Skinner,  4  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  546;  Boardman  ▼.  Halliday,  10 
Paige  (N.  Y.),  223;  Bamum  ▼. 
Hempstead,  7  Paige  (N.  Y.),  568. 
See  also  Delegation  of  power  to  pre- 
fer, chap.  XI,  §  0,  supra. 

94.  Traders'  Nat.  Bank  v.  Steere^ 


508 


FkAUDULEKT    C0NVBTAITCB& 


§  33.  Preferences  between  relatives  generally. — A  oonveyanoe 
of  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  relatives  in  discharge  of  an 
indebtedness  to  tbem,  made  in  good  f aith,  is  valid  as  against  the 
grantor's  other  creditors^  being  only  a  preference  given  by  him 
to  the  claim  of  his  relatives  over  that  of  the  others."^  Transactions 
between  relatives  whereby  property  is  transferred  from  one  credi- 
tor to  another  in  payment  of  an  alleged  past-due  indebtedness,  by 
reason  of  which  other  creditors  are  deprived  of  their  just  dues, 
will,  however,  be  scrutinized  very  closely,  and  the  bona  fides  of 
such  transactions  must  be  clearly  established.^  Relationship  is 
not  a  badge  of  fraud,  though  it  may  require  that  the  dealings  of 
the  parties  be  treated  with  suspicion;  but  suspicion  is  not  proof 
of  fraud.  Fraud  must  be  proved  not  by  surmise,  but  by  evid^ice 
which  rises  above  the  realm  of  mere  suspicion,  and  to  the  dignity 
of  proof;  otherwise  it  would  be  next  to  impossible  to  sustain  trans- 
actions between  near  relatives  upon  any  other  theory.  In  the  ab- 
sence of  actual  fraud,  a  preference  given  for  a  valid  subsisting 
debt  by  a  debtor  to  a  member  of  his  family  or  other  relative  is 
as  valid  as  if  made  to  any  other  creditor.^     There  is  no  law 


166  Mam.  389,  43  N.  E.  187.  And 
see  In  re  Mapleback,  4  Ch.  D.  150, 
13  Cot  C.  C.  374,  36  L.  T.  R.  N.  8. 
503,  25  Wkly.  Bep.  103. 

95.  Silvers  v.  Potter,  48  N.  J.  £q. 
539,  22  Atl.  684. 

96.  Fisher  y.  Herron,  22  Neb.  183, 
34  N.  W.  365. 

97.  N,  r.— Lindsley  ▼.  Van  Cort- 
landt,  67  Hun,  145,  22  N.  Y.  Supp. 
222,  afTd  142  N.  Y.  682,  37  N.  E. 
825;  Toffey  t.  Williama,  5  Thomp.  ft 
C.  294. 

U.  fif.— Davis  ▼.  Schwartz,  155  U. 
S.  631,  15  Sup.  Gt.  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
289;  Walker  ▼.  Houghteling,  120 
Fed.  928,  57  C.  C.  A.  218;  Corwine 
▼.  Thompson  Nat.  Bank,  105  Fed. 
196,  44  C.  C.  A.  442;  Vanriekle  ▼. 


Wills,  100  Fed.  25;  Hinchman  t. 
Parlin,  74  Fed.  698,  21  C.  C.  A.  273, 
41  U.  S.  App.  301;  Buford  ▼.  Cook» 
36  Fed.  21. 

Ala. — Worthington  y.  Bogan 
(1898),  26  So.  299;  Owens  y.  Hob- 
ble, 82  Ala.  467,  3  So.  145;  Crawford 
y.  Kirksey,  50  Ala.  290. 

Ark, — Hemstead  y.  Johnston,  18 
Ark.  123,  65  Am.  Dec  458. 

Cai.— Boberts  y.  Burr,  135  Gal. 
156,  67  Pac.  46. 

/tt.— Schuberth  y.  SchUlo,  177  Hl^ 
346,  52  N.  E.  319,  affg  76  111.  App. 
356;  Victor  y.  Swisky,  87  HI.  App. 
583. 

Ind, — ^Boekland  County  y.  Sam- 
meryille,  139  Ind.  695,  39  N.  B.  307; 
Adams  y.  Curtis,  137  Ind.  175,  36  N. 


PSEFEBBKCES  TO  CbEOITOBS* 


609 


which  forbids  persons  standing  in  near  relations  of  consanguinity, 
affinity,  or  business,  from  dealing  with  each  other,  or  which  re* 
quires  them  to  conduct  their  business  vrith  each  other  differently 
from  the  manner  in  which  they  conduct  it  with  other  persons.** 
In  accordance  with  the  general  rules  stated  in  the  first  section  of 
this  chapter,  a  debtor  has  a  legal  right  to  give  a  preference  for  a 
bona  fide  debt  to  his  father,**  to  his  mother,^  to  his  brother,*  to 


E.  1095;  Jones  v.  Snyder,  117  Ind. 
229,  20  K.  E.  140;  Wilson  ▼.  Wilson, 
113  Ind.  416,  16  N.  E.  613;  Goff  ▼. 
Rogers,  71  Ind.  469. 

Iowa, — ^Roberts  v.  Brothers,  119 
Iowa,  309,  93  N.  W.  289;  Brooks  ▼. 
Jones  (1900),  82  N.  W.  434;  Stroff 
V.  Swafford,  81  Iowa,  696,  47  N.  W. 
1023;  Rockford  Boot,  etc.,  Mfg.  Co. 
V.  Mastin,  75  Iowa,  112,  39  N.  W. 
219;  Wise  Y.  Wilds,  47  Iowa,  586, 
42  N.  W.  563. 

iTon.— Winfleld  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Crooo,  46  Kan.  629,  26  Pac.  942; 
Bliss  V.  Couch,  46  Kan.  400,  26  Pac. 
706;  Cooper  ▼.  First  Nat.  Bank,  40 
Kan.  6,  18  Pac.  937. 

Ky.—Siokw  v.  Coffey,  71  Kj.  533; 
Young  V.  Stallings,  44  Ky.  307. 

Md, — Commonwealth  Bank  ▼. 
Keams,  100  Md.  202,  69  Atl.  1010. 

iftcA.— Webber  v.  Webber,  109 
Mich.  147,  66  N.  W.  960;  Leppig  ▼. 
Bretzel,  48  Mich.  321,  12  N.  W.  199. 

ifistf.— Donoghue  v.  Shull,  85  Miss. 
404,  37  So.  817. 

Mo. — ^Ridge  v.  Greenwell,  63  Mo. 
App.  479. 

i\re&.— Blair  State  Bank  ▼.  Bunn, 
61  Neb.  464,  85  N.  W.  527;  Earring- 
ton  V.  Stone,  36  Neb.  456,  53  N.  W. 
389. 

N.  •f.— Silvers  v.  Potter,  48  N.  J. 
Eq.  539,  22  Ati.  584. 

OMo.— Thaeker  v.  Newall,  7  Ohio 
Dee.  (Reprint)  576,  3  Cine.  L.  Bui. 
1159. 


Or.— Hesse  ▼.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202, 
68  Pac.  751;  Feldman  ▼.  Nioolai,  28 
Or.  34,  40  Pac.  1010;  Jolly  ▼.  Kyle, 
27  Or.  95,  39  Pac.  999. 

Pa, — Candee's  Appeal,  191  Pa.  St. 
644,  43  Atl.  1093;  Kitchen  v.  Me- 
Closkey,  150  Pa.  St.  376,  24  Atl.  688, 
30  Am.  St.  Rep.  811;  Collins  ▼. 
Cronin,  117  Pa.  St  35,  11  Ati.  869. 

8,  C. — ^Mechanics'  Bldg.,  etc., 
Assoc,  y.  Fowler,  67  S.  C.  110. 

8.  D.— Studebaker  Mfg.  Co.  t. 
Zollars,  12  S.  D.  296,  81  N.  W.  292. 

Tefm. — ^Miller  v.  Winton  (Ch.  App. 
1900),  56  S.  W.  1049;  Maryrille 
Bank  v.  Thorton  (Ch.  App.  1895),  35 
S.  W.  565. 

Fa. — Johnson  ▼.  Lucas,  103  Va.  36, 
48  8.  E.  497. 

J^fi^.— Orogan  ▼.  Cooke,  2  Ball  4  B. 
234. 

98.  Johnson  ▼.  Lucas,  103  Va.  36, 
48  S.  E.  497. 

Am  lBsolT«mt  yHTata  mamv- 
f aetvrlns  oorpovatioaL  may  pre- 
fer its  directors,  or  creditors  on 
whose  claims  the  directors  are  sure- 
ties, though  their  votes  are  necessary 
therefor,  and  though  loss  is  thereby 
caused  to  persons  having  claims 
against  the  corporation,  the  directors 
owing  no  duty  to  creditors.  Nap- 
panee  Canning  Co.  v.  Reid,  159  Ind. 
614,  64  N.  E.  870,  1115,  59  L.  R.  A. 
199. 

99.  y.  7.— Lindsley  t.  Van  Oori- 


510 


FBAin)UI.£NT   CONVEYANCEB. 


his  sister/  or  to  his  child/  to  the  same  extent  as  he  might  prefer 
other  creditors.    Where  there  is  no  f raud,  parents  may  lawfully 


landt,  67  Hun,  146,  22  N.  Y.  Supp. 
222,  aifd  142  N.  Y.  6S2,  37  N.  E. 
S25. 

Ind. — Rockland  County  v.  Summer- 
Yille,  139  Ind.  696,  39  N.  £.  307 ;  Me- 
Fftdden  v.  Rom,  126  Ind.  341,  26  N. 
E.  76. 

lovoa, — First  Nat  Bank  v.  Bru- 
baker,  123  Iowa,  687,  106  N.  W.  116. 

ifio;^.— State  Bank  v.  Whittle,  48 
Mich.  1,  11  N.  W.  766. 

Minn, — Ferguson  ▼.  Kumler,  11 
Minn.  104. 

yeh. — Peregoy  ▼.  Krantz,  31  Neb. 
68,  47  N.  W.  422. 

1.  Leach  v.  Flack,  31  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  606;  Auburn  Exch.  Bank  ▼. 
Fitch,  48  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  344;  Roberto 
Y.  Burr,  136  Cal.  166,  67  Pac.  46; 
Coley  V.  Coley,  14  N.  J.  Eq.  360; 
Jones  V.  Naughright,  10  N.  J.  Eq. 
298;  Lloyd  v.  Williams,  21  Pa.  St. 
327. 

S.  Ala, — ^Moog  ▼.  Farley,  79  Ala. 
246. 

Cal, — Saunderson  v.  Broadwell,  82 
Cal.  132,  23  Pac.  36. 

Colo, — ^Krippendorf-Dittman  Co.  ▼• 
Trenoweth,  16  Colo.  App.  178»  64 
Pac.  373. 

lovoa, — ^Adams  v.  Ryan,  61  Iowa, 
733,  17  N.  W.  169. 

Ky, — Shaw  v.  Shaw,  16  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  692,  24  S.  W.  630. 

Pa.— Kitchen  ▼.  McCloskey,  160 
Pa.  St.  376,  24  Atl.  688,  30  Am.  St. 
Rep.  811.  See  also  Candee's  Appeal, 
191  Pa.  St.  644,  43  Atl.  1093,  where 
one  member  of  a  debtor  firm  was  a 
brother  of  a  member  of  the  creditor 
firm. 

8,  C. — Sloan  v.  Hunter,  66  S.  C. 
386,  34  S.  E.  668,  879,  76  Am.  St 


Rep.  561;  Thorpe  v.  Thorpe,  12  S.  C. 
164. 

3.  Toflfey  v.  Williams,  6  Thomps. 
k  C.  (N.  Y.)  294;  Cahn  v.  Groves, 
46  Mo.  App.  263. 

4.  If,  y.— National  Bank  v.  Port 
Jenris  v.  Bonnell,  26  Misc.  Rep.  641, 
67  N.  Y.  Supp.  486;  Hyde  v.  Houston, 
29  N.  Y.  Supp.  818. 

JJ,  £f.— Micou  ▼.  First  Nat  Bank, 
104  U.  S.  630,  26  L.  Ed.  834;  Vattier 
V.  Hinde,  7  Pet  262,  8  L.  Ed.  675. 

ifwi.— Clow  ▼.  Brown  (1904),  72 
N.  E.  534. 

Iowa, — Riddick  v.  Parr,  111  Iowa, 
733,  82  N.  W.  1002;  Sands  y.  Pier- 
son,  61  Iowa,  702,  17  N.  W.  107. 

Kan, — ^Pettyjohn  v.  Newhart,  7 
Kan.  App.  64,  61  Pac.  969;  Nurray 
Y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  5  Kan.  App.  466, 
49  Pac.  326. 

JTy.— Seiler  v.  Walz,  100  Ky.  105, 
29  S.  W.  338,  31  S.  W.  729,  17  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  301;  Caldwell  v.  Deposit 
Bank,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep.  166,  35  S.  W. 
625;  Spurrier  v.  Haley,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
364. 

ifd.— Thompson  ▼.  Williams,  100 
Md.  196,  60  Atl.  26. 

JftM.— Donly  V.  Ray  (1889),  6  So. 
324. 

Mo, — Lillard  v.  Johnson,  148  Mo. 
23,  49  S.  W.  889;  Ridge  y.  Green- 
well,  63  Mo.  App.  479. 

Vfeb, — Carson  y.  Murphy,  1  Neb. 
(Unoff.)  619,  96  N.  W.  110. 

y,  J, — ^Doremus  y.  Daniels  (Ch. 
1890),  20  Atl.  147. 

Tenn, — ^Nelson  Y.  Kinney,  93  Tenn. 
428,  25  S.  W.  100. 

Wm.— Barr  y.  Church,  82  Wis- 
382,  52  N.  W.  691. 

Con.— Ourofski  y.  Harris,  27  Ont 


Pbbfxbsnces  to  Cbeditoss. 


511 


receive  pay  or  take  security  from  their  son^  who  Ls  indebted  to 
them,  though  thej  know  that  the  result  will  be  to  delay  or  defeat 
his  other  creditors.^  Where  a  father  emancipates  his  child  so 
that  his  earnings  belong  to  him  and  thereafter  borrows  the  same 
from  him,  a  conveyance  from  the  father  to  the  child  to  repay  the 
same  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  existing  creditors  of  the  father/ 
As  a  general  rule  a  transfer  of  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor 
to  a  relative,  which  has  the  effect  of  hindering  or  delaying  other 
creditors  in  the  collection  of  their  debts,  will  be  subjected  to 
greater  scrutiny  than  if  the  parties  to  the  conveyance  were 
strangers,  though  it  will  be  sustained  if  made  in  good  faith  and 
for  an  adequate  consideration.''  Where  a  debtor  prefers  a  credi- 
tor related  by  blood  or  marriage,  clearer  proof  of  good  faith  is 
required  than  in  case  of  strangers,'  and  the  bona  fides  of  such 
transaction  must  be  clearly  established.* 


201,  affd  23  Ont  App.  717;  Smith  ▼. 
Wright.  2  N.  Brunsw.  Eq.  62S. 

6.  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Brubaker, 
128  Iowa»  687,  105  N.  W.  116. 

6.  McCaffrey  ▼.  Hickey,  66  Barb. 
(N.  Y.)  480;  Flynn  v.  Baisley,  86 
Or.  268,  67  Pac.  008,  76  Am.  St.  Rep. 
406,  45  L.  R.  A.  645;  Bomar  v. 
Means,  53  S.  C.  232,  31  S.  £.  234; 
Rosenbaum  v.  Davis  (Temi.  Ch.  App. 
1808),  48  S.  W.  706.  See  also  Wages 
of  debtor's  minor  child,  chap.  IV,  § 
10,  iupra;  Earnings  of  minor  child, 
chap.  VIII,  S  57,  supra. 

7.  y.  y. — Lindsley  v.  VanCort- 
landt,  67  Hun,  146,  22  N.  T.  Supp. 
222,  alfd  142  N.  Y.  682,  37  N.  B. 
670. 

Ala.— Rnssell  ▼.  Davis  (1001),  86 
So.  614;  Calhoun  v.  Hannon,  87  Ala. 
277,  6  So.  201;  Moog  v.  Farley,  70 
Ala.  246. 

Ifd. — Commonwealth  Bank  v* 
Keams,  100  Md.  202,  60  Atl.  1010. 

.Ve&.— Blair  State  Bank  ▼.  Bumi> 
61  Neb.  464,  86  N.  W.  627;  Stein- 


krauB  Y.  Korth,  44  Neb.  777,  62  K. 
W.  1110;  Farrington  ▼.  Stone,  36 
Neb.  466,  63  N.  W.  380. 

N.  C7.— -Mitchell  ▼.  Eure,  126  N.  C. 
77,  36  S.  £.  100;  Allen  ▼.  McLendon, 
113  N.  C.  321,  18  S.  £.  206. 

Or, — Feldman  v.  Nicolai,  28  Or. 
34,  40  Pac  1010;  Jolly  ▼.  Kyle.  27 
Or.  05,  30  Pac.  000. 

P^— Lloyd  ▼.  Williams,  21  Pa.  St. 
327. 

Fa. — Johnson  ▼.  Lucas,  108  Va. 
36,  48  S.  E.  407. 

8.  Schloss  V.  McGuire,  102  Ala. 
626,  15  So.  276;  Smith  v.  Collins,  04 
Ala.  304,  10  So.  334;  Owens  v.  Hob- 
ble, 82  Ala.  467,  3  So.  146. 

9.  Calhoun  v.  Hannan,  87  Ala. 
277,  6  So.  201;  Bonwit  ▼.  Heyman, 
43  Neb.  637,  61  N.  W.  716;  Plummer 
Y.  Rummel,  26  Neb.  142,  42  N.  W. 
386;  Bartlett  ▼.  Cheesbrough,  23 
Neb.  767,  37  N.  W.  652;  Brooks  v. 
Todd,  1  Handy  (Ohio),  160,  12  Ohio 
Dec.  (Reprint)  84,  the  parties  must 
have  acted  with  the  most  scrupulous 


512 


Fbaudulent  Conveyanoes. 


§  34.  Preference  of  husband  and  wife. — ^It  is  quite  generally 
held  by  the  courts  that,  inasmuch  as  dealings  between  husband 
and  wife  which  result  in  the  appropriation  of  the  husband's  prop- 
erty for  the  payment  of  a  debt  claimed  to  be  due  the  wife,  to 
the  exclusion  of  other  creditors,  furnish  uncommon  opportuni- 
ties for  the  perpetration  and  concealment  of  f raud,  they  should 
be  carefully  and  rigidly  scrutinized,  especially  when  charged  to 
be  fraudulent.'®  Yet  it  is  a  well  established  rule  that  where  a 
wife  is  a  bona  fide  creditor  of  her  husband,  she  is  entitled  to 
security  or  payment,  the  same  as  any  other  creditor;  and,  al* 
though  the  husband  is  insolvent  or  in  failing  circumstances,  he 
may  in  good  faith  prefer  her,  either  by  payment  of  money  or  the 
conveyance  of  property  still  under  his  control,  or  by  giving  se- 
curity, to  the  exclusion  of  other  creditors,  the  same  as  he  may 
prefer  any  pther  creditor,  and  such  a  preference  is  not  of  itself 
fraudulent,  and  will  not  be  set  aside  as  in  fraud  of  the  other 
creditors  of  the  husband,  unless  there  is  proof  of  a  fraudulent 
intent  on  the  part  of  the  husband.^^    The  same  principles  apply 


good  faith,  taking  care  that  no  un- 
just or  nnneoeaaary  delay  or  hind- 
rance is  offered  to  the  rights  of 
others. 

Traiuuietioiui  held  fv«id«lent 
ma  to  vaaeevred  evedJtors* — 
Arnold  ▼.  Wilds,  77  Iowa,  593,  42  N. 
W.  656;  Wise  ▼.  Wilds,  77  Iowa, 
586,  42  N.  W.  653. 

lO.  White  V.  Benjamin,  150  N.  Y. 
258,  44  N.  E.  956;  Manchester  v. 
Tibhetts,  121  N.  Y.  219,  24  N.  £. 
304,  18  Am.  8t.  Rep.  816;  Hollis  ▼. 
Rodgers,  106  Ga.  13,  31  8.  E.  783; 
Vietor  ▼.  Swiskey,  200  111.  257,  65  N. 
E.  625;  Sutton  v.  Guthrie,  188  Pa. 
St.  359,  41  Atl.  528;  McElwee  v. 
Kennedy,  56  S.  C.  154,  34  8.  E.  86; 
Hairston  ▼.  Hairston,  35  S.  G.  298, 
14  S.  E.  634.  See  also  Transactions 
between   persons   in  confidential  re- 


lations— ^Husband    and    wife,    chap. 
IX,  S  4,  supra. 

11.  ?r.  7. — ^ICaaehester  ▼.  Tlb- 
betts,  121  N.  Y.  219,  24  N.  E.  304, 
18  Am.  St.  Rep.  816;  Baker  ▼. 
Georgi,  10  App.  DIt.  249,  41  N.  Y. 
Supp.  1030;  First  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Hamilton,  76  Hun,  613,  27  N.  Y. 
Supp.  1029;  Jewett  v.  Noteware,  30 
Hun,  192;  Woodworth  ▼.  Sweet,  44 
Barb.  268,  affd  51  N.  Y.  8;  Doty  ▼. 
Glint,  11  St.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)  87. 

17.  £r.— New  York  Fourth  NaU 
Bank  v.  American  Mills  Go^  137  U. 
S.  234,  11  Sup.  Gt.  52,  34  L.  Ed. 
655;  Jewell  ▼.  Knight,  123  U.  S. 
426,  8  Sup.  Gt.  193,  31  L.  Ed.  190; 
Magniac  v.  Thompson,  7  Pet.  348, 
a1f*g  16  Fed.  Gas.  No.  8,956,  Baldw. 
344;    Vansickle   ▼.   Wells,   105   Fed. 


PBErEBENCES  TO  CrEDITOBS. 


513 


between  husband  and  wife  as  between  any  other  persons  oocupy- 


16;  Hmehman  v.  Parlin,  etc,  Co.,  74 
Fed.  698,  21  C.  C.  A.  273. 

Ala. — Beddow  ▼.  Sheppard,  118 
Ala.  474,  23  So.  662;  National  Bank 
of  Bepublic  v.  Diekinaon,  107  Ala. 
265,  18  So.  144;  Kilgore  v.  Stoner 
(1892),  12  So.  60;  Whaun  v.  Atkin- 
son, 84  Ala.  692,  4  So.  681;  North- 
ington  y.  Faber,  62  Ala.  46. 

Col. — Roberta  v.  Burr,  136  Cal. 
156,  67  Pac.  46. 

CoZo.-^First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Kava- 
nagh,  7  Colo.  App.  160,  43  Pac  217; 
Stramann  ▼.  Scheeren,  7  Colo.  App. 
1,  42  Pac   191. 

Fla.— Hill  ▼.  Meinhard,  39  Fla. 
Ill,  21  So.  805. 

(To.— Simms  ▼.  Tidwell,  98  Ga. 
686,  25  S.  E.  555;  Comer  v.  Allen, 
72  Ga.  1. 

III. — German  Ins.  Co.  r.  Bartlett, 
188  111.  166,  58  N.  E.  1076,  80  Am. 
St.  Rep.  172,  52  L.  R.  A.  283,  affg 
89  111.  App.  469;  Tomlinaon  ▼.  Kat^ 
thews,  98  m.  178;  Earl  v.  Earl,  186 
111.  370,  57  N.  E.  1079,  rev'g  87  HI. 
App.  491;  Cooke  v.  Peter,  93  111. 
App.  1;  Cartwright  v.  Gartwright, 
68  III.  App.  74;  Hensley  r.  Hensley, 
65  111.  App.  195;  Hughes  ▼.  Bell,  62 
111.  App.  74;  Fleming  v.  Weagley, 
32  111.  App.  183. 

Ind. — ^Brigham  v.  Hubbard,  115 
Ind.  474,  17  N.  E.  920;  Dice  v.  Irvin, 
110  Ind.  561,  11  N.  E.  488;  Hoes  ▼. 
Royer,  108  Ind.  494,  9  N.  E.  427; 
Bragg  V.  Stanford,  82  Ind.  234;  Sims 
▼.  Rickets,  35  Ind.  181,  9  Am.  Rep. 
679;  Kyger  r.  F.  Hull  Skirt  06.,  34 
Ind.  249.  ' 

Iowa. — Qark  v.   Ford,   126   Iowa, 

460,  102  N.    W.    421;    Meredith  v. 

Schaap  (1901),  85  N.  W.  628;  Muir 

V.  Miller,  103  Iowa,  127,  72  N.  W. 

38 


409;  Sprague  ▼.  Benson,  101  lowm, 
678,  70  N.  W.  731 ;  Fowler  Oo.  v.  Mc- 
Donnell, 100  Iowa,  536,  60  N.  W. 
873;  Jones  v.  Brandt,  59  Iowa,  332, 
10  N.  W.  854,  13  N.  W.  310. 

JTofi.— Fuller  v.  Crooo,  46  Kan.  634, 
26  Pac.  944;  Winfield  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Cpooo,  46  Kan.  629,  26  Pac.  942;  De 
Ford  V.  Nye,  40  Kan.  665,  20  Pac. 
481;  Cooper  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  40 
Kan.  5,  18  Pac.  937;  Chapman  r. 
Summerfield,  36  Kan.  610,  14  Pac. 
235;  Miller  v.  Krueger,  36  Kan.  344, 
13  Pac.  641;  Kennedy  ▼,  Powell,  34 
Kan.  22,  7  Pftc.  606. 

JTy.— Taylor  v.  Gooley,  20  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1365,  49  S.  W.  335.  See  also 
Cochran  ▼.  Rennison,  23  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
2326,  67  S.  W.  5;  McCandlees  v.  Rea, 
21  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1687,  56  S.  W.  10. 

Ife.— Ferguscm  v.  Spear,  65  Me. 
277;  French  v.  Motl^,  63  Me.  326. 

Ifd.— Crane  v.  BarkdoU,  59  Md. 
634. 

If ««.— Atlantic  Nat  Bank  v.  Tave- 
ner,  130  Mass.  407,  where  the  con- 
Tsyanoe  was  made  through  a  third 
person. 

JTio^— Cole  V.  Cole,  126  Mich.  569, 
85  N.  W.  1098;  Strauss  v.  Parshall, 
91  Mich.  475,  51  N.  W.  1117;  DuU  v. 
Merrill,  69  Mich.  49,  36  N.  W.  677; 
Leppig  V.  Bretzel,  48  Mich.  321,  12 
N.  W.  199;  Hyde  v.  Powell,  47  Mich. 
156,  10  N.  W.  181 ;  Jordan  v.  White, 
38  Mich.  253;  Allen  v.  Antisdale,  38 
Mich.  229;  Hill  r.  Bowman,  35  Mich. 
191. 

ifwn.— -Frost  ▼.  Steele,  46  Minn. 
1,  48  N.  W.  413. 

If m.— Savage  ▼.  Dowd,  54  Miss. 
728.  And  see  Magnum  ▼.  Finueaae, 
38  Miss.  364. 


514 


Fraudulent  Conveyances. 


ing  the  relation  of  debtor  and  creditor  toward  each  other,^  and 
a  married  woman  who  has  a  bona  fide  claim  against  her  husband 
is  entitled  to  the  same  legal  rights  as  any  other  creditor,  except  as 
to  remedy."  The  validity  of  a  preference  by  an  insolvent  hus- 
band to  his  wife  is  not  affected  by  the  fact  that  it  was  for  money 
loaned  by  the  wife  from  the  proceeds  of  her  separate  estate,  which 
had  been  previously  given  to  her  by  her  husband,  when  he  was  sol- 
vent and  it  was  not  done  in  fraud  of  creditors,  prior  or  subsequent,^^ 


Mo, — See  Third  Nat.  Bank  y.  Cra- 
mer, 78  Mo.  App.  476. 

Mont. — ^Lambrecht  v.  Patten,  16 
Mont.  260,  38  Pac.  1063. 

Neh, — ^Dayton  Spioe-Mills  Co.  ▼. 
Sloan,  49  Neb.  622,  68  N.  W.  1040; 
Ward  V.  Parlin,  30  Neb.  376,  46  N.  W. 
629. 

N,  J.— Taloott  V.  Arnold,  64  N.  J. 
Eq.  670,  36  Atl.  632;  Brock  v.  Hnd- 
B<Hi  County  Nat.  Bank,  48  N.  J.  Eq. 
616,  23  Atl.  269,  27  Am.  St.  Bep. 
461. 

Or.— Sabin  v.  Wilkins,  31  Or.  460, 
48  Pac.  426,  37  L.  R.  A.  466. 

Pa, — Benson  ▼.  Maxwell  106  Pa. 
St.  274,  10  Pa.  Cas.  380,  14  Atl.  161 ; 
Lahr's  Appeal,  90  Pa.  St.  607;  Mat- 
ter of  Bradway,  1  Asbm.  212. 

8.  C— McElwee  v.  Kennedy,  66  8. 
C.  154,  34  S.  E.  86 ;  McGbee  v.  Welli, 
52  S.  C.  472,  30  S.  E.  602;  Gerald  ▼. 
Gerald,  28  S.  C.  442,  6  S.  E.  290. 

reap.— McCrory  v.  Lutz,  94  Tex. 
650,  64  S.  W.  780;  Thompson  v.  Wil- 
son, 24  Civ.  App.  666,  60  S.  W.  364; 
Massie  ▼.  McKee  (Civ.  App.  1900), 
56  S.  W.  119;  Jacobs  v.  Womack 
(Civ.  App.   1894),  26  S.  W.  431. 

W.  Va.— Bennett  v.  Bennett,  37 
W.  Va.  396,  16  S.  E.  638,  38  Am.  St. 
Rep.  47;  Cale's  Adm'r  v.  Shaw,  33 
W.  Va.  299,  10  S.  E.  637. 

Wm.— Brickley  v.  Walker,  68  Wis. 
663,  32  N.  W.  773. 


Can, — Pair  v.  Toang,  26  Grant  Clu 
(U.  C.)  644. 

CoBveyaaee  vesarded  mm  atort* 

sas^ — A  conveyance  to  a  wife  by  a 
husband  in  failing  circumstances  is 
not  absolutely  void  as  against  cred- 
itors, but  is  valid  as  a  mortgage, 
where  the  facts  were  that  she  had  bor- 
rowed money  for  him  on  her  property 
on  condition  that  he  would  make  the 
conv^ance  as  security.  Baker  v. 
Georgi,  10  App.  Div.  (N.  T.)  249,  41 
N.  Y.  Supp.  1030.  And  see  Brock  v. 
Hudson  County  Nat.  Bank,  48  N.  J. 
Eq.  615,  23  Atl.  269,  27  Am.  St.  Bep. 
461. 

FaUvre  of  tlie  wife  to  mako 
hor  elaim  known  will  not  deprive 
her  of  her  rights  as  a  creditor  even 
aa  against  one  of  the  husband's  cred- 
itors who  gave  credit  to  him  in  ignor- 
ance of  the  wife's  claim.  Dull  v. 
Merrill,  69  Mich.  49;  Hyde  v.  Powell, 
47  Mich.  166. 

12.  Victor  V.  Swisky,  87  III.  App. 
683;  Rudershausen  v.  Atwood,  19  111. 
App.  68;  Torr^  v.  Cameron,  73  Ter. 
583,  11  S.  W.  840. 

13.  Rigfater  v.  Biley,  42  W.  Va. 
633,  26  S.  E.  367. 

14.  De  Prato  v.  Jester  (Ark. 
1892),  20  S.  W.  807;  Knox  v.  aaric» 
15  Colo.  App.  356,  62  Pac.  334;  Laird 
V.  Davidson,  124  Ind.  412,  26  N.  E.  7. 


Pbeferences  to  Cbeditobs. 


515^ 


or  the  purchase  money  for  which  had  been  furnished  by  the  husband 
when  solvent.^^  And  it  is  immaterial  that  the  statute  of  limita- 
tions had  run  against  the  debt  or  a  portion  of  the  debt  pref erred, 
since  the  husband  was  not  obliged  by  any  duty  he  owed  his  other 
creditors  to  interpose  the  statute  as  a  defense.^*  Neither  the  stat- 
ute of  limitations,  nor  the  presumption  of  payment  arising  from 
lapse  of  time,  applies  to  a  loan  made  by  the  wife  to  the  husband, 
so  as  to  render  a  preference  of  such  debt  by  him  fraudulent."  But 
the  fact  that  the  debt  or  a  portion  thereof  was  barred  by  limita- 
tions is  admissible  in  evidence  in  support  of  the  claim  that  the 
conveyance  was  fraudulent,  to  be  considered  on  the  question  of 
good  faith,^  or  whether  or  not  an  actual  indebtedness  existed.^* 
A  conveyance  by  a  debtor  to  his  wife  has  been  held  to  be  volun- 
tary as  to  creditors,  where  the  only  consideration  therefor  was 
certain  sums  of  money  furnished  him  by  her  at  various  times, 
ranging  from  seven  to  thirty  years,  before  the  conveyance  was 
made,  for  which  no  note,  acknowledgment,  or  promise  of  pay- 
ment, was  taken,  no  account  kept,  nor  payment  of  interest  re- 
quired.^ 


15.  Bean  ▼.  Patterson,  122  U.  S. 
496,  7  Sup.  Ct.  1298,  30  L.  Ed.  1126. 

16.  Manchester  ▼.  Tibbetts,  121  N. 
Y.  219,  24  K  E.  304,  18  Am.  St.  Rep. 
816;  Vansickle  V.  Wells,  105  Fed.  16; 
Kennedy  v.  Powell,  34  Kan.  22;  Frost 
v.  Steele,  46  Minn.  1,  48  N.  W.  413. 
See  also  French  v.  Motley,  63  Me. 
326,  the  fact  that  the  debt  was  barred 
by  the  statute  is  not  conclusive  evi- 
dence of  a  want  of  good  faith.     See 


Debts    barred    by    limitation,    chap. 
VIII,  §  22,  supra. 

17.  Rudershausen  v.  Atwood,  1^ 
m.  App.  58;  Dice  v.  Irwin,  110  Ind. 
661,  11  N.  E.  488. 

18.  Vansickle  t.  Wells,  Fargo  ft 
Co.,  105  Fed.  16, 

19.  HoUis  Y.  Rodgers,  106  6a.  13, 
31  8.  £.  783. 

SO.  Dillman  v.  Nadelhoffer,  162 
HI.  625,  45  N.  E.  680,  afg  56  Ul. 
App.  517. 


3  bios  Ob  lab  SAH  1 

STANFORD  UNIVERSITY  UW  UBEOr 


> 


474: 


flUUDULENT   CONVETANCES. 


unsecured  creditors  to  the  equity  of  redemption  ;^  by  a  oonf ession 
of  judgment;^  by  allowiiig  a  judgment  to  be  taken  by  default;* 


(Gh.  App.  1899),  58  S.  W.  463;  Mc- 
Grew  V.  Hancock  (Ch.  App.  1899 )» 
52  S.  W.  500. 

Tew. — Gompton  v.  Marshall,  88 
Tex.  60,  27  S.  W.  121,  28  S.  W.  518, 
29  S.  W.  1059;  Martin-Brown  Co.  ▼. 
Sicbe,  6  Tex.  Civ.  App.  232,  26  S.  W. 
327. 

F*.— McGregor  v.  Chase,  37  Vt.  225. 

Waah. — ^Turner  ▼.  Iowa  Nat.  Bank, 
2  Wash.  192,  26  Pac.  256. 

Wm.— Kickbusch  t.  Oorwith,  108 
Wis.  634,  85  N.  W.  148;  Stevens  ▼. 
Breen,  75  Wis.  595,  44  N.  W.  645; 
Chicago  Coffin  Co.  v.  Maxwell,  70 
Wis.  282,  35  N.  W.  733.  See  Berry 
V.  O'Connor,  33  Minn.  29,  21  N.  W. 
840,  as  to  effect  of  insolvent  law. 

4t3.  Chafee  v.  Blatchford,  6  Mackey 
(D.  C),  459. 

44.  N.  y.— Galle  v.  Todd,  148  N. 
Y.  270,  42  N.  E.  673,  aff'g  74  Hun, 
542,  26  N.  Y.  Supp.  633;  Columbus 
Watch  Co.  V.  Hodenpyl,  135  N.  Y. 
430,  32  N.  E.  239,  aff*g  61  Hun,  557, 
16  N.  Y.  Supp.  337 ;  Robinson  v.  Haw- 
ley,  45  App.  Div.  287,  61  N.  Y.  Supp. 
138;  Rothchild  v.  Mannesovitch,  29 
App.  Div.  580,  51  N.  Y.  Supp.  253; 
London  v.  Martin,  79  Hun,  229,  29  N. 
Y.  Supp.  396,  alfd  149  N.  Y.  586, 
44  N.  £.  1125;  Childs  v.  Latham, 
60  Hun,  578,  14  N.  Y.  Supp.  507; 
Stein  V.  Levy,  55  Hun,  381,  8  N.  Y. 
Supp.  505;  Beards  v.  Wheeler,  11 
Hun,  539;  Williams  v.  Brown,  4 
Johns.  Ch.  682. 

U.  8, — Rice  V.  Adler-Goldman  Com- 
mission Co.,  71  Fed.  151,  18  C.  C.  A. 
15. 

Ala, — Warren  v.  Hunt,  114  Ala. 
506,  21  So.  939.  Compare  First  Nat. 
Bank  v.  Acme  White  Lead,  etc.,  Co., 
123  Ala.  344,  26  So.  354. 


Oat — Meeker  ▼.  Harris,  19  OaL 
278,  79  Am.  Dec.  216. 

Del, — Slessinger  v.  Topkis,  1  Marr. 
140,  40  Atl.  717. 

III. — Havens,  etc.,  Co.  ▼.  First  Nat. 
Bank,  162  lU.  35,  44  N.  E.  384; 
Young  v.  aapp,  147  HL  176,  32  N. 
E.  187,  35  N.  E.  372;  Chicago  Stamp- 
ing C6.  T.  Hanchett,  25  HI.  App.  198. 

Md. — Citizens'  F.,  etc,  Ins.  Co.  ▼. 
WaUis,  23  Md.  173. 

Miss,— 'Bolherg  ▼.  Jaffray,  64  Mias. 
746,  2  So.  168. 

Mo. — ^Hard  v.  Foster,  98  Mo.  297, 
11  S.  W.  760. 

N.  J.-^Qoodwin  r.  HamiU*  26  N.  J. 
Eq.  24. 

Ohio. — ^Hauel  v.  Mintser,  1  Haady^ 
375,  12  Ohio  Dec.  191. 

Pa.— Appeal  of  Candee,  191  Pa.  St. 
644,  43  Atl.  1093;  Braden  y.  CNeil, 
183  Pa.  St.  462,  38  Atl.  1023,  63 
Am.  St.  Rep.  761;  Werner  ▼.  Zier- 
fuss,  162  Pa.  St.  360,  29  Atl.  737; 
Lake  Shore  Banking  Co.  v.  Fuller,  110 
Pa.  St.  156,  1  Atl.  731;  Walker  v. 
Marine  Nat.  Bank,  98  Pa.  St  574; 
Keen  v.  Kleckner,  42  Pa.  St.  629; 
Guy  V.  McHree,  26  Pa.  St.  92;  Wor- 
man  v.  Wolfersberger,  19  Pa.  St.  59; 
Davis  V.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St  82;  Ap- 
peal of  Blakley,  7  Pa.  St  449; 
Greenwalt  v.  Austin,  1  Grant,  169; 
Haldeman  ▼.  Michael,  6  Watts  ft  8. 
128,  40  Am.  Dec.  546;  Heiney  ▼.  An- 
derson, 9  Lane.  Bar,  12;  Wetmore  ▼. 
Wisner,  2  Loz.  Leg.  Obs.  204. 

8.  C— Sloan  v.  Hunter,  56  S.  C. 
385,  34  S.  E.  658,  76  Am.  St  Rep. 
551;  Weinges  v.  Cash,  15  S.  C.  44; 
Bevins  v.  Dunham,  1  Speers,  39; 
Cureton  v.  Doby,  10  Rich.  Eq.  411,  73 
Am.  Dec.  96;  Bird  v.  Aitken,  Rice  Eq. 
73;  Hill  V.  Rogers,  Rice  Eq.  7. 


FSSFEBSKCES  TO  CrEDPTOBS* 


476 


bj  consenting  to  an  order  in  a  creditors'  suit  requiring  the  debtor 
to  transfer  property  to  the  receiver;**  or  by  having  a  policy  of 
life  insurance  on  his  life  made  payable  to  one  or  more  creditors/^ 
A  conveyance  absolute  in  terms  but  intended  by  the  parties  to 
operate  as  a  mortgage  is  not,  as  a  rule,  necessarily  fraudulent  as 
to  the  grantor's  creditors,  but  may  be  given  effect  as  a  mortgage.** 
The  fraudulent  intent  of  the  debtor  cannot  be  imputed  to  the 
creditor  who  consents  to  confession  of  judgment  in  his  favor,  nor 
does  such  consent  create  the  relation  of  principal  and  agent  be- 
tween the  parties.*^  Fraud  cannot  be  inferred  from  the  fact 
that  a  single  judgment  by  confession  includes  the  separate  claims 
of  several  creditors,  the  object  being  to  place  them  on  a  footing 
of  equality.  Indeed  the  practice  is  rather  to  be  commended,  in- 
asmuch as  it  gives  the  judgment  creditors  equal  rights  and  pre- 
vents a  race  of  diligence  which  might  occur  if  separate  judgments 
were  given."  Where  a  partner  desiring  to  prefer  a  creditor  of 
the  firm,  the  other  partner  being  unwilling  to  do  so,  assists  the 
creditor  in  suing  out  an  attachment  against  the  firm,  his  act 


Va. — Johnson  v.  Lucas,  103  Va.  86, 
48  S.  £.  497. 

Eng. — ^Meux  v.  Howell,  4  East,  1; 
Holdbird  ▼.  Anderson,  5  T.  R.  235. 

45.  Rothchild  t.  Mannesofvitch,  29 
App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  580,  51  N.  Y.  Supp. 
253,  a  judgment  by  default  which 
gives  preference  to  a  certain  credi- 
tor, though  irregularly  rendered,  is 
not  to  be  deemed  on  that  account 
alone  a  fraudulent  one;  Appeal  of 
Morgan,  20  Pa.  St.  152;  Worman  v. 
Wolfersberger,  19  Pa.  St.  59. 

Contra, — Wright  v.  Fergus  Falls 
Nat.  Bank,  48  Minn.  120,  50  N.  W. 
1030. 

Where  a  debtor  submits  to  a  de- 
fault, and  judgment  is  taken  by  the 
creditor  for  the  whole  claim  in  suit, 
though  such  claim  has  been  partly 
satisfied,  the  judgment  is  void  in  toio 
against    attaching    creditors    of    the 


debtor.    Pierce  y.  Partridge,  44  Mass. 
44. 

46.  Young  V.  Clapp,  147  HI.  176, 
32  N.  E.  187,  35  N.  E.  372. 

47.  Dunckel  v.  Failing,  52  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  615,  5  N.  Y.  Supp.  504. 

48.  Doswell  v.  Adler,  28  Ark.  82; 
Cathcart  v.  Grieve,  104  Iowa,  330,  73 
N.  W.  835;  Harrison  v.  Phillips 
Academy,  12  Mass.  456.  Compare 
Fuller  v.  Griffith,  91  Iowa,  632,  60  N. 
W.  247;  Ellis  y.  Musselman,  61  Neb. 
262,  85  N.  W.  75.  See  also  Absolute 
conveyance  as  security,  chap.  VI,  { 
15,  9upra;  Secret  reservations  of 
trusts,  chap.  X,  9  14,  9upra. 

49.  Hard  v.  Foster,  98  Mo.  297, 
11  S.  W.  760.  See  Preference  not  in- 
validated by  mere  fraudulent  intent 
§  23,  infra, 

50.  Harris  v.  Alcock,  10  Gill  4  J. 
(Md.)  226,  32  Am.  Dec.  158. 


476 


Fraudui*ekt  Conveyances. 


does  not  necessarily  render  the  suit  a  collusive  one  as  against 
other  firm  creditors,"  A  valid  preference  may  be  effected  by 
the  debtor's  organizing  a  corporation,  transferring  his  property 
to  the  company,  and  having  stock  issued  to  pay  or  secure  certain 
of  his  creditors." 


§  6.  Sale  to  pay  debts  to  preferred  creditors.— An  insolvent 
or  failing  debtor,  who  has  the  right  to  prefer  certain  creditors,  is 
not  required,  in  the  exercise  of  that  right,  to  convey  his  property 
directly  to  such  creditors,  but  he  may  sell  and  transfer  his  prop- 
erty at  a  fair  valuation  to  a  responsible  third  person,  and  pay 
the  proceeds  to  certain  creditors  to  the  exclusion  of  others,"  al- 
though the  purchaser  knows  of  the  insolvency  of  the  debtor  and 


51.  Hyman  v.  Stadler,  63  Miss. 
362.  See  also  CoUusive  attachment, 
chap.  II»  {15,  9upra, 

52.  Fisher  v.  CampbeU,  101  Fed. 
156,  41  C.  C.  A.  256;  Scripps  ▼. 
Crawford,  123  Mich.  173,  81  N.  W. 
1098;  Troy  t.  Morse,  22  Wash.  280, 
60  Pac.  648.  Compare  Ck)lorado 
Trading,  etc.,  Co.  t.  Acres  Commis- 
sion Co.,  18  Colo.  App.  263,  70  Pao. 
954.  See  also  Organization  of  cor- 
poration, chap.  II,  §  16,  supra, 

63.  ^.  7.— Ruhl  V.  Phillips,  48  N. 
Y.  125,  8  Am.  Rep.  522;  BedeU  y. 
Chase,  34  N.  Y.  386. 

V.  8. — Clements  v.  Moore,  6  WaU. 
299,  18  L.  Ed.  786. 

Ala. — Fargason  v.  Hall,  99  Ala. 
209,  13  So.  302. 

Oal, — ^Priest  v.  Brown,  100  Cal. 
626,  35  Pac.  323.  Compare  Mamlodc 
T.  White,  20  Cal.  698. 

/».— Holhrook  v.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
10  111.  App.  140. 

/fki.— Wilcoxon  v.  Annesley,  28 
Ind.  285,  where  a  creditor  bought  the 
debtor's  goods  and  paid  his  own  debt 
and  debts  of  other  preferred  credi- 


tors; Anderson  ▼.  Smith,  5  Bladcf. 
395. 

Kan. — ^Bishop  ▼.  Jones,  28  Kan. 
680. 

F«.— York  County  Bank  y.  Carter^ 
38  Pa.  St.  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494. 

Tew.— Ellis  V.  Valentine,  65  Tter.  532. 

Vt — Gregory  v.  Harrington,  33  Vt. 
241. 

B«t  under  atatatea  prohibit* 
las  pref  ereaeea  by  a  debtor  when 
insolvent  or  contemplating  insolvency^ 
a  sale  to  pay  preferred  creditors  is 
unlawful.  King  v.  Moody,  79  Ky. 
63;  and  the  preferred  creditor  must 
bring  in  the  money  so  received  to  be 
distributed  ratably  in  payment  pro 
tanto  of  the  debts  due  to  him  and  the 
creditors  at  whose  instance  the  trans- 
action is  set  aside.  Powers-Taylor 
Drug  Co.  V.  Faulooner,  52  W.  Va.  581, 
44  S.  E.  204;  Wolf  v.  McGugin,  37 
W.  Va.  552,  16  S.  E.  797.  The  rem- 
edy of  a  creditor  who  suffers  by  such 
preferential  act  is  to  institute  a 
suit  to  have  it  treated  as  an  assign- 
ment for  the  benefit  of  all  tiie  credi- 
tors. Hoover  v.  Hawks,  21  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  190,  51  8.  W.  606. 


Pbefsbenges  to  Cbbditobs. 


477 


of  his  intent  to  make  a  preference,^  and  although  the  sale  is  made 
on  credit,  the  vendor  taking  the  purchaser's  notes,^  unless  the 
purchaser  knows  of  the  vendor's  fraudulent  intent  to  hinder, 
delay  and  defraud  his  creditors.^  An  insolvent  or  failing  debtor 
may  sell  his  property  to  a  third  person  in  consideration  that  the 
purchaser  pay  certain  debts  owing  by  the  debtor  to  certain  speci- 
fied creditors  in  the  absence  of  any  fraudulent  intent^  Thus, 
deeds  executed  by  one  who  was  largely  indebted  as  endorser  of 
notes  of  a  corporation  in  which  he  was  a  stockholder,  conveying 
property  to  his  children,  for  a  consideration  which  was  not  inade- 
quate, and  which  was  fully  paid  by  taking  up  such  of  the  obliga- 
tions upon  which  the  father  was  endorser  as  he  directed,  are 


54.  N.  y.— Ruhl  y.  PhiUips,  4S  N. 
T.  126,  S  Am.  Rep.  622. 

17.  8. — Clements  v.  Moore,  6  Wall. 
299,  IS  L.  Ed.  7S6. 

Cal — Priest  v.  Brown,  100  Cal. 
626,  35  Pac.  323. 

Pa. — ^York  County  Bank  ▼.  Carter, 
38  Pa.  8t.  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494. 

Tem.^Ellw  t.  Valentine,  66  Tex. 
632. 

Vt. — Gregory  v.  Harrington,  33 
Vt.  241. 

55.  Ruhl  T.  Phillips,  48  N.  Y.  126, 
8  Am.  Rep.  622;  Bedell  v.  Chase,  34 
N.  Y.  386;  Clements  ▼.  Moore,  6 
Wall.  (U.  S.)  290,  18  L.  Ed.  786; 
Priest  V.  Brown,  100  Cal.  626,  36 
Pac.  323;  Gregory  ▼.  Harrington,  33 
Vt.  241.      • 

56.  Ruhl  v.  Philips,  48  N.  Y.  126, 
8  Am.  Rep.  622. 

57.  U.  8. — Blackmore  v.  Parkes, 
81  Fed.  899,  26  C.  C.  A.  670. 

Ind. — Wilcoxon  v.  Annesley,  23 
Ind.  286;  Anderson  ▼.  Smith,  6 
Blackf.  396. 

Ky, — Rosenberg  y.  Smith,  19  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  341,  40  S.  W.  243,  such  a 
sale  is  valid  unless  attacked  under 
the  statute. 


Or.— Hesse  y.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202, 
68  Pac  761. 

Pa.— Uhler  y.  Maulfair,  23  Pa.  St. 
481. 

Tev.— Ellis  y.  Valentine,  66  Tex. 
632. 

W%8. — Greene,  etc.,  Co.  v.  Reming- 
ton, 72  Wis.  648,  39  S.  W.  767,  40 
N.  W.  643;  Ingram  y.  Osbom,  70 
Wis.  184,  36  N.  W.  304. 

anptioiL  of  debts  by 
Ltee. — ^When  an  insolvent  mer- 
cantile firm  sells  its  stock  of  mer- 
chandise to  a  disinterested  party, 
such  purchaser  may,  as  a  part  of  the 
purchase  money,  make  a  note  pay- 
able directly  to  a  bank  that  holds 
the  note  of  said  firm  for  a  hotia  fide 
pre-existing  debt,  and  substitute 
such  note  for  the  note  of  said  firm 
held  by  the  bank,  under  Code,  chap. 
74,  9  2,  as  amended  by  Acts  1896, 
chap.  4,  making  preferential  trans- 
fers by  an  insolvent  fraudulent  as  to 
creditors,  but  providing  that  nothing 
in  said  section  shall  affect  any  trans- 
fer of  any  '^  evidence  of  debt  in  pay- 
ment of  or  as  collateral  security  for 
the  payment  of  a  bona  fide  debt," 
whether  made  at  the  time  such  debt 


478 


Fbaudui-bnt  Conveyances. 


not  fraudulent  as  to  other  creditors  of  the  grantor^  where  prefer- 
ences were  permitted  by  the  laws  of  the  state." 

§  7.  Failure  to  apply  proceeds  to  debts. — ^A  purchaser  of  prop- 
erty from  an  insolvent  debtor,  who  believed  at  the  time  that 
the  purchase  money  notes  were  to  be  used  in  a  valid  preference 
of  certain  creditors,  is  not  bound  to  see  that  they  are  in  fact  so 
applied  and  is  not  guilty  of  any  fraud  because  they  are  not  ap- 
plied in  payment  of  such  creditors,  or  are  subsequently  used  for 
a  fraudulent  or  invalid  purpose,  and  the  sale  cannot  be  impeached 
by  reason  of  such  facts.*  But  if  the  property  is  bought  by  the 
purchaser  partly  with  a  view  of  aiding  the  debtor  in  preferring 
certain  creditors,  preferences  of  creditors  being  allowed  by  the 
lex  loci,  the  purchaser  is  in  equity  responsible  to  the  unpreferred 
creditors  for  so  much  of  the  purchase  price  as  was  applied  by  the 
debtor  to  his  own  use  and  not  to  the  payment  of  creditors.* 

§  8.  Splitting  demand  to  expedite  recovery. — The  parties  to 
a  large  demand  may,  by  agreement,  divide  it,  and  several  con- 
fessions of  judgment  by  the  debtor,  before  a  justice,  for  the 
parts,  are  lawful.*^  It  is  lawful  for  a  debtor,  owing  a  large  debt, 
to  divide  it  into  smaller  sums,  in  order  to  enable  his  creditor  to 
sue  immediately  before  a  magistrate  and  in  that  manner  obtain 
judgments  more  speedily  than  his  other  creditors  could,  and  thus 
give  such  creditor  a  preference.  A  transaction  by  a  debtor  is  not 
fraudulent  for  merely  baffling  one  creditor  in  order  to  pay  an- 
other." 


is  contracted  or  in  payment  of  a  pre- 
existing debt.  Merchant  k  Co.  ▼. 
Whitescarver,  47  W.  Va.  861,  34  8. 
E.  813.  See  also  Armstrong  v.  Oil 
Well  Supply  Co.,  47  W.  Va.  465,  35 
S.  E.  967. 

58.  Corwine  ▼.  Thompson  Nat. 
Bank,  105  Fed.  196,  44  C.  C.  A.  442. 

50.  Priest  ▼.  Brown,  100  Cal.  626, 
35  Pac.  323.  See  also  Gist  v.  Bar- 
row, 42  Ark.  521.     See  Duty  to  see 


to    application    of    proceeds,    ebap. 
XIII,  §  16,  infra. 

60.  Clements  ▼.  Moore,  6  Wan. 
(U.  S.)   299,  18  L.  Ed.  786. 

61.  Cornell  ▼.  Cook,  7  Cow.  (N. 
Y.)  310. 

68.  Andrews  ▼.  Kaufmans,  60  Ga. 
669;  Alexander  ▼.  Young,  23  Ga. 
616;  Bank  of  Savannah  ▼.  Planters' 
Bank,  22  Ga.  466;  Lavender  ▼. 
Thomas,   18  Ga.  668;   Newdigate  ▼. 


Pbbfbbekcbs  to  Cseditobs. 


479 


§  9.  Del^ation  of  power  to  prefer.— The  delegation  of  the 
debtor's  power  of  preference  in  an  instrument  conveying  property 
for  the  benefit  of  creditors  renders  the  instrument  void  as  to 
his  creditors^  since  the  right  to  give  preference  to  creditors  is  a 
personal  privilege  of  the  debtor  which  cannot  be  delegated  by 
him  to  another  to  be  exercised  at  the  tatter's  discretion.*'  If 
preferences  are  to  be  given^  the  relative  interest  of  the  creditors 
in  the  assigned  property  must  be  fixed  by  the  assignment  itself.  A 
clause  giving  assignees  power  to  give  preferences  in  their  dis- 
cretion avoids  the  assignment  for  it  might  be  used  to  coerce  credi- 
tors into  compromising.*^ 

§1  10.  Nature  of  property  transferred.— The  nature  of  the 
property  transferred  by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  by  way  of  preference 
to  pay  or  secure  the  debt  is  immaterial.*^  A  debtor  may  pay  a 
creditor  his  just  debt  in  land  at  a  fair  valuation,**  by  the  assign- 
ment of  a  judgment,*'  or  a  contract,**  by  the  assignment  of  wages 


Jacobs,  9  Dana  (Ky.)  17.  But  see 
Beach  v.  Atkinson,  87  Ga.  288,  13 
S.  £.  691,  collusion  between  a  non- 
resident debtor  and  a  creditor  by 
which  the  former  enables  the  latter 
to  obtain  judgments  in  advance  of 
the  time  in  which  another  creditor 
who  has  previously  commenced  pro- 
ceedings can  obtain  judgment,  for 
the  purpose  of  defeating  the  latter's 
rights,  will  invalidate  the  judg- 
ments so  obtained. 

63*.  Harvey  v.  Mix,  24  Conn.  406; 
Wagoner  v.  Ck)oley,  17  111.  239; 
Seger  v.  Thomas,  107  Mo.  636,  18  S. 
W.  33;  Hargardine-McKittrick  Dry 
Goods  Co.  V.  Camahan,  79  Mo.  App. 
219.  Compare  Dubose  v.  Dubose,  7 
Ala.  236,  42  Am.  Dec.  688,  a  discre- 
tion given  to  a  trustee,  for  whose 
indemnity  the  trust  is  created,  to  pay 
first  either  of  two  debts,  for  which 
he  is  liable  as  surety,  warrants  no  in- 
ference of  fraudulent  intention. 


64.  Strong  v.  Skinner,  4  Barb.(N. 
Y.)  646;  Boardman  v.  Halliday,  10 
Paige  (N.  Y.),  223;  Bamum  v. 
Hempstead,  7  Paige   (N.  Y.),  668. 

65.  See  cases  cited  in  first  note  to 
first  section  of  this  chapter. 

66.  Thomas  v.  Johnson,  137  Ind. 
244,  36  N.  £.  893;  Govanhovan  v. 
Hart,  21  Pa.  St.  496,  60  Am.  Dec. 
67. 

67.  Langert  v.  David,  14  Wash. 
389,  44  Pae.  876,  an  attorney 
although  knowing  of  a  judgment 
against  his  client,  may  secure  him- 
self for  service  rendered  and  money 
advanced  by  taking  an  assignment  of 
a  judgment  against  a  third  person, 
which  he  procures  in  the  client's 
favor,  and  it  is  immaterial  that  to 
do  so  he  is  obliged  to  purchase  the 
entire  judgment,  crediting  thereon 
the  amount  of  his  claim. 

68.  Ingram  ▼.  Osbom,  70  Wis. 
184,  36  N.  W.  304. 


480 


Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 


or  salary,**  or  by  the  trauBfer  of  a  proniisaory  note,''^  or  other 
personal  property.  A  failing  debtor  may  use  property  bought  on 
credit  of  one  to  pay  another.^  The  doctrine  that  the  capital  of 
a  corporation  is  a  trust  fund  for  the  payment  of  its  debts  can* 
not  be  so  extended  as  to  subject  such  capital  appropriated  in  pay* 
ment  of  a  claim  for  the  construction  of  a  plant  for  the  company 
to  a  trust  in  favor  of  the  contractors  on  acooimt  of  supplies  fur- 
nished the  latter  for  the  plant  And  a  creditor  of  the  contractor 
to  construct  the  plant  of  the  corporation,  on  account  of  supplies 
furnished  for  the  plant,  is  not  entitled  to  subrogation  under  an 
agreement  to  which  it  is  not  a  party,  by  which  the  contractor 
while  he  is  insolvent  in  effect  turns  over  the  bonds  and  capital 
stock  of  the  corporation,  which  had  been  turned  over,  to  him 
under  his  contract,  to  persons  who  advanced  the  money  which 
enabled  him  to  perform  his  contract." 

§  11.  Nature  of  debts  preferred  in  generaL— The  debt  pre- 
ferred must  be  a  valid  and  subsisting  demand  of  the  creditor 
against  the  debtor  capable  of  being  enforced  by  action ;  otherwise 
the  preference  is  a  mere  gift  which  may  be  set  aside  by  other 
creditors."  Where  an  insolvent  debtor  executes  a  chattel  mort- 
gage to  secure  an  antecedent  debt  of  his  wife  the  conveyance  is 
fraudulent.^*  Any  transfer  of  the  assets  of  a  corporation  not 
made  in  the  usual  course  of  business  and  for  value  will  be  set 
aside  in  equity  at  the  suit  of  creditors.'^  But  any  legal  indebted- 
ness of  the  debtor  or  any  legal  liability  incurred  by  a  third  per- 
son on  his  behalf  may  become  the  subject  of  a  preference."    A 


69.  Hax  ▼.  Acme  Cement  Plaster 
Co.,  82  Mo.  App.  447. 

70.  Marsh  v.  Davis,  24  Vt.  363. 

71.  CDonald  y.  Constant,  82  Ind. 
212;  Baldwin  v.  Flash,  58  Miss.  593. 
Compare  Krippendorf  v.  Hyde,  28 
Fed.  788. 

7«.  McNeal  Pipe  k  F.  Co.  v.  Bul- 
lock, 174  Pa.  93,  34  Atl.  594. 
73.  See    Pre-existing    liability    as 


consideration— cases  dted  in  note  97, 
chap.  Vm,  9  18. 

74.  Lippitt  ▼.  Oilmartin,  37  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  411,  55  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1042. 

75.  Banton    v.    Smith,    113    HI. 

481. 

76.  See  cases  cited  in  the  follow- 
ing notes:  Sloan  v.  Hunter,  56  S.  C. 
385,  34  S.  E.  658,  76  Am.  St  Rep. 


Fbsferences  to  Cbeditobs. 


481 


sale  by  a  debtor  to  his  creditor  in  payment  of  an  account  is  not 
invalid  because  a  portion  of  tbe  account  was  for  charges  for 
tobacco  and  liquors,  although  the  debtor  may  have  used  them 
lavishly." 

§  12.  DtbtB  not  due.-- An  insolvent  debtor  may  prefer  a 
creditor  by  paying  or  securing  his  debt,  though  the  debt  is  not 
due.'''  The  law  does  not  forbid  a  debtor  to  pay  and  a  creditor  to 
receive  a  debt  before  it  is  due,  provided  the  creditor's  purpose  is 
to  receive  his  own  debt  and  not  to  defeat  or  delay  another.'^  Where 
there  are  two  debts  owing  to  the  same  creditor,  one  already  due 
and  payable  and  the  other  payable  at  a  distant  date,  the  creditor 
may  take  from  his  debtor  security  for  the  payment  of  both  with- 
out inference  or  imputation  of  fraud,  although  the  debtor  is  in 
failing  circumstances.^  An  attorney  may  always  demand  and 
receive  a  reasonable  compensation  before  rendering  services,  and 
the  payment  will  be  valid,  even  in  the  case  of  one  contemplating 
bankruptcy.** 


561,  a  debt  contracted  for  tbe  pnr- 
^hase  of  slaves  was  not  invalidated 
bj  the  abolition  of  slavery. 

77.  Hey  v.  Niswanger,  1  McCord 
Eq.   (S.  C.)   518. 

78.  U.  fif.— Smith  ▼.  Craft,  12  Fed. 
866,  11  Biss.  340,  appeal  dismissed, 
123  U.  8.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct.  196,  31  L. 
Ed.  267. 

(7a. — ^Alexander  ▼.  Young,  23  Ga. 
616. 

/U.— Cipher  v.  McFall,  69  111.  App. 
228. 

ifo. — State  V.  Excelsior  Distilling 
Co.,  20  Mo.  App.  21. 

Ohio, — ^Hauel  ▼.  Mintaer,  1 
Handy,  376,  12  Ohio  Dec.  (Reprint) 
191,  an  accommodation  endorser  who 
has  assumed  the  payment  of  the 
notes  not  yet  due,  and  thereby  made 
himself    absolutely   liable    for    their 

31 


payment,  may'  in  good  faith  take  a 
mortgage  or  other  security  from  the 
debtor  to  indemnify  him  from  ulti- 
mate loss. 

Pa. — Commonwealth  v.  Smith,  1 
Brewst.  347. 

Tenn, — ^McGrew  v.  Hancock  (Ch. 
App.  1899),  62  S.  W.  600. 

Tex. — Frees  v.  Baker,  81  Tex.  216, 
16  S.  W.  900,  13  L.  R.  A.  340; 
Mayer  v.  Templeton  (Civ.  App. 
1899),  53  S.  W.  68,  rent;  Butler  v. 
Sanger,  4  Tex.  Civ.  App.  411,  23  S. 
W.  487. 

70.  McElwee  v.  Kennedy,  56  S.  C. 
154,  34  S.  E.  86. 

80.  Carpenter  ▼.  Mnren,  42  Barb. 
(N.  Y.)   300. 

81.  Lyon  v.  Marshall,  11  Barb. 
(N.  Y.)  241;  Reed  v.  Mellor,  5  Mo. 
App.  667. 


482 


Fraudulent  Cowvetances. 


§  13.  Contingent  debts  and  liabilities  on  behalf  of  debtor. — 
A  contingent  liability  on  behalf  of  a  debtor^  as  well  as  an  existing 
indebtedness,  is  a  good  and  valid  consideration  for  a  preferential 
transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor."  A  confession  of 
judgment  by  a  debtor  to  secure  a  contingent  liability  is  not  a 
fraud  in  law,  and  whether  it  is  fraud  in  fact  depends  upon  the 
attendant  circumstances."  The  endorser  of  commercial  paper  has 
full  power,  with  the  consent  of  the  person  discounting  the  paper, 
to  use  it  as  a  debt  due  him,  and  to  protect  his  endorsement  by 
obtaining  a  conveyance  from  the  debtor  to  the  amount  of  such 
paper.^  A  bill  of  sale,  executed  to  secure  the  vendee  from  his 
liability  as  endorser  of  a  promissory  note  made  for  the  accommo- 
dation of  the  vendor,  is  not  fraudulent  and  void  as  against  credi- 
tors under  the  statute  of  frauds."  A  debtor  may  secure  a  surety 
who  is  liable  for  him,  in  preference  to  paying  other  creditors,  if 
he  does  so  in  good  faith  and  without  any  design  to  conceal  his 
property  from  his  creditors."    The  liability  of  an  acceptor  of  a 


82.  CurtiB  ▼.  Fox,  101  Pa.  St  644, 
43  Atl.  1093. 

83.  Braden  y.  (XNeil,  1S3  Pa.  St 
462,  38  Atl.  1023,  63  Am.  St  Bep. 
761. 

84.  Bamberger  ▼.  Schoolfield,  160 
U.  S.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct.  225,  40  L.  Ed. 
374.  See  also  cases  cited  in  last  two 
preceding  notes. 

85.  Weller  v.  Wayland,  17  Johns. 
(N.  Y.)  102.  See  also  Hauel  y. 
Mintzer,  1  Handy  (Ohio),  375. 

86.  27.  8, — Leggett  y.  Humphreys, 
62  U.  S.  66,  16  L.  Ed.  60. 

Ala, — Coker  y.  Shropshire,  59  Ala. 
542;  Hopkins  y.  Soott,  20  Ala.  179,  a 
deed  of  trust  by  a  defaulting  guar- 
dian to  indemnify  his  sureties;  Pen- 
nington y.  Woodall,  17  Ala.  685. 

Del. — ^Tunnell  v.  Jefiferson,  5  Harr. 
206. 

(7a. — ^Alexander  v.  Young,  23  Ga. 
616. 


/{{.-•Wood  ▼.  aark,  121  lU.  359, 
12  N.  E.  271,  afTg  21  lU.  App.  464; 
Frank  y.  Welsh,  89  111.  38;  Cipher  y. 
McFall,  69  HI.  App.  228. 

Ind, — Owens  y.  Qaacho,  154  Ind. 
225,  56  N.  £.  224. 

JTif.-— Beatty  y.  Dudley,  80  Ky. 
381. 

Mass. — Steyens  y.  Bell,  6  Maaa^ 
339. 

Mich. — ^Adams  y.  Niemann,  46 
Mich.  135,  8  N.  W.  719. 

ifo. — ^Albert  y.  Besel,  88  Mo.  150. 

N.  J, — Essex  County  y.  lAndalej, 
41  N.  J.  Eq.  189,  3  Atl.  391. 

Ohio. — ^Hauel  y.  Mintzner,  1 
Handy,  375. 

7*6».--Frees  y.  Baker,  81  Tex.  216, 
16  S.  W.  900,  13  L.  R.  A.  340;  But- 
ler y.  Sanger,  4  Tex.  Ciy.  App.  41 1» 
23  S.  W.  487. 

7^.— Spaulding  y.  Austin,  2  Vt 
555. 


Frefebences  to  Cbeditobs. 


483 


bill  of  exchange,"^  or  of  bail,"  may  be  the  subject  of  a  valid  prefer- 
ence by  a  debtor.  But  merely  nominal  liability,  as  that  of  the 
sureties  on  a  debtor's  official  bond  as  executor,  is  insufficient  to 
support  a  preference.** 

§  14.  Usurious  interest. — An  agreement  for  usurious  interest 
in  the  inception  of  a  debt  otherwise  bona  fide  with  no  view  to 
its  ulterior  use  for  a  fraudulent  purpose,  will  not  render  a  trans- 
fer of  the  debtor's  property  in  payment  thereof  assailable  by 
another  creditor,**  nor  will  the  validity  of  a  conveyance  of  prop- 
erty by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  to  prefer  a  debt  be  affected  by  the 
fact  that  one  of  the  items  of  the  debt  consists  of  usurious  interest 
which  the  creditor  was  compelled  to  pay  to  a  third  person  for  the 
purpose  of  replacing  money  which  the  debtor  had  borrowed  and 
failed  to  return.*^  But  if  there  is  no  previous  agreement  as  to 
the  rate  of  interest,  and  usurious  interest  is  allowed  for  the  pur- 
pose of  swelling  the  debt  to  an  amount  not  materially  less  than 
the  value  of  the  property,  the  transaction  should  be  pronounced 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors.** 

§  15.  Attorney's  fees. — A  transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  to 
his  attorney,  in  payment  of  services  rendered,  is  not  invalid  as 
against  a  judgment  creditor,  against  whose  claim  the  attorney  had 
defended  the  debtor."  Attorney's  fees  which  by  lawful  stipulation 
are  made  a  part  of  the  debts,  in  a  mortgage  given  for  the  benefit 
of  certain  creditors,  are  properly  awarded  where  the  contingen- 


But  Bee  Sanford  v.  Wheeler,  18 
Conn.  165,  33  Am.  Dec.  389,  where  a 
mortgage  given  both  lor  an  existing 
debt  and  to  indemnify  the  mortgagee 
against  his  liability  as  surety  pur- 
ports on  its  face  to  be  given  solely 
for  the  existing  debt,  it  cannot  as 
against  creditors  be  supported  fur- 
ther than  to  secure  the  amount 
actually  due. 

■  87.  Perry  Ins.,  etc.,  Co.  ▼.  Foster, 
58  Ala.  502,  29  Am.  Rep.  779. 


88.  Davis  v.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St.  82. 
80.  Crawford  v.  Kirksey,  50  Ala. 
590,  55  Ala.  282,  28  Am.  Rep.  704. 

00.  Harris  v.  Russell,  93  Ala.  59, 
9  So.  541. 

01.  Pennington  v.  Woodall,  17 
Ala.  685. 

OS.  Harris  v.  Russell,  95  Ala.  59, 
9  So.  541;  Lehman  ▼.  Greenhut,  88 
Ala.  478,  7  So.  299. 

08.  Barker  v.  Archer,  49  App. 
Div.  <N.  Y.)  80,  63  N.  Y.  Snpp.  298. 


484 


Fbaudulbitt  Convetasczs. 


cieSy  upon  which  thej  were  to  become  a  part  of  the  demand,  have 
occurred.**  The  fees  of  an  attorney  for  aervioes  for  advice  given 
and  for  preparing  and  drafting  a  preferential  deed  of  trust  or 
other  oonvejanccy  for  advising  the  trustee  as  to  his  duties,  and  for 
defending  any  attacks  that  may  be  made  on  the  conveyance,  may 
be  included  in  a  preference.*^  The  inclusion  of  attorney's  fees  in 
judgment  notes  given  by  an  insolvent  is  fraudulent  and  void  as 
to  other  creditors  not  preferred,  but  only  vitiates  the  notes  pro 
tanto,  and  equity  will  follow  the  fund  realized  thereon  as  fees 
for  the  benefit  of  other  judgment  creditors.** 

§  16.  Debts  arising  out  of  breach  of  trust. — Where  an  in- 
solvent debtor  has  misapplied  money  placed  in  his  hands  as  a 
trustee  and  afterwards  replaces  the  money  from  his  own  funds,*^ 
or  gives  security  to  the  beneficiaries  to  protect  the  payment  of  the 
same,^  the  transaction  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  creditors.  A  note 
and  mortgage  executed  by  a  guardian  to  his  ward  for  money  or" 
property  of  the  latter  which  the  former  had  appropriated  and 
for  which  he  was  personally  responsible  is  not  invalid  as  against 
his  creditors  for.  want  of  consideration  because  the  money  was 
secured  by  the  guardian's  bond.**  But  where  a  debtor,  acting  as 
trustee  for  his  minor  children,  has  exercised  the  discretion  im- 
posed on  him  by  the  trust,  and  supported  them  out  of  the  trust 
fund,  he  will  not  be  permitted  to  restore  the  sum  so  expended  to 
the  trust  estate  on  a  plea  that  it  is  his  personal  duty  to  support 


04.  Martin-Brown  Co.  y.  Siebe,  6 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  232,  26  S.  W.  327. 

05.  Mayer  v.  Templeton  (Tex. 
Civ.  App.  1899),  53  S.  W.  68;  Ham- 
ilton-Brown Shoe  Co.  V.  Lastinger 
(Tex.  Civ.  App.  1894),  26  S.  W.  924; 
Butler  V.  Sanger,  4  Tex.  Civ.  App. 
411,  23  S.  W.  487. 

06.  Young  V.  Clapp,  147  111.  176, 
82  N.  E.  187,  36  N.  E.  372 ;  Hul«e  v. 
Mershon,  126  IH.  62,  17  N.  E.  60, 
affg  Mershon  v.  Hulae,  26  111.  App. 


292;  Bauer  Grocer  Co.  ▼.  McKee 
Shoe  Co.,  87  111.  App.  434;  Farmers', 
etc.,  Bank  v.  Spear,  49  111.  App.  600. 

07.  Jackson  v.  Spivey,  63  N.  C. 
261. 

08.  McLaughlin  v.  Carter,  13  Tex. 
Civ.  App.  694,  37  S.  W.  666 ;  Middle- 
ton  V.  Pollock,  2  Ch.  D.  104,  46  L.  J. 
Ch.  293. 

00.  Jennings  v.  Jennings,  104  CaL 
160,  37  Pac  794. 


Fbefebekces  to.  Cseditobs. 


485 


his  children,  when  by  so  doing  he  will  evade  the  payment  of  his 
honest  debts.^ 

§  17.  Secured  debts  generally.— The  payment  of  a  debt  for 
which  the  creditor  holds  security  cannot  be  held  fraudulent,  as 
by  the  discharge  of  the  debt  the  security  will  be  released  and 
wiU  become  liable  to  the  claims  of  other  creditors.'  The  giving 
of  additional  security  for  the  payment  of  a  daim  otherwise  se- 
cured is  held  by  some  authorities  not  to  be  fraudulent/  while 
others  hold  that  the  taking  of  additional  security  by  one  who 
is  otherwise  abundantly  secured  is  in  itself  evidence  of  fraud,  as 
the  creditor  will  not  be  permitted  to  heap  security  on  security 
unnecessarily  to  the  injury  of  other  creditors.*  The  burden  of  up- 
holding such  a  transaction  is  on  the  creditor.^  But  the  fact  that 
a  creditor  accepts  additional  security  and  releases  to  the  debtor 
the  collateral  he  has  been  holding  does  not  invalidate  the  con- 
veyance, as  against  unsecured  creditors,  in  the  absence  of  proof 
of  fraud,  or  that  the  collateral  surrendered  was  negotiable  and 
so  not  to  be  reached  by  creditors/ 

§  18.  Discharge  of  mortgage  on  homestead.*— An  insolvent  or 
failing  debtor  has  a  right  to  pay  by  way  of  preference  a  debt 
secured  by  a  mortgage  on  his  homestead,  and  the  fact  that  he 
can  afterwards  hold  the  premises  clear  of  all  claims  of  creditors 
does  not  aflFect  that  rightJ    Where  a  debtor  in  failing  circum- 


1.  National  Valley  Bank  v.  Han- 
cock, 100  Va.  101,  40  S.  E.  611,  98 
Am.  St.  Rep.  983,  57  L.  R.  A.  728. 

S.  liQcaB  V.  Claflin,  76  Va.  269. 

9.  Plummer  v.  Green,  49  Neb.  316, 
68  N.  W.  600;  Padgitt  v.  Porter 
(Tex.  Civ.  App.  1894),  26  S.  W.  429; 
West  Coast  Grocery  Co.  ▼.  Stinson, 
13  Wash.  265,  43  Pac.  35. 

4.  Lombard  v.  Dows,  66  Iowa,  243, 
28  N.  W.  649;  Crapster  v.  Williams, 
21  Kan.  109;  Jaffray  v.  Wolf,  4 
Okla.  803,  47  Pae.  496. 


5.  Lombard  ▼.  Dows,  66  Iowa, 
243,  23  N.  W.  649. 

6.  Compton  ▼.  Marshall,  88  Tex. 
60,  27  a  W.  121,  28  S.  W.  618,  29 
8.  W.  1059,  25  S.  W.  441 ;  McGregor 
V.  Chase,  37  Vt.  225;  Bradley  v.  Got- 
«an  ft  Co.,  12  Wash.  71,  40  Pac. 
623. 

7.  Randall  v.  Bnffington,  10  Cal. 
491;  Bradley  y.  Gotzian  ft  Co.,  12 
Wash.  71,  40  Pae.  623.  See  Purchase 
of  homestead  and  payment  of  liens, 
chap.  IV,  S  45,  9upra.        • 


486  Fbaudulent  Conveyances. 

stances  sold  to  a  creditor^  already  secured  by  a  mortgage  on  the 
debtor's  homestead,  his  stock  of  goods  and  fixtures,  the  balance 
above  the  debt  to  be  paid  to  trustees  for  the  benefit  of  creditors 
in  consideration  of  his  releasing  the  mortgage  on  the  homestead, 
it  was  not  a  fraudulent  conveyance.' 

§  19.  Trantfer  of  encumbered  property  in  pajrment  of  en- 
cumbrance.— A  transfer  of  mortgaged  property  to  the  mortgage 
creditor  in  settlement  of  a  debt  much  larger  in  amount  than 
the  fair  value  of  the  mortgaged  property/  or  where  the  fair  value 
of  the  property  is  not  greater  than  the  debt/®  is  not  fraudulent 
as  against  the  debtor's  other  creditors/*  since  it  is  not  a  convey- 
ance to  the  exclusion  or  prejudice  of  the  other  creditors."  And 
the  substitution  of  other  property,  on  which  there  was  no  specific 
lien  in  favor  of  other  creditors,  in  lieu  of  a  part  of  the  mortgaged 
chattels,  will  not  render  the  transaction  invalid,  if  the  substi* 
tuted  property  was  received  by  the  mortgagee  at  a  fair  valua- 
tion." 

§  20.  Transfer  of  all  the  debtor's  property.— The  statute  in 
New  York  prevents  an  insolvent  debtor,  by  a  general  assignment, 
from  devoting  more  than  one-third  in  value  of  his  estate  to  the 
payment  of  preferred  creditors.  But  he  may  accomplish  that 
result  and  practically  prefer  his  creditors  to  as  great  an  extent  as 
his  property  permits,  by  omitting  to  make  a  general  assignment, 
and  instead,  giving  mortgages  and  bills  of  sale  or  confessing 
judgments  to  the  more  highly  favored  creditors,  in  an  amount 
sufficient  to  exhaust  his  entire  estate.  The  statute  only  con- 
demns such  preferences  when  made  in  a  general  assignment.^* 

8.  Flask  ▼.  Tindall,  30  Ark.  571.  the  mortgagee  had  no  knowledge  that 

O.  Campodonico    ▼.    Oregon    Imp.  the    mortgagor    had    debts    due    to 

Co.,  87  Cal.  566,  25  Pae.  7639*  Jack-  others  than  himself. 

son  ▼.  Miller,  32  La.  Ann.  432.  IS.  Johnson  v.  Riley,  41   W.  Va. 

10.  Wiggins    V.    Tumlin,    96    Ga.  140,  23  S.  E.  608. 

753,  23  S.  E.  75.  13.  Smith  v.  Hardy,  36  Wis.  417. 

11.  Morse  ▼.  Velzy,  123  Mich.  632,  14.  Manning  ▼.  Beck,  120  N.  Y.  1, 
82  N.  W.  225,  under  a  finding  that      29  N.  £.  00,  14  L.  R.  A.  198;  London 


Pbeferenges  to  Cbeditobs. 


487 


But  such  other  means  of  transfer  to  preferred  creditors  cannot  be 
used  and  employed  as  a  shield  so  as  to  hold  off  all  other  creditors, 
while  practically  returning  the  property  to  the  possession,  and 
subjecting  it  to  the  control  of  the  debtor.^^  As  a  general  rule  a 
transfer  of  all  the  debtor's  property  lo  pay  or  secure  a  valid 
debt  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  oiher  creditors  if  the  value  of  the 
property  does  not  materially  exceed  the  amount  of  the  indebted- 
ness for  which  it  is  given  in  payment  or  security,  and  there  is  no 
reservation  of  any  trust  or  benefit  for  the  debtor  beyond  that 
which  the  law,  in  the  absence  of  contract,  would  allow  him." 
Under  the  statute  in  some  states  a  preferential  transfer  of  sub- 


▼.  Martin,  79  Hun,  229,  29  N.  Y. 
Supp.  396,  affd  149  N.  Y.  5S6,  44  N. 
E.  1126;  Victor  v.  Levy,  72  Hun,  263. 
25  N.  Y.  Supp.  644,  aif'd  148  N.  Y. 
739,  42  N.  E.  726;  Auburn  Exch. 
Bank  v.  Fitch,  48  Barb.  344. 

15.  Billings  v.  Ruasell,  101  N.  Y. 
226,  4  N.  E.  531;  Stimaon  ▼.  Wrig- 
ley,  86  N.  Y.  332:  Victor  v.  Levy, 
supra;  Abegg  v.  Schwab,  9  N.  Y. 
Supp.  681. 

16.  "N,  Y, — See  cases  cited  in  note 
14,  this  section. 

U,  8, — Stewart  v.  Dunham,  115  U. 
S.  61,  5  Sup.  Ot  1163,  29  L.  Ed.  329; 
Foeter  v.  McAlester,  114  Fed.  145, 
52  C.  G.  A.  107;  Repauno  Chemical 
Co.  v.  Victor  Hardware  Co.,  101  Fed. 
948,  42  C.  C.  A.  106. 

Ala.— Russell  v.  Davis,  133  Ala. 
647,  31  So.  514,  91  Am.  St.  Rep.  56. 
though  a  failing  debtor,  prior  to  the 
enactment  of  Code  1896,  S  2158. 
which  requires  general  assignments 
by  debtors  to  be  for  the  benefit  of  all 
creditors,  had  a  right  to  prefer  a 
creditor  to  the  extent  of  conveying 
his  entire  estate,  such  conveyance 
was  invalid  if  not  absolute,  or  if  any 
benefit  was  reserved  to  the  grantor, 
or  if  the  property  conveyed  was  ma- 
terially in  excess  of  the  debt,  or  if  the 


debt  or  a  portion  thereof  was  ficti- 
tious, or  if  cash  was  received  as  a 
part  consideration  for  the  conv^- 
ance;  Cook  v.  Thornton,  109  Ala.  523, 
20  So.  14;  Chipman  v.  Stem,  89  Ala. 
207,  7  So.  409;  Carter  v.  Coleman, 
84  Ala.  256,  4  So.  151;  Hodges  v. 
Coleman,  76  Ala.  107;  Chamberlain 
V.  Dorrance,  69  Ala.  40. 

(7al.— In  le  Muller,  118  Cal.  432, 
50  Pae.  660;  Dana  v.  Stanford,  10 
Oal.  269. 

Z>eZ.— Stockl^  ▼.  Hors^,  4  Hoast. 
603. 

Ga.— McWhorter  v.  Wright^  5  Ga. 
555. 

Iowa. — Southern  White  Lead  Co.  v. 
Haas,  73  Iowa,  399,  33  N.  W.  657,  35 
N.  W.  494;  Aulman  v.  Aulman,  71 
Iowa,  124,  32  N.  W.  240,  60  Am.  St. 
Rep.  783;  Gage  v.  Parry,  69  Iowa, 
605,  29  N.  W.  822;  Farwell  v.  How- 
ard, 26  Iowa,  381;  Johnson  v.  Mc- 
Grew,  11  Iowa,  151,  77  Am.  Dec.  137; 
Cowles  V.  Ricketts,  1  Iowa,  582. 

Kan. — Schram  v.  Taylor,  51  Kan. 
547,  33  Pac.  315;  First  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Ridenour,  46  Kan.  707,  27  Pftc.  150, 
26  Am.  St.  Rep.  167. 

Ma88. — Stephens  ▼.  Bell,  6  Mass. 
339. 

ifo.— Jaffrey  ▼.  Mathews,  120  Mo. 


488 


Fraudulsnt  Conveyances. 


stantiallj  all  the  debtor's  property  inures  to  the  benefit  of  all 
his  creditors/^  while  in  others  the  statute  does  not  prevent  a  debtor 
from  pledging  property  for  the  security  of  part  of  his  creditors 
only."  An  agreement  by  a  debtor  who  is  insolvent,  and  known 
to  be  insolvent  by  a  certain  creditor,  not  to  make  a  general  assign- 
ment,  lest  it  might  invalidate,  as  an  unlawful  preference,  a  trans- 
fer of  the  debtor's  entire  property  to  the  said  creditor,  shows  a 
fraudulent  intent,  and  renders  void  the  transfer  as  to  other  credi- 
tors, though  made  in  payment  of  a  bona  fide  indebtedness." 


§  21.  Knowledge  and  intent  of  parties  generally. — A  convey- 
ance or  transfer  of  property  by  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  to  pay  or 
secure  only  his  own  debt  is  valid,  and  a  creditor  may  take  pay- 
ment or  security  for  his  demand,  although  others  are  thereby  de- 
prived of  all  means  of  obtaining  satisfaction  of  their  equally 
meritorious  daims."^  In  the  absence  of  a  statute  making  it  in- 
valid, to  render  such  a  preferential  transfer  invalid,  it  must  have 
been  made  with  the  actual  intent  to  hinder,  delay  or  defraud  other 


317,  26  S.  W.  187;  Crow  ▼.  Bardsley, 
08  Mo.  435;  Marry  v.  Cason,  15  Mo. 
378. 

Jfeb, — Blair  State  Bank  v.  Buim, 
61  Neb.  464,  85  N.  W.  527;  Bennett 
▼.  McDonald,  59  Neb.  234,  80  N.  W. 
826. 

Okla.—jBffTBj  V.  Wolfe,  1  Okla. 
312,  33  Pae.  945. 

R.  /.— EUiott  ▼.  Benedict^  13  R.  I. 
463. 

£r.  C — ^McElwee  ▼.  Kennedy,  56  S. 
C.  154,  34  8.  E.  86. 

Tenn, — ^McGrew  ▼.  Hancock  (Ch. 
App.  1899),  52  S.  W.  500;  Fidelity, 
etc.,  Co.  V.  (VBrien  (Ch.  App.  1896), 

38  S.  W.  417. 

Wash.—TuTneT  ▼.  Iowa  Nat.  Bank, 
2  Wash.  192,  26  Pac.  256. 

Wi8,'—Gaigt  ▼.  Cbesebro,  49  Wla. 
486   5  N.  W.  881. 


Can, — ^Brown  ▼,  Sweet,  7  Ont.  App> 
725. 

Eng, — ^Alton  ▼.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4,  Ch, 
622,  38  L.  J.  Ch.  669,  21  L.  T.  Rep.  N. 
S.  282,  17  Wkly.  Rep.  1034;  Ex  parte 
Games,  12  Ch.  D.  314,  40  L.  T.  Rep. 
N.  S.  789,  27  Wkly.  Rep.  744. 

17.  Baxley  v.  Simmons,  132  Ala. 
117,  31  So.  76.  See  Statutes  of  the 
several  States. 

18.  Jaffrey  y.  Mathews,  120  Mo. 
317,  25  S.  W.  187;  Crow  ▼.  Beards- 
ley,  68  Mo.  435;  Union  Bank  ▼.  Kan- 
sas City  Bank,  136  U.  S.  223,  10  Snp. 
Ct.  1013,  34  L.  Ed.  341,  overrvlinff 
Martin  y.  Hausman  14  Fed.  160,  and 
cases  following  it. 

10.  Tompkins  y.  Hunter,  65  Hun 
(N.  Y.),  441,  20  N.  Y.  Supp.  355. 

20.  Wheaton  y.  Neville,  19  OtA.  46 ; 
Dana  v.  Stanford,  10  Oal.  269. 


FlUCFSfiEKCES  TO  CbEDITOBS. 


489 


creditors,^  with  the  actual  design  to  prevent  the  application  of  the 
whole  or  a  part  of  the  debtor's  property  to  the  payment  of  his 
debts."  The  intent  to  satisfy  or  secure  one  creditor  at  the  expense 
of  others  is  not  enough.**  Where  there  is  an  actual  debt  or  lia- 
bility to  be  discharged  or  secured  a  bona  fide  preference  is  valid, 
although  such  preference  hinders,  delays,  or  defeats  other  credi- 
tors, and  fraud  is  not  to  be  imputed  nor  any  inference  of  a  fraud- 
ulent intent  to  be  drawn  from  the  fact  that  the  debtor  desired 
to  and  did  prefer  the  creditor,  or  that  the  creditor  sought  to  and 
did  obtain  a  preference  to  the  exclusion  of  other  creditors,  or 
from  the  fact  that  it  tends  to  hinder,  delay,  olr  defeat  creditors.  It 
is  not  enough  that  the  effect  of  a  conveyance  is  to  delay  credi- 
tors. It  must  be  executed  with  such  an  intent  and  purpose.** 
Where  a  sale  of  property  by  a  debtor  is  made  professedly  for 
the  purpose  of  preferring  certain  creditors,  it  is  presumed  to  be 


21.  U.  8. — ^Hiuflkamp  ▼.  MoUne 
Wagon  Cq.,  121  U.  S.  310,  7  Sap.  Ct 
899,  30  L.  Ed.  971;  Drury  y.  Cross, 
74  U.  S.  299,  19  L.  Ed.  40;  Poster  ▼. 
HcAlester,  114  Fed.  145,  62  C.  C.  A. 
107. 

CoZ.— Dana  ▼.  Stanford,  10  Cal. 
269. 

Del, — Stockleif  v.  Horsey,  4  Houst. 
603. 

/».— Ewing  ▼.  Runkle,  20  Bl.  448, 
to  render  a  oonveyanoe  void  under 
our  statute  of  frauds  and  perjuries, 
both  parties  must  intend  to  practice 
a  fraud. 

N,  J. — Green  v.  McCrane,  56  N.  J. 
£q.  436,  37  Atl.  318. 

2^.  C— Hafner  ▼.  Irwin,  23  N.  C. 
490. 

Pa.— Candee's  Appeal,  191  Pa.  St. 
644,  43  Atl.  1093;  Werner  v.  Zier- 
fuss,  162  Pa.  St.  360,  29  Atl.  737; 
Jaroslawski  ▼.  Simon,  3  Brewsi.  37. 

ZZ.  Alabama  L.  Ins.,  etc.,  Co.  ▼. 
Pettway,  24  Ala.  544;  Roberts  ▼. 
Burr,  135  C5al.   166,  67  Pac.  46,  the 


fraud  contemplated  is  an  actual 
fraud  of  which  intent  is  a  necessary 
element;  Wheaton  ▼.  Neville,  19  GaL 
46;  Lucas  v.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269. 

23.  Lucas  ▼.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269. 

»4.  N.  F.— Bishop  y.  Stebbins,  41 
Hun,  243;  Auburn  Exeh.  Bank  y. 
Fitch,  48  Barb.  344. 

U.  fif.— Davis  y.  SchwartE,  156  U.  S, 
631,  15  Sup.  Ct  237,  39  L.  Ed.  289; 
Tompkins  v.  Wheeler,  41  U.  S.  106, 
10  L.  Ed.  903;  Foster  v.  McAIester, 
114  Fed.  146,  52  C.  C.  A.  204;  Re- 
pauno  Chemical  Co.  y.  Victor  Hard- 
ware Co.,  101  Fed.  948, 42  C.  C.  A.  M>6. 

Ala, — ^Warren  y.  Hunt,  114  Ala, 
506,  21  So.  939. 

CaL^Randall  y.  Buffington,  10  Cal. 
491. 

(To.— Carter  y.  Neal,  24  Oa.  346, 
71  Am.  Dec.  136. 

/{Z.— Nelson  y.  Leiter,  190  111.  414, 
60  N.  E.  851,  83  Am.  St.  Rep.  142, 
aff'g  93  111.  App.  176;  Wood  y.  Clark, 
121  HI.  359,  12  N.  E.  271,  affg  21 
111.  App.  464. 


490 


PbAUDULENT   CoNVEYAirCES. 


fair  and  honest.^^  Where  a  debtor  has  in  good  faith  transferred 
property  to  a  preferred  creditor  in  payment  of  an  anteced^it 
debt;  without  reserving  to  himself  any  trust  or  benefit,  or  exer- 
cising any  intention  to  defraud  creditors,  the  fact  that  he  was  in- 
solvent at  the  time  and  that  the  effect  of  the  conveyance  is  to 
leave  the  debtor  without  property  to  pay  his  other  debts  or  to 
CO  diminish  his  assets  as  to  actually  obstruct  or  defeat  other  credi- 
tors in  the  collection  of  their  claims,  does  not  make  the  convey- 
ance fraudulent.  This  is  only  the  necessary  effect  of  giving  a 
preference.'^     The  criterion  in  determining  fraud  is  not  the 


JTy. — Kennaird  v.  Adama^  50  K^. 
102. 

Me, — Gardner  Nat.  Bank  v.  Hagar, 
65  Me.  359. 

ifd.— Rich  ▼.  Levy,  16  Md.  74. 

Mich, — ^Ferris  v.  McQueen,  04  Mich. 
367,  64  N.  W.  164. 

Mo, — Bell  V.  Thompeon,  3  Mo.  84; 
Derring  v.  Collins,  38  Mo.  App.  80. 

Neh, — Dempster  Mill  Mfg.  'Go.  ▼. 
First  Nat.  Bank,  49  Neb.  321,  68  N. 
W.  477;  J.  T.  Robinson  Notion  Go. 
y.  Foot,  42  Neb.  156,  60  N.  W.  316; 
John  V.  Farwell  Go.  v.  Wright,  38 
Neb.  445,  56  N.  W.  984;  Jones  v. 
Loree,  37  Neb.  816,  56  N.  W.  390. 

N.  J7.— Osgood  ▼.  Thome,  63  N.  H. 
375. 

N.  J.— Uhl  V.  Beatiy  (Gh.),  3  Ati. 
524. 

Ohio. — Sack  v.  Hemann,  6  Ohio 
Dec.  1104,  10  Am.  Law  Ree.  483. 

Pa, — Gandee^s  Appeal,  191  Pa.  St 
644,  43  Atl.  1093;  Werner  y.  Zierfuss, 
162  Pa.  St  360,  29  Atl.  737;  York 
County  Bank  y.  Garter,  38  Pa.  St. 
446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494;  Uhler  y.  Maul- 
fair,  23  Pa.  St.  481;  Covanhovan  y. 
Hart,  21  Pa.  St.  495,  60  Am.  Dec. 
57;  Davis  y.  Charles,  8  Pa.  St  82; 
Meyers  v.  Meyers,  24  Pa.  Super.  Ct. 
603;  Peek  v.  Spruks,  6  Lack.  Leg. 
N.  132. 


Teim.— McGrew  v.  Hancock  (Ol. 
App.  1899),  58  S.  W.  500. 

Tew.'-OweDB  v.  Clark,  78  Tex.  547, 
15  S.  W.  101 ;  ElUa  y.  Valentine,  65 
Tex.  532;  Lewy  y.  Fischl,  65  Tex. 
311;  Greenleye  y.  Blum,  69  Tex. 
124 ;  Iglehart  v.  WillU,  58  Tex.  306. 

Fa.— -Lucas  y.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269. 

WiuK—Weat  Coast  Qrooery  C6.  v. 
Stinson,  13  Wash.  255,  43  Piac  35. 

Wm.— Haben  y.  Harshaw,  49  Wis. 
379,  5  N.  W.  872. 

J^.— Middleton  y.  Pollock,  2  Ch. 
D.  104,  45  L.  J.  Ch.  293. 

Contra, — La. — ^De  Blanc  v.  Martin, 

2  Rob.  38;   Taylor  y.  Knox,  2  La. 
16;  Misotiere's  Syndecs  y.  Coignard, 

3  Mart  (O.  S.)  561. 

M.  Wood'  y.  Clark,  121  HI.  359,  12 
N.  E.  271,  alfg  21  HI.  App.  464. 

86.  U.  /ST.— Foster  y.  McAlester, 
114  Fed.  145,  52  C.  G.  A.  107. 

Ala.— Crawford  v.  Kirks^,  55  Ala. 
282,  28  Am.  Rep.  704. 

Col, — Dana  v.  Stanfords,  10  Cal. 
269. 

Ind, — ^Levering  y.  Bimel,  146  Ind. 
545,  45  N.  E.  775. 

Iowa, — Southern  Wliite  Lead  Co.  y. 
Haas,  73  Iowa,  399,  33  N.  W.  657,  35 
N.  W.  494. 

If  tcA.--Geer  v.  Trader's  Bank,  138 
Mich.  215,  93  ST.  W.  437. 


PSEFEREXCES  TO  CbEDITOBS. 


491 


effect  of  the  preference  but  the  intent  with  which  it  was  made.'' 
A  debtor  has  a  right  to  prefer  one  creditor  to  another  and  to  so 
dispose  of  his  property  that  one  creditor  will  receive  his  pay  in 
full  and  another  will  receive  nothing.^  For  a  debtor  to  dispose 
of  his  property  so  as  to  prevent  one  creditor  from  reaching  it  is 
not  void  on  the  principles  governing  conveyances  in  fraud  of 
creditors,  if  the  property  is  wholly  and  unreservedly  appropriated 
to  the  demands  of  another  creditor.**  A  person  in  failing  cir- 
cumstances may  prefer  a  creditor  by  conveying  to  him  a  part 
or  all  of  his  property,  to  the  exclusion  of  other  creditors,  pro- 
vided it  is  done  in  good  faith,*^  and  where  a  debtor  gives  a 
preference  to  one  or  more  of  his  creditors,  to  the  exclusion  of 
others,  such  disposition  of  his  effects  is  not  impeachable  on  the 
groimd  of  fraud,  even  though  it  embraces  all  his  property,  and 
by  the  exhaustion  of  all  the  property  of  the  debtor  to  pay  the 
honest  debt  of  the  preferred  creditor  absolutely  prevents  the  other 
creditors  from  collecting  any  part  of  their  claims.*^    A  preference 


Mo, — Gaff  ▼.  stern,  12  lAo.  App. 
115. 

ytib, — ^Blair  State  Bank  y.  Bunn, 
61  Neb.  464,  85  N.  W.  527;  Jones  v. 
Loree,  37  Neb.  816,  66  N.  V^r.  390. 

2^.  J. — ^National  Bank  of  Metropo- 
lis ▼.  Sprague,  20  N.  J.  Eq.  13. 

Pa.— Werner  v.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa. 
St.  360,  29  Atl.  737;  Lake  Shore 
Banking  Co.  y.  Fuller,  110  Pa.  St. 
156,  1  Atl.  731;  Bentz  y.  Rocky,  69 
Pa.  St.  71;  York  County  Bank  y.  Car- 
ter, 88  Pa.  St.  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  404. 

8.  (7.— Thorpe  y.  Thorpe,  12  S.  C. 
154;  Maples  y.  Maples,  Rice  Eq.  300. 

Tern, — ^Edwards  y.  Dickson,  66  Tex. 
613,  2  S.  W.  718;  Ellis  y.  Valen- 
tine, 65  Tex.  532;  Lewy  y.  Fischl,  65 
Tex.  311;  Iglehart  y.  Willis,  58  Tex. 
306;  Noyes  y.  Sanger,  8  Tex.  Ciy. 
App.  388,  27  S.  W.  1022. 

7a.— Lucas  y.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269. 

W.  F&— Harden  y.  Wagner,  22  W. 
Va.  356. 


Wm. — Steyens  y.  Breen,  75  V^m, 
595,  44  N.  W.  645. 

27.  Werner  y.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa.  St 
360,  29  AtL  737. 

S8.  Schroeder  y.  Walsh,  16  111. 
App.  590,  affd  120  HI.  403,  11  N.  E. 
70. 

M.  Hauselt  y.  Vilmar,  2  Abb.  N. 
C.   (N.  Y.)  222. 

ao.  Thorton  y.  Tandy,  89  Tex. 
544. 

31.  y,  T, — Auburn  Exeh.  Bank  t. 
Fitch,  48  Barb.  344. 

17.  8. — Foster  y.  McAIester,  9Upra; 
Repauno  Chemical  Co.  y.  Victor 
Hardware  Co.,  supra, 

CaL— Dana  y.  Stanfords,  10  OaL 
269. 

Kan, — Schram  y.  Taylor,  51  Kan. 
547,  33  Pac  315;  First  Nat.  Bank  t. 
Ridenour,  46  Kan.  707,  27  Pac.  150, 
26  Am.  St.  Rep.  167. 

Veh, — ^Blair  Stare  Bank  y.  Bmui, 
61  Neb.  464,  85  N.  W.  527. 


492 


FRAUDULENT   CoNVEYA9G£B. 


by  an  insolvent  debtor  of  a  valid  debt  and  the  aooeptanoe  thereof 
by  a  creditor  in  satisfaction  of  his  daim  is  not  rendered  fraudu- 
lent, so  as  to  enable  other  creditors  to  avoid  the  oonvejanoe,  al- 
though the  creditor  knows  of  the  debtor's  insolvency  and  both  par- 
ties know  that  the  effect  of  such  preference  will  be  to  deprive  the 
other  creditors  of  the  power  of  satisfying  their  claims,  or  to  delay 
or  defeat  collection  thereof.'^    Since  the  debtor  when  he  exercises 


Wis. — Gage  ▼.  Ghesebro,  49  Wis. 
4S6,  5  N.  W.  8S1. 

32.  y.  r.— New  York  County  Nat. 
Bank  ▼.  American  Surety  Co.,  69 
App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  163,  74  N.  Y. 
Supp.  692,  afTd  174  N.  Y.  644,  67  N. 
£.  1086;  Beards  v.  Wheeler,  11  Hun, 
539;  Auburn  Exch.  Bank  y.  Fitch, 
48  Barb.  344. 

U.  8, — ^Bamberger  ▼.  Schoolfield, 
160  U.  6.  149,  16  Sup.  Ct  225,  40  L. 
Ed.  374;  Hinskamp  v.  Moline  Wagon 
Co.,  9upra;  McCartney  y.  Earle,  116 
Fed.  462;  63  C.  C.  A.  392,  aff^g  112 
Fed.  372;  Wilson  y.  Jones,  76  Fed. 
484;  Repauno  Chemical  Co.  y.  Vic- 
tor Hardware  Co.,  aupra. 

Ala. — Cook  y.  Thornton,  109  Ala. 
523,  20  So.  14;  Bray  y.  Ely,  106  Ala. 
663,  17  So.  180;  Goetter  y.  Smith, 
104  Ala.  481,  16  So.  634;  Bates  y. 
Vandiyer,  102  Ala.  249,  14  So.  631; 
Pollock  y.  Meyer,  96  Ala.  172,  11  So. 
386;  First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Smith,  93 
Ala.  97,  9  So.  648;  Chamberlain  y. 
Dorrance,  69  Ala.  40;  Crawford  y. 
Kirksey,  aupra, 

Cal. — ^Wheaton  y.  Neyille,  19  Cal. 
41;  Dana  y.  Stanfords,  10  Cal.  269. 

/ZZ.— Nelson  y.  Leiter,  190  lU.  414, 
60  N.  E.  861. 

/nd.— Dice  y.  Irwin,  110  Ind.  661» 
11  N.  E.  488. 

iotoa. — ^Aulman  y.  Aulman,  71 
Iowa,  124,  82  N.  W.  240,  60  Am.  Bep. 
788.    And  see  Johnson  y.  McQrew,  11 


Iowa,  161,  77  Am.  Dec.  137;  Cowlea 
y.  Ricketts,  1  Iowa,  582. 

Ma8%, — Giddings  y.  Sears,  115 
Mass.  605;  Banfield  y.  Whipple,  96 
Mass.  13. 

ificA.— Webber  y.  Webber,  109 
Mich.  147,  66  N.  W.  960;  Ferris  y. 
McQueen,  94  Mich.  367,  54  N.  W. 
164;  Sheldon  y.  Mann,  85  Mich.  265, 
48  N.  W.  573. 

Mo. — Crothers  y.  Buseh,  153  Mo. 
606,  55  S.  W.  149,  where  a  debtor 
transferred  her  property  to  a  trustee, 
to  secure  and  prefer  one  of  her  cred- 
itors, and  to  hinder  others  in  the 
collection  of  their  claims,  and  the 
trustee  and  the  preferred  creditor 
knew  of  such  purpose,  and  that  such 
would  be  the  effect  of  the  transfer, 
but  acted  only  to  secure  the  prefer- 
ence, the  transfer  was  not  yoid  as  to 
the  other  creditors. 

0*io.— Walker  y.  Walker,  6  Ohio 
S.  k  C.  PI.  Dec.  365,  4  Ohio  N.  P. 
324. 

Or. — ^Marquam  y.  Sengfelder,  24 
Or.  2,  32  Pac.  676. 

Pa.— Penn  Plate  Glass  Co.  y. 
Jones,  189  Pa.  St.  290,  42  Att.  189; 
Werner  y.  Zierfuss,  supra;  Uhler  y. 
Maulfair,  23  Pa.  St.  48;  Coyanhoyan 
y.  Hart,  21  Pa.  St.  495,  60  Am.  Dec 
67. 

8.  0. — ^McElwee  y.  Kennedy,  56  S. 
C.  154,  84  S.  E.  86. 

Tenn. — ^McGrew  y.  Hancock,  ntpru; 


Pbxtxssncbs  to  Cbbditobs. 


493 


the  right  to  prefer  one  of  his  creditors  must  be  oonscious  that 
his  act  of  preference  will  hinder  and  delay^  and  poesiblj  defeat, 
the  collection  of  other  demands  against  him,  it  maj  always  be 
said  his  intention  is  to  hinder  and  delay  the  unpreferred  credi- 
tors, but  he  cannot  be  deprived  of  his  right  of  preference  on  that 
ground.  The  test  to  be  applied  is  simply  whether  the  debtor,  in 
exercising  that  right  or  privilege,  acts  in  good  faith,  with  the 
intent  to  pay,  or  secure  the  payment  of  a  just  indebtedness  against 
him.*  Fraud  is  not  to  be  imputed  to  an  honest  creditor,  who 
is  preferred  by  a  failing  debtor  as  against  another  creditor,  who 
had  been  promised  payment  by  the  debtor  out  the  proceeds  of 
the  same  property  assigned  to  the  former  to  secure  him,"*  even 
though  he  had  knowledge  of  this  f  act.** 

§  22.  Participatioa  of  preferred  creditor  in  fraudulent  intent. 
— A  failing  debtor  has  a  right  to  protect  certain  of  his  creditors  in 
preference  to  others ;  and  even  though  the  debtor  is  actuated  by  an 
intent  to  hinder,  delay,  and  defraud  other  creditors,  one  creditor 
has  the  right  to  accept  payment  of  his  claim  in  full,  or  security 
by  a  confession  of  judgment  therefor,  so  long  as  this  is  done  with- 
out knowledge  on  his  part  of  the  fraudulent  intent  of  the  debtor, 
or  participation  therein.*     And  the  fact  that  the  creditor  has 


Johnson  v.  Goldston  (Ch.App.  1890), 
52  8.  W.  474;  Feder  v.  Erwin  (Ch. 
App.  1896),  38  8.  W.  446,  36  L.  R. 
A.  335. 

Tear.— Smith  v.  Whitfield,  67  Tex. 
124,  2  8.  W.  822;  Lewy  v.  Fischl, 
9upra;  Greenleve  v.  Blum,  9upra; 
Iglehart  ▼.  Willis,  tiiprft. 

Fck — Johnson  ▼.  Lucas,  103  Va.  36, 
48  8.  E.  497. 

Wis, — Gage  ▼.  Chesebro,  49  Wis. 
486,  5  N.  W.  881.  See  also  Ingram 
y.  Osborn,  70  Wis.  184,  36  N.  W. 
304. 

33.  Nelson  ▼.  Leiter,  190  111.  414, 
60  N.  E.  851,  83  Am.  8t.  Bep.  142, 
ajfp  93  lU.  App.  176. 


84.  McEeown  t.  Coogler,  18  Fla. 
866. 

35.  Langert  ▼.  Darid,  14  Wash. 
389,  44  Pao.  875.  See  Beldipg  Say- 
ings Bank  y.  Moore,  118  Mich.  150, 
76  N.  W.  368,  where  a  mortgge  to  a 
creditor  was  left  for  deliyery  with  a 
third  person,  to  be  deliyered  when 
directed  by  the  mortgagor,  and  be- 
fore  delivery  debtor  conveyed  the 
same  premises  to  another  creditor, 
the  deed  was  held  not  to  be  fraudu- 
lent. 

86.  Galle  y.  Tode,  148  N.  T.  270, 
42  N.  E.  673;  Manning  y.  Beck,  129 
N.  T.  1,  29  N.  £.  90,  14  L.  R.  A. 
198;  Storin  y.  Kelly,  88  N.  Y.  421. 


494 


Pbaudulent  Conveyakobb. 


knowledge  that  the  purpose  of  the  debtor  is  to  defeat  other  credi- 
tors does  not  invalidate  the  preference,  if  the  pre-existing  debt 
is  the  sole  consideration  and  the  value  of  the  property  trans- 
ferred is  not  materially  in  excess  of  the  debt,  provided  the  credi- 
tor does  not  actually  participate  in  the  fraud."  Knowledge  on  the 
part  of  the  creditor,  however,  of  the  debtor's  fraudulent  purpose, 
is  held  to  be  equivalent  to  participation  in  the  fraud  where  the 
pre-existing  debt  is  only  part  of  the  consideration."  Where  the 
creditor  does  not  participate  in  the  fraudulent  intent  of  his  debtor, 
but  takes  the  property  as  security  for  the  sole  purpose  of  satis- 
fying or  securing  an  honest  debt,  it  has  been  held  that  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  fraudulent  intent  of  the  debtor  is  immaterial.* 

§  23.  Preference  not  invalidated  by  mere  fraudulent  intent. — 
A  conveyance  of  property  to  an  existing  creditor  in  satisfaction 
of  his  debt,  which  was  an  adequate  consideration,  and  with  an 
expressed  purpose  of  keeping  it  from  being  subjected  to  another 
creditor's  claim,  is  not  in  itself  fraudulent***  A  preferential  con- 
veyance of  property  to  or  a  judgment  obtained  by  a  creditor  in 
payment  of  or  as  security  for  an  actual  and  honest  debt,  not 
greater  in  value  or  amount  than  is  reasonably  sufficient  for  that 
purpose,  and  which  has  no  other  effect  between  the  parties  than 
to  pay  or  secure  such  debt,  no  interest  or  benefit  being  reserved 
for  the  debtor,  is  not  void  as  against  other  creditors,  although 
the  intention  of  the  debtor  and  the  effect  of  the  conveyance  or 
judgment  is  to  hinder  and  delay  other  creditors,  and  the  preferred 
creditor  knows  that  it  will  have  that  effect  and  that  the  debtor 


37.  Dudley  ▼.  Danforth,  61  N.  T. 
226.  See  also  Participation  in 
fraudulent  intent  where  debt  is  sole 
consideration,  chap.  XIII,  §  9,  infra. 

38.  Levi  ▼.  Hamilton,  68  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  277,  74  N.  Y.  Supp.  169. 
See  also  Participation  in  fraudulent 
intent  where  debt  is  only  part  of 
consideration,  chap.  XIII,  §  10,  infra, 

89.  Dudley  ▼.  Danforth,  61  N.  Y. 


626;  Hasie  t.  Connor,  53  Kan.  713, 
37  Pae.  128;  Carr  ▼.  Briggs,  156 
Maas.  78,  30  N.  E.  470;  Banfield  ▼. 
Whipple,  96  Mass.  13;  State  v. 
Mason,  112  Mo.  374,  20  S.  W.  629,  34 
Am.  St.  Rep.  390;  Sexton  v.  Ander- 
son, 95  Mo.  373,  8  8.  W.  564. 

40.  Wilson  T.  Berger,  5  St  Rep. 
(N.  Y.)  822;  dements  ▼.  Davis,  7 
Pa.  St  263. 


PSEFSBBNCES  TO  CbBDITOBB. 


495 


lias  the  intent  tliat  it  sliall  have  that  effect,  and  he  obtains  such 
judgment  or  conveyance  to  aid  such  intent  as  well  as  to  protect 
himself.  The  act  of  preference  being  a  lawful  act  and  the  end 
accomplished  lawful^  there  is  nothing  from  which  fraudulent 
motives  can  be  inferred,  and  anj  fraudulent  motives  the  parties 
may  actually  have  or  whatsoever  be  the  motives  of  the  parties 
are  immaterial.^    The  law  condemns  motives  and  intents,  only 


41.  y.  r.— Aubnrn  Exch.  Bank  ▼. 
Fitch,  4S  Barb.  344;  Brett  v.  Catlin, 
47  Barb.  404;  Wilson  ▼.  Berger,  5  St. 
Rep.  S22.  And  see  Archer  v.  O^rien, 
7  Hun,  146,  a  hona  fide  creditor  who 
takes  a  transfer  of  property  to  secure 
his  debt,  and  reduces  it  into  his  pos- 
session, is  not  affected  by  an  undis- 
closed intent  on  the  part  of  the 
debtor  to  hinder  and  delay  other 
creditors,  of  which  he  had  no  notice. 

U,  8. — Bamberger  ▼.  Schoolfield, 
ISO  U.  a  149,  16  Sup.  Gt.  225,  40  L. 
Ed.  374. 

Ala. — ^Beddow  ▼.  Sheppard,  118 
Ala.  474,  23  So.  662;  Pollock  ▼. 
Meyer,  96  Ala.  172,  11  So.  386;  El- 
lison V.  Moses,  96  Ala.  221,  11  So. 
347;  First  Nat  Bank  ▼.  Smith,  93 
Ala.  97,  9  So.  548 ;  Harris  ▼.  Russell, 
93  Ala.  59,  9  So.  541;  Chipman  v. 
Stem,  89  Ala.  207,  7  So.  409;  Garter 
Coleman,  84  Ala.  256,  4  So.  151; 
Levy  ▼.  Williams,  79  Ala.  171; 
Hodges  ▼.  Coleman,  76  Ala.  103.  And 
see  Dawson  ▼.  Flash,  97  Ala.  539,  12 
So.  67,  a  conveyance  by  an  insolvent 
debtor  in  payment  of  an  antecedent 
indebtedness  honestly  due  and  not 
materially  less  than  the  value  of  the 
property  conveyed,  without  reserving 
any  interest  or  benefit,  is  valid,  al- 
though it  was  made  without  solicita- 
tion and  was  accepted  as  a  payment 
only  to  the  extent  of  the  amount 
realind  from  the  property. 


/I2.— Holbrook  ▼.  First  Nat  Bank, 
10  HL  App.  140. 

Pa.— Snayberger  ▼.  Fahl,  195  Pa. 
8t  336,  45  Ati.  1065,  78  Am.  St  Rep. 
818;  Werner  v.  Zierfuss,  162  Pa.  St. 
860,  20  AtL  737;  Covanhovan  v. 
Hart,  21  Pa.  St  495,  60  Am.  Dec 
57;  Peck  y.  Sprucks,  6  Lack.  Leg.  N. 
182. 

But  see  Bunn  v.  Ahl,  29  Pa.  St 
887,  72  Am.  Dec  639,  where  a  debtor 
confessed  judgment  for  an  amount 
honestly  due,  for  the  purpose  of  forc- 
ing his  other  creditors  into  a  com- 
promise of  their  claims,  it  is  void- 
able by  such  creditors,  even  though 
not  used  for  that  purpose.  The  giv- 
ing and  receiving  judgment  is  some- 
thing more  than  a  fraudulent  inten- 
tion; it  is  something  done  in  pur- 
suance of  the  intention,  and  it  is 
voidable  by  any  person  in  a  position 
to  question  it 

7e0.— Ellis  V.  Valentine,  65  Tex. 
532;  Texas  Drug  Co.  v.  Baker,  20 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  684,  50  S.  W.  157; 
Scarborough  v.  Hilliard  (Civ.  App. 
1894),  28  S.  W.  231;  Reynolds  v. 
Wienman  (Civ.  App.  1894),  25  S. 
W.  33. 

Can. — ^McMaster  v.  Clare,  7  Grant 
Ch.  (U.  C.)  550.  And  see  Attomey- 
Oeneral  v.  Harmer,  16  Grant  Ch.  (U. 
C.)  583. 

^ii^.— See  Wood  v.  Dixie,  7  Q.  B. 
892,  9  Jur.  796,  53  E.  C.  L.  892. 


496 


FSAUDUUBNT   CoNVEYAlTCSS. 


when  thej  are  carried  into^  allied  to,  or  aooompanied  bj,  an  act 
which  is  itself  illegal.  If  the  end  aooomplished  be  lawful|  it  is  im- 
material what  may  have  prompted  it,  provided  the  intent  itself 
inflict  no  personal  or  pecimiary  wrong,  and  does  not  aggravate  the 
result.  A  mere  intent  accompanied  bj  no  illegal  act  will  not  givo 
a  ground  of  action.^  It  has  been  held  that  where  a  preferential 
sale  or  conveyance  of  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  one  or 
more  of  his  creditors  is  attacked  by  other  creditors  as  fraudulent 
the  only  questions  for  consideration  are:  (1)  The  existence,  bona 
fides  and  amount  of  the  purchasing  creditors'  claims;  (2)  whether 
the  sale  or  conveyance  was  in  absolute  payment  and  satisfaction 
of  the  debts  at  a  fair  valuation  of  the  property;  and  (3)  whether 
any  benefit  or  interest  was  reserved  or  inured  to  the  debtor,^  and 
that  if  these  questions  are  determined  in  favor  of  the  preference 
the  facts  absolutely  rebut  all  inferences  that  might  be  drawn 
from  attendant  badges  of  fraud,  and  impart  validity  to  the  con- 
veyance as  an  allowable  preference  of  the  particular  creditor.^ 
And  in  an  action  of  replevin  by  the  grantee  of  a  bill  of  sale 
given  as  security  for  a  precedent  debt,  against  the  sheriff  hold- 
ing an  attachment  at  the  suit  of  a  creditor  of  the  common  debtor, 
it  has  been  held  that  the  plaintiff  is  entitled  to  recover  on  showing: 
(1)  that  there  was  a  valid  subsisting  indebtedness;  (2)  that  the 
property  was  transferred  to  secure  it;  and  (3)  that  it  was  reduced 
to  possession,  and  that  the  burden  is  on  the  attaching  creditor  to 
show  notice  of  fraudulent  intent  on  the  part  of  the  debtor  if  he 
relies  on  that.^    There  are  authorities  which  hold  that  a  transfer 


42.  Wilson  ▼.  Berger,  6  St.  Bep. 
(N.  Y.)  822;  Carter  ▼.  Coleman,  84 
Ala.  666,  3  So.  161.  See  also  Ellis  v. 
Valentine,  66  Tex.  532. 

The  f  aot  that  the  Imstrvment 
of  traaafer  oomtaiaa  pvorlsloaa 
that  would  otherwise  tend  to  hinder 
or  delay  unsecured  creditors  in  col- 
lecting their  claims  is  immaterial 
where  the  value  of  the  property  con- 
veyed to  pay  or  secure  a  preferred 
creditor  does  not  equal  the  amount  of 


the  deht.    Wade  ▼.  Odle,  21  Tex.  Civ. 
App.  666,  64  S.  W.  786. 

48.  Fargerson  t.  Hall,  99  Ala. 
Ala.  209,  13  So.  302;  Harris  ▼.  Rus- 
sell, 93  Ala.  69,  9  So.  541 ;  Carter  ▼. 
Cohen,  84  Ala.  256,  4  So.  151 ;  Hesse 
▼.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202,  68  Pac.  751. 

44.  Hodges  t.  Coleman,  76  AUu 
103. 

45.  Archer  y.  O^rien,  7  Hua  (K* 
Y.)   146. 


Pbbfssknces  to  Cbbditobb, 


497 


CIS 


of  property  given  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  pay  or  secure  a  valid 
debt  actually  owing  by  the  debtor,  in  order  to  be  valid^  must  be 
made  in  good  faith  and  with  no  purpose  of  defrauding  those  who 
are  not  preferred,  and  that,  if  made  and  accepted  with  the  intent 
to  hinder,  delay,  or  defeat  other  creditors  of  the  debtor,  it  is 
fraudulent  and  void  as  against  such  other  creditors.^  The  fact 
of  the  payment  of  a  valuable  consideration  upon  the  transfer  of 
the  property  is  iiot,  it  is  held,  as  a  proposition  of  law,  inconsis- 
tent with  the  existence  of  an  intent  to  defraud,  and  in  the  applica- 
tion of  this  principle,  it  is  held,  no  distinction  can  be  made  be- 
tween the  consideration  furnished  by  an  existing  debt  and  a  pres- 
ent consideration,  or  one  arising  in  any  other  manner.  Hence 
proof  that  the  conveyance  or  transfer  was  made  to  pay  or  secure 
a  debt  actually  owing  by  the  debtor  does  not,  as  a  matter  of 
law,  disprove  the  existence  of  a  fraudulent  intent  on  the  part  of 
the  debtor  sufficient  to  enable  a  creditor  to  set  it  aside.^  But  it 
is  also  held  that  a  mere  intent  to  hinder  or  prevent  another  credi- 
tor from  reaching  the  property  is  not  enough  to  vitiate  a  trans- 
fer in  satisfaction  of  other  actual  indebtedness  to  a  creditor  to 
whom  the  debtor  desires  to  give  a  preference;  that  there  must  be 
something  shown  more  than  a  preference  given  to  and  accepted 
by  a  creditor  with  the  intent  to  defeat  another,^  as,  for  example, 
an  intent  to  enable  the  debtor  to  continue  in  possession  and  retain 


46.  y.  7.— Billings  v.  Rtusell, 
101  N.  Y.  226,  4  N.  E.  681,  rev^g  81 
Hun,  66;  New  York  Joe  Ck>.  v. 
CoiuinB,  23  App.  Div.  660,  48  N.  Y. 
8upp.  799;  Howe  ▼.  Sommers,  22 
App.  Div.  417,  48  N.  Y.  Supp. 
162. 

Oa. — ^Bigfoy  v.  Warnock,  116  Oa. 
886,  41  8.  E.  622,  67  L.  R.  A.  764; 
Monroe  Mercantile  Co.  ▼.  Arnold, 
108  Ga.  449,  34  8.  E.  176;  Conley  ▼. 
Buck,  100  Ga.  187,  28  8.  £.  97; 
Phinizy  ▼.  Clark,  62  Ga.  623. 

Ind. — ^Wynne  v.  Giideweil,  17  Ind. 
446. 

Ky.^W9ad  v.  Trotter,  19  Ky.  1. 

32 


Maaa, — Crowinahield  t.  Kittridge, 
48  Mass.  620. 

Mo. — Crow  ▼.  Beardtley,  68  Mo. 
435;  Scott  Hardware  Co.  ▼.  Riddle, 
84  Mo.  App.  276;  Ross  t.  Ashton,  78 
Mo.  App.  264. 

47.  Billings  ▼.  RusseU,  101  N.  Y. 
226,  4  N.  £.  631. 

48.  Wilson  ▼.  Berger,  6  N.  Y.  St. 
Rep.  822,  citing  Auburn  Ezch.  Bank 
T.  Fitch,  48  Barb.  344;  Waterbury  ▼. 
Sturtevant,  18  Wend.  363,  and  dia- 
linguishing  Billings  ▼.  Russell,  101 
N.  Y.  226,  4  N.  £.  631;  Billings  T. 
Billings,  31  Hun,  66.  See  also 
eited  in  note  46,  mtpra. 


498 


FSAUDULSNT   Ck>NVXYANCBS. 


the  use  and  benefit  of  the  property.^  It  may  be  said  as  a  general 
rule  that  to  impeach  the  payment  or  securing  of  an  actual  debt 
there  should  be  evidence  tending  to  show  either:  (1)  some  other 
advantage  or  benefit  to  the  debtor  beyond  the  discharge  of  his 
obligation;  or  (2)  some  other  benefit  to  the  creditor,  beyond 
mere  payment  of  his  debt;  or  (3)  some  injury  to  the  other  credi* 
tors  beyond  mere  postponement  to  the  debt  preferred." 


§  24.  Secrecy  and  haste. — In  the  absence  of  a  bankrupt  or 
insolvent  law^  a  debtor  may  lawfully  pay  one  creditor  to  the 
exclusion  of  others,  and  the  fact  that  the  preference  is  accom- 
plished quickly  or  secretly,  in  order  to  prevent  interference,  is 
immaterial.^^    One  may  be  hasty  in  paying  an  honest  debt  and 


40.  BUUngs  ▼.  RuBsell,  101  N.  T. 
226. 

50.  Snayberger  v.  Fahl,  195  Pa. 
St  336,  45  AU.  1065,  7S  Am.  St  Bep. 
818;  Werner  v.  ZierfuBB,  162  Pa.  St 
3C0,  29  Atl.  737;  Dalley's  Estate,  13 
Pa.  Super.  Ct.  506.  See  also  Re- 
pauno  Chemical  Co.  v.  Vietor  Hard- 
ware Co.,  101  Fed.  948,  42  C.  C.  A. 
106. 

51.  N.  7. — Thompson  ▼.  Fuller,  8 
N.  Y.  Supp.  62,  5  Silv.  Sup.  41. 

U.  fir.— Davis  V.  Schwartz,  155  U. 
S.  631,  15  Sup.  Ct  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
289;  Foster  v.  McAlester,  114  Fed. 
145,  52  C.  C.  A.  107,  instructions 
which  convey  to  a  jury  the  impres- 
sion that  secrecy  or  haste  in  a  trans- 
action by  which  a  debtor  secures  one 
of  his  creditors,  or  the  fact  that  the 
giving  of  such  security  operates  to 
hinder  and  delay  other  creditors, 
are  badges  of  fraud  which  place  the 
burden  on  a  secured  creditor  to  sus- 
tain the  validity  of  his  security,  are 
misleading  and  erroneous  without  a 
full  explanation  of  the  legal  right  of 
a  bona  fide  creditor  to  obtain  secur- 
ity for  his  debts  to  the  exclusion  of 


others,  if  done  in  good  faith;  and 
such  instructions  are  not  warranted 
in  any  case  unless  there  is  other  evi- 
dence tending  to  impeach  the  good 
faith  of  the  transaction,  since  such 
facts  are  entirely  consistent  with 
the  exercise  by  the  creditor  of  his 
legal  rights;  Repauno  Chemical  Co. 
V.  Victor  Hardware  Co.,  101  ¥eA. 
948,  42  C.  C.  A.  106;  Rice  v.  Adler- 
Goldman  Commission  Co.,  71  Fed. 
151,  18  C.  C.  A.  15. 

Ala. — Carter  v.  Coleman,  84  Ala. 
256,  4  So.  151,  so  long  as  the  law 
allows  a  failing  debtor  to  prefer 
some  of  his  creditors  at  the  expense 
of  others,  it  permits,  if  it  does  not 
invite,  a  race  of  diligence,  and  no 
presumption  of  fraud  arises  from 
haste  in  the  transaction;  Hodges  v. 
Coleman,  76  Ala.  103.  See  also  War- 
ren V.  Hunt,  114  Ala.  506,  21  So. 
939. 

Miaa. — ^Holberg  v.  Jaffray,  64  Miss. 
746,  2   So.   168. 

Po.—Candee's  Appeal,  191  Pa.  St 
644,  43  Atl.  1093. 

Tenn. — Reeves  v.  John,  95  Temi* 
434,  32  S.  W.  312. 


Pbsfbssnces  to  Cbeditobs. 


499 


lie  is  not  bound  to  explain  what  he  is  doing.  The  great  question 
is,  was  the  debt  an  honest  one,  and  was  there  an  honest  transac- 
tion intended  to  pay  it."  That  a  creditor  seeking  to  induce  the 
debtor  to  convey  to  him  goods  for  his  protection  attempts  to  keep 
the  other  creditors  from  finding  out  his  purpose  will  not  render 
the  sale  fraudulent."  But  it  has  been  held  that  a  preference,  to 
be  valid,  must  not  be  secret,  but  must  be  open  and  fair,  without 
any  other  object  than  the  act  on  its  face  imports.^  That  a  debtor 
keeps  secret  and  fails  to  disclose  to  his  other  creditors  the  fact  of 
his  indebtedness  to  the  preferred  creditor,  or  the  fact  that  he  has 
entered  into  an  agreement  to  prefer  such  creditor,  does  not  consti- 
tute a  fraud  on  the  other  creditors.^  But  a  secret  arrangement 
by  a  debtor,  who  compounds  with  his  creditors,  to  pay  one  more 
than  he  does  the  others,  is  a  fraud  upon  the  others,  and  a  mortgage 
given  to  carry  out  such  an  arrangement  is  void." 

§  26.  Preference  pending  suit  in  general. — ^A  preferential 
conveyance  by  a  debtor  of  property  at  a  fair  value,  in  payment 
of  a  bona  fide  debt,  is  not  rendered  fraudulent  and  void  by  the 
fact  that  it  was  made  during  the  pendency  of  an  action  by  an- 
other creditor  against  the  debtor.^^  In  the  absence  of  fraud,  a 
judgment  by  confession  for  a  just  and  l^al  debt  will  not  be  set 


&2.  Thompson  v.  Fuller,  8  N.  Y. 
Supp.  62,  6  8ilv.  Sup.  41. 

53.  Rice  v.  Wood,  61  Ark.  442,  33 
S.  W.  636,  31  L.  R.  A.  609. 

54.  McNeal,  etc..  Go.  v.  Plows,  88 
111.  App.  186;  Hancock  v.  Horan,  16 
Tex.  607;  Edrington  ▼.  Rogers,  16 
Tex.  188. 

55.  Robinson  v.  Hawley,  46  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  287,  61  N.  Y.  Supp. 
138;  Smith  ▼.  Munroe,  1  App.  Div. 
(N.  Y.)  77,  37  N.  Y.  Supp.  62;  Mc- 
Elwee  ▼.  Kennedy,  66  S.  C.  164,  34 
S.  B.  86. 

56.  Harvey  ▼.  Himt,  110  Mass. 
279 ;  Feldman  ▼.  Gamble,  26  N.  J.  Eq. 
494. 


57.  N,  y.— Waterbury  v.  Sturte- 
▼ant,  18  Wend.  363. 

U,  £f.— Davis  v.  Sehwarts,  166  U.  S. 
631,  16  Sup.  Ct.  237,  39  L.  Ed.  289; 
Vansickle  v.  Wells,  106  Fed.  26. 

Ala, — Crawford  v.  Kirlcsey,  60  Ala. 
690;  Stetson  v.  Miller,  36  Ala.  642; 
Williams  v.  Jones,  2  Ala.  314. 

/nA— Dice  v.  Irvin,  110  Ind.  661, 
11  N.  E.  488. 

Kan. — ^Randall  v.  Shaw,  28  Kan.  419. 

Kff, — ^Kennaird  v.  Adams,  11  B. 
Mod.  102. 

Minn, — Ferguson  v.  Kumler,  11 
Minn.  104. 

MiM. — Donoghue  v.  t^ull,  86  Misa. 
404,  37  So.  817. 


500 


FnAUDtXLENT   CoWVEYANOBS. 


aside  simply  because  it  was  given  by  the  defendant  after  obtain- 
ing from  plaintiff  an  extention  of  time  to  answer  in  an  action 
then  pending.**  But  where  such  extention  was  obtained  by  promis- 
ing to  pay  plaintiff's  claim,  and  that  in  the  meantime  there  should 
be  no  change  in  the  defendant's  property ,  and  that  no  judgment 
should  be  entered  against  him  and  that  plaintiff  should  not  in 
any  way  be  prejudiced  by  the  delay,  a  judgment  so  confessed  is 
fraudulent  and  void  as  to  the  plaintiff.^  The  fact  that  when  a 
preference  is  made  by  an  insolvent  debtor  there  are  bankruptcy 
proceedings  pending  against  him  and  that  the  transfer  is  in  viola- 
tiontion  of  the  federal  bankruptcy  act  is  not  material  and  does 
not  affect  the  validity  of  the  conveyance  in  a  jurisdiction  which 
permits  a  preference  to  be  given.^ 


§'  26.  Intent  to  defeat  judgment,  execution*  or  attachment. — 
A  transfer  of  property  at  a  fair  value,  in  payment  of  a  bona  fide 
debt,  is  not  fraudulent  under  the  statute  as  against  an  execution 
subsequently  issued  by  a  judgment  creditor,*^  and  when  taken 
by  a  creditor  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  himself  and  not  with 
intent,  on  his  part  at  least,  of  defeating  the  lien  of  a  judgment 
to  be  entered  on  a  verdict  secured  against  the  debtor,  of  which 
he  had  knowledge,  is  not  fraudulent**    Conveyances  in  good  faith 


Mo. — ^Kuykendall  v.  MeDonald,  16 
Ho.  416,  57  Am.  Dec.  212. 

N,  J, — Doremus  ▼.  Daniels  (Ch. 
1S90),  20  Atl.  147;  Goodwin  t.  Ha- 
mill,  26  N.  J.  Eq.  24. 

OMo.— Barr  v.  Hatch,  3  Ohio»  527. 

Pa.— Snayberger  ▼.  Fahl,  196  Fa. 
St.  336, 45  AU.  1065,  78  Am.  St.  R.  818. 

S.  C— Weinges  v.  Cash,  15  S.  O. 
44;  Beyins  ▼.  Dunham,  1  Speers,  39. 

Utah,  —  Henderson  v.  Adams 
(1897)»  48  Pac.  898. 

Fa.— Luoas  v.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269; 
Williams  t.  Lord,  75  Va.  390. 

See  also  Transfers  in  anticipation 
of  or  pending  suit,  chap.  VI,  f  7, 
mpra. 


58.  Wood  V.  Mitehdil,  17  N.  Y. 
Supp.  782,  alfg  14  N.  Y.  Supp.  7,  26 
Abb.  N.  Gas.  12». 

59.  H.  B.  Caaflin  Co.  ▼.  Amheim, 
87  Hun  (N.  Y.)  236,  33  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1037»  1  N.  Y.  Annot.  391. 

60.  Talcott  ▼.  Harder,  119  N.  Y. 
536,  23  N.  E.  1056. 

61.  Wilder  ▼.  Winne,  6  Oow.  (K. 
Y.)  284;  Ludlow  t.  Hurd,  19  Johns. 
(N.  Y.)  218;  Weller  v.  Wayland,  17 
Johns.   (N.  Y.)    102. 

62.  Hall  ▼.  Arnold,  15  Barb.  (K. 
Y.)  599;  Waterbury  v.  Sturtenuit» 
18  Wend.  (N.  Y.)  363.  Oamparv 
Stoddard  t.  Butler,  20  W«nd.  (K 
Y.)  507. 


PSEFESENCES  TO  CbEDITOBS. 


601 


to  pay  or  secure  a  valid  debt  by  way  of  preference  are  not  ren- 
dered fraudulent  by  the  fact  that  they  were  executed  under  in- 
stant apprehension  of  attachment  suits  or  were  made  and  accepted 
with  the  intent  to  defeat  judgments  or  executions  against  the 
debtor  and  thus  prevent  other  creditors  from  collecting  their 
claims."  A  conveyance  from  a  debtor  to  a  creditor  is  not  in- 
valid because  the  debtor  made  it  with  the  intention  of  delaying 
other  creditors,  although  the  creditor  taking  the  conveyance  knows 
this,  if  he  took  it  with  the  honest  purpose  of  securing  his  debt. 
If,  however,  his  purpose  was  not  honest,  or  if  he  participated  in 
a  fraudulent  purpose  of  the  debtor,  the  rule  is  otherwise.**  A 
conveyance  by  a  debtor  on  the  eve  of  judgments  being  obtained 
against  him  is  a  badge  of  fraud  only  and  does  not  necessarily  ren- 
der the  conveyance  inoperative.*  Circumstances  may  be  admitted 
to  explain  and  justify  such  a  transfer,  and  when  it  appears  that 
the  transfer  was  of  property  for  a  full  and  fair  price  to  a  credi- 
tor, in  payment  of  a  just  and  valid  debt,  and  that  the  debt  is 
thereby  discharged,  any  presumption  of  fraud  arising  from  the 
pendency  of  the  suit  is  removed.**  But  a  preference  secured  by 
a  creditor  over  other  creditors  by  obtaining  payment  of  his  debt 
by  suit  commenced  or  judgment  secured  by  collusion  with  the  in- 
solvent debtor,  whereby  other  creditors  of  the  debtor  are  hindered, 


63.  U,  £r.— Davis  y.  Schwarts,  155 
U.  S.  631,  16  Sup.  Ct  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
289. 

Cat. — ^Walden  ▼.  Murdock,  23  Cal. 
540,  S3  Am.  Dec.  135;  Wlieatcm  v. 
Neville,  19  Cal.  41. 

Fto.— Gassett  ▼.  Wilson,  3  Fla.  235. 

722.— Funk  v.  Staats,  24  HI.  633. 

Ind, — Steele  v.  Moore,  54  Ind.  52. 

Ma88, — Carpenter  t.  Cushman,  121 
Mass.  265. 

Mo, — ^Kuykendall  ▼.  McDonald,  15 
Mo.  416,  57  Am.  Dec.  512. 

V.  J.—Goodwin  v.  Hamill,  26  K. 
J.  Eq.  24. 

Pa, — Clemens  ▼.  Davis,  7  t^a.  St 
263. 


re».— Moore  ▼.  Robinson  (Civ. 
App.  1903),  76  S.  W.  890;  Frowr  v. 
Thatcher,  49  Tex.  26. 

Va, — ^Lucas  v.  Clafflin,  76  Va.  269; 

Can.— OuTofski  v.  Harris,  27  Ont. 
201,  aff'd  23  Ont.  App.  717;  White 
V.  Stevens,  7  U.  C.  Q.  B.  340. 

Eng, — ^Alton  v.  Harrison,  L.  R.  4 
Ch.  622,  38  Li  J.  Ch.  669,  21  L.  T. 
Rep.  N.  S.  282,  17  Wkly.  Rep.  1034; 
Wood  V.  Dixie,  7  Q.  B.  892,  9  Jur. 
796,  63  E.  C.  L.  892. 

64.  Shelley  v.  Boothe,  73  Mo.  74, 
39  Am.  Rep.  481. 

65.  Williams  v.  Jones,  2  Ala.  314. 

66.  Barr  v.  Hatch,  3  Ohio,  527. 


502 


FfiAUDULEKT    CONVEYANCES. 


delayed,  and  defrauded,  is  a  fraudulent  preference  and  void.*' 
And  a  preference  given  will  be  held  fraudulent  in  fact,  as  against 
the  judgment  of  a  creditor,  where  the  transfer  was  made  by  the 
debtor  in  violation  of  his  agreement  with  such  creditor,  and  with 
the  obvious  intent  to  deprive  the  latter  of  the  benefit  of  a  security 
previously  given,  or  after  such  creditor  had  been  induced  to  re- 
frain from  entering  judgment  by  the  fraudulent  representations 
of  the  debtor  that  there  would  be  no  change  in  the  property  and 
that  the  creditor's  right  should  not  be  in  any  way  prejudiced  by 
the  delay.® 


i; 


§  27.  Agreement  to  prefer.— Inasmuch  as  a  failing  debtor 
may  legally  prefer  one  or  more  creditors  and  the  law  will  uphold 
such  a  preference  honestly  made,  and  he  may  make  such  prefer- 
ence without  any  antecedent  promise,  it  will  not  be  invalidated 
because  made  in  pursuance  of  a  valid  or  invalid  agreement  hon- 
estly made,®  nor  because  such  agreement  for  preferential  trans- 
fer was  conditional,  as,  for  example,  to  secure  the  indebtedness 
whenever  demanded,™  or  to  protect  the  creditor  if  it  should  be- 
come necessary  to  do  so,  or  if  the  debtor  should  become  insolvent.^ 
Such  facts  are  merely  circumstances  from  which  fraud  may  be 


67.  First  Nat.  Bank  y.  Acme 
White  Lead,  etc.,  Co.,  123  Ala.  344,  26 
So.  354. 

68.  Robinson  ▼.  Hawley,  46  App. 
Div.  (N.  Y.)  287,  61  N.  Y.  Supp.  138; 
H.  B.  Claflin  Co.  v.  Arnheim,  87  Hun 
(N.  Y.)  236,  33  N.  Y.  Supp.  1037,  1 

N.  Y.  Annot.  Cas.  391,  dUtinguiahing 
Wood  V.  Mitchell,  17  N.  Y.  Supp.  782. 

69.  National  Park  Bank  ▼.  Whit- 
more,  104  N.  Y.  297,  10  N.  E.  624; 
Foster  v.  McAlester,  114  Fed.  145,  52 
C.  C.  A.  107;  Fechheimer  v.  Baum, 
43  Fed.  719,  2  L.  R.  A.  153;  Smith  ▼. 
Craft,  17  Fed.  705,  appeal  di9m%88ed 
123  U.  S.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct.  196,  31  L. 
Ed.  267;  Marquese  v.  Felsenthal,  68 
Ark.  293,  24  S.  W.  493;  First  Nat. 
Bank  v.  North,  2  S.  D.  480,  51  N.  W. 


96.     See  also  Cooper  v.  Perdue,  114 
Ind.  207,  16  N.  E.  140. 

70.  Foster  ▼.  McAlester,  114  Fed. 
145,  62  C.  C.  A.  107. 

71.  National  Park  Bank  ▼.  Whit- 
more,  104  N.  Y.  297,  10  N.  E.  624; 
Robinson  v.  Hawlej,  45  App.  Div. 
(.N.  Y.)  287,  61  N.  Y.  Supp.  138; 
Smith  V.  Monroe,  1  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.) 
77,  37  N.  Y.  Supp.  62 ;  Ftehheimer  v. 
Baum,  43  Fed.  719,  2  L.  R.  A.  163; 
Smith  V.  Craft,  17  Fed.  705.  But 
compare  Krippendorf  v.  Hyde,  28  Fed. 
788. 

A  general  assignment  is  not  in- 
valid  because  it  was  not  filed  until 
four  days  after  it  was  signed,  where 
it  was  signed  with  the  understanding 
that  it  was  not  then  to  be  delivered. 


Pbefebenges  to  Csebitobs. 


603 


inferred  as  a  fact  and  are  proper  to  be  submitted  to  the  jury  on 
the  question  of  f raud.^  An  agreement  providing  for  the  immedi- 
ate maturity  of  a  debt  in  case  the  debtor  becomes  involved  is  not 
fraudulent  as  to  creditors,  in  the  absence  of  a  fraudulent  intent.^ 
But  an  agreement  by  a  debtor  that^  in  case  he  becomes  insolvent, 
he  will  turn  over  his  property  to  a  creditor,  is  fraudulent  as  to 
his  other  creditors  under  local  insolvency  laws.^*  And  a  mortgage 
given  to  secure  advances  is  none  the  less  an  unlawful  preference 
because  given  in  pursuance  of  an  agreement  to  prefer.^ 


"§  28.  Transfer  partly  as  preference  and  partly  on  other  con- 
sideration.— Where  an  insolvent  debtor  conveys  or  transfers  prop- 
erty to  a  creditor,  partly  in  payment  of  an  antecedent  debt  and 
partly  for  money  paid  or  loaned  at  the  time,  the  validity  of  the 
transaction  as  against  other  existing  creditors  is  to  be  determined 
by  the  rules  applicable  to  a  purchase  on  an  entirely  new  considera- 
tion.''* The  creditor  in  such  a  case  must  pay  a  reasonably  fair 
price  for  the  property  conveyed  or  transferred  and  the  debtor 
must  not  secure  or  reserve  any  benefit  by  the  transaction  which 
the  law  would  not  secure  to  him  in  the  absence  of  a  contract.^  If 
these  requirements  are  complied  with,  in  the  absence  of  actual 


but  only  in  cnse  the  assignors  were 
unable  to  procure  an  extension  from 
their  creditors.  Pierce  Steam  Heat- 
ing Co.  y.  Ransom,  16  App.  Div.  (N. 
Y.),  268,  44  N.  Y.  Supp.  S23. 

The  f  ailiire  to  rooord  an  agree- 
ment by  a  debtor  to  prefer  a  certain 
creditor  in  case  of  insolvency  does 
not  render  it  fraudulent,  where  such 
an  agreement  is  not  required  by  law 
to  be  recorded,  as  its  record  in  such 
case  would  not  constitute  notice. 
Fechheimer  t.  Baum,  43  Fed.  719. 

72.  Marquese  v.  Felsenthal,  68 
Ark.  293,  24  S.  W.  493;  Smith  v. 
Craft,  123  U.  S.  436,  8  Sup.  Ct.  196, 
31  L.  Ed.  267. 


7i3.  Teitig  v.  Boesnuin,  12  Mont. 
404,  31  Pac.  371. 

74.  Chevalier  v.  Commins,  106  Cal. 
680,  39  Pac.  929. 

75.  Forbes  v.  Howe,  102  Mass.  427, 
8  Am.  Rep.  476. 

76.  Owens  v.  Hobbie.  82  Ala.  467, 
3  So.  146.  See  Transfer  to  creditor 
where  debt  is  only  part  of  considera- 
tion, chap.  XIII,  S  10.  infra. 

77.  Leinkauff  v.  Frenkle,  80  Ala. 
136,  where  a  creditor,  with  a  demand 
for  $6,700,  purchases  his  insolvent 
debtor's  entire  stock  at  the  gross  sum 
of  $6,200  for  which  he  pays  $1,000  in 
cash,  lenvin<v  $500  of  his  debt  unsat- 
isfied, the  transaction  is  frnudulent 
as  to  other  creditors. 


504 


FbAUDULENT   CONTBTAirOSS. 


f raudy  a  transfer  by  an  insolvent  debtor  of  his  property  to  one  of 
his  creditors  for  a  fixed  consideration,  which  the  creditor  pays  in 
part  by  discharging  his  daim,  and  in  part  by  paying  other  debta 
of  the  grantor  or  by  the  payment  of  money,  will  be  valid  as 
against  other  creditors."  A  conveyance  of  land  to  one  creditor, 
to  the  exclusion  of  others,  the  price  paid  being  more  than  the 
land  with  a  perfect  title  is  worth,  is  not  rendered  fraudulent  by 
the  fact  that  the  grantee  agreed  to  pay  a  sum  of  money  to  the 
wife  of  the  grantor  for  her  separate  use,  for  her  relinquishment 
of  her  right  of  dower."  A  transfer  of  property  by  an  insolvent 
debtor  however,  to  a  creditor,  who  gives  a  time  note  for  the 
excess  over  the  amount  of  his  debt  thus  providing  for  payment 
of  the  balance  of  the  consideration  in  the  future,  is  invalid,  its 
effect  being,  as  to  siich  excess,  to  hinder  and  delay  creditors  in 
their  lawful  actions.*^  And  the  same  rule  has  been  held  to  apply 
where  the  effect  of  the  transfer  is  to  give  the  transferee  time  within 
which  to  repay  a  conceded  surplus  over  the  amount  of  the  debt, 
thereby  hindering  and  ddaying  creditors  of  their  lawful  actions, 
the  parties  being  held  to  have  intended  that  effect  as  the  natural, 
probable,  and  necessary  result  of  their  vohmtary  act.*^  While  a 
bona  fide  creditor  may,  with  knowledge  that  the  debtor  intend, 
to  hinder,  delay,  or  defraud  other  creditors,  take  the  property 
of  the  debtor  in  satisfaction  of  his  claim,  and  if  necessary  for 


78.  Ala.—KilBt  V.  Barrow,  42  Ark. 
521. 

Iowa. — ^Adams  v.  Ryan,  61  Iowa, 
733,  17  K.  W.  159;  Johnson  v.  Mo- 
Orew,  11  Iowa,  151,  77  Am.  Dec.  137. 

Mo. — Calm  v.  Groves,  46  Mo.  App. 
263. 

F<.— Lyon  v.  Rood,  12  Vt.  233. 

WaaK—lxngact  ▼.  Barid,  14  Wash. 
389,  44  Pac.  875. 

In  Texas,  though  a  failing  debtor 
may  prefer  a  creditor,  be  cannot 
transfer  his  property  to  such  creditor, 
receiving  a  partial  money  considera- 
tion  therafor,   and   to   cut  off   the 


rights  of  other  creditors.  8nch  a 
transfer  will  be  set  aside  not  only  aa 
to  the  excess  in  value,  but  as  to  all 
the  property  transferred.  Black  v. 
Vau^an,  70  Tex.  47,  7  a  W.  604*,. 
Seligson  v.  Brown,  61  Tex.  180; 
Greenleve  v.  Blum,  69  Tex.  124. 

70.  Marshall  v.  Hutchinson,  44 
Ky.  208. 

80.  Brinson  v.  Bdwards,  94  Ala. 
447,  10  So.  219;  Elser  v.  Graber,  69 
Tex.  222,  6  S.  W.  560. 

But  see  Langert  v.  David,  14  Wash. 
389,  44  Pac.  875. 

81.  Seger  v.  Th<»nas,  107  Mo.  635,. 
18  S.  W.  33. 


Prsfebbi^cbs  to  Cbbditobs.  505 

this  pnrpofle  make  a  cash  payment  to  the  debtor  of  the  difference 
between  the  debt  and  the  value  of  the  property^  yet  the  transaction 
most  not  be  for  the  purpose  of  conferring  a  benefit  upon  the 
debtor,  and  the  cash  payment  made  must  be  necessary  in  order  to 
effectuate  the  transfer  or  the  collection  of  the  debt.^ 

§  29.  Where  present  consideration  is  exempt. — Where  a; 
debtor  sells  his  property  at  a  fair  value  and  receives  payment 
partly  in  the  discharge  of  an  antecedent  debt  and  partly  for  a 
present  consideration^  either  in  money  or  notes  of  the  purchaser, 
if  the  present  consideration,  together  with  the  remaining  prop- 
erty of  the  debtor,  do  not  exceed  in  value  the  amount  of  the  exemp- 
tion to  which  he  is  entitled,  the  effect  of  the  transaction  is  to  make 
an  authorized  preference  among  the  seller's  creditors,  and  secure 
to  him  a  sum  of  money  which  is  not  liable  to  his  other  debts; 
and  the  fact  that  the  money  or  notes  were  taken  in  part  payment 
of  the  purchase  does  not  render  the  transaction  fraudulent,  since, 
as  the  money  or  notes  were  included  in  the  exemption,  the  change 
was  merely  in  the  form  of  the  property  exempted,  and  did  not 
therefore  involve  any  prejudice  to  the  rights  of  creditors.^  The 
debtor  in  such  case  must  be  shown  to  be  a  resident  of  the  state 
and  thus  entitled  to  the  exemption.** 

• 

§  30.  Present  consideration  to  be  paid  by  debtor  to  other 
creditors. — ^A  sale  by  an  insolvent  debtor  of  his  property  at  a 
fair  valuation  partly  in  absolute  payment  of  a  hana  fide  debt,  no 
benefit  being  reserved  to  himself,  and  partly  for  a  present  con- 
sideration, is  not  rendered  fraudulent  by  the  fact  that  it  was 
stipulated  that  the  present  consideration  should  be  applied  on 
the  debts  of  another  bona  fide  creditor,  and  that  it  was  so  ap- 

8S.  Sly  V.  Bell  (Iowa,  1906),  108  aomc  of  the  property,  consisting  of 

N.  W.  227,  where  a  transaction  was  cattle,  horses  and  farm  implements, 

held  Toidahle  at  the  suit  of  the  cred-  from  the  sale. 

itors,  inasmuch  as  the  cash  payment  88.  Fargerson  v.  Hall,  99  Ala.  209, 

was  unnecessary  hecause  the  differ-  14  So.  302;  Brinson  ▼.  Edwards,  94 

enee   covered   by  the   cash   payment  Ala.  447,  10  So.  219. 


eoold  have  been  avoided  by  omitting        84.  Brinson  t.  Edwards,  ntpra. 


506 


Fbaudui-bnt  Convetakcbs. 


plied."    Snch  a  stipulation  is  not  objectionable  as  being  a  reser- 
vation of  a  benefit  to  the  debtor." 


§  31.  Other  debts  assumed  by  transferee. — A  bona  fide  prefer- 
ential sale  or  transfer  of  property  by  an  insolvent  or  failing  debtor 
to  a  creditor,  in  consideration  of  the  cancellation  of  a  debt  due 
by  the  debtor  to  the  creditor,  or  to  secure  the  payment  of  such  a 
debt,  is  valid,  as  against  the  unpreferred  creditors,  although  the 
vendee  or  grantee  also  agrees,  as  part  of  the  consideration  or  as 
further  consideration,  to  pay,  or  assumes  the  payment  of,  debts 
owing  by  the  debtor  to  certain  other  creditors,  or  to  pay  a  certain 
sum  on  such  debts  as  the  debtor  may  direct*'  The  rule  applies 
although  the  conveyance  is  of  all  the  debtor's  property,"  and  al- 


86.  Fargerson  v.  Hall,  09  Ala.  209, 
13  So.  302;  Carter  ▼.  Ck>lemaii,  84 
Ala.  266,  4  So.  161 ;  Moog  v.  Farley, 
79  Ala.  246,  when  it  is  not  shown 
that  the  grantee  had  knowledge  of 
the  grantor's  insolvency;  Rankin  ▼. 
Vandiver,  78  Ala.  662. 

86.  Rankin  v.  Vandi^w,  78  Ala. 
662.  See  Reservation  of  power  to 
direct  application  of  surplus  pro- 
ceeds, chap.  X,  §  9,  8upra, 

87.  N.  y.— Hine  v.  Bowe,  114  N. 
Y.  360,  21  N.  E.  733,  afg  46  Hun, 
196;  Carpenter  v.  Muren,  42  Barb. 
300,  mortgage. 

17.  fif.— Randolph  v.  Allen,  73  Fed. 
23,  19  C.  C.  A.  363. 

AIa.--Goetter  v.  Smith,  104  Ala. 
481,  16  So.  634;  Dixon  v.  Higgins, 
82  Ala.  284,  2  So.  289. 

CaL — Saimderson  v.  Broadwell,  82 
Cal.  132,  23  Pa.  36. 

Conn.— Koeter  v.  Merritt,  82  Conn. 
246,  such  a  sale  is  not  void  as  pre- 
ferring creditors,  if,  under  the  laws 
of  the  State  where  the  sale  is  made 
such  preferences  are  not  invalid. 

/ZZ.— Ewing  V.  Runkle,  20  111.  448, 
where  such  a  transfer  was  made  with 


the  consent  of  other  creditors,  the 
consenting  creditors  were  bound  by  itw 

Ind, — Wilooxson  ▼.  Annesley,  2B 
Ind.  286. 

Iowa, — ^Lycoming  Rubber  Co.  t. 
King,  90  Iow|i,  343,  57  N.  W.  864, 
mortgage;  Johnson  v.  McGrew,  11 
Iowa,  161,  77  Am.  Dec.  137. 

N.  /.—Essex  County  v.  Undaley,  41 
N.  J.  Eq.  189,  3  Atl.  391. 

Pa. — ^York  County  Bank  v.  Carter, 
38  Pa.  St  446,  80  Am.  Dec.  494. 

Tenn. — Johnson  v.  Coldst(»i  (Ch. 
App.  1899),  61  S.  W.  474,  where  all  of 
the  transferrer's  debts  were  assumed 
by  the  transferee,  who  paid  some  of 
them  and  became  liable  for  the  rest. 

Tex. — Jacobs  v.  Totty,  76  Tex.  343, 
13  S.  W.  372;  Noyes  v.  Sanger,  8 
Tex.  Civ.  App.  388,  27  S.  W.  1022. 

Va, — Janney  v.  Bumes,  11  Lei.  100. 

TTiS.— Ingram  v.  Osbom,  70  Wis. 
184,  36  N.  W.  304. 

Compare  Foster  v.  Grigsl^,  64  Ky. 
86;  Smith  v.  Conkwright,  28  Minn. 
23,  8  N.  W.  876. 

88.  Chipman  v.  Stem,  89  Ala.  807, 
7  So.  409;  Johnson  t.  McOrew,  11 
Iowa,  161. 


PSBFEREKGES  TO  CbEDITOBS* 


607 


though  the  tranfiaction  restdts  in  the  preference  of  the  creditors 
the  payment  of  whose  claims  is  thus  assumed,  or  such  preference 
is  stipulated  for  by  the  parties,  since  the  debtor  has  a  legal  right 
to  direct  the  application  of  the  surplus  and  to  give  preferences 
therefrom."  There  is  no  reason  why  the  debtor  may  not  as  well 
direct  the  payment  of  the  surplus  of  the  consideration  by  the 
purchaser  upon  his  debts,  as  to  take  the  money  and  pay  it  on 
them  himself.**  Where  there  is  a  complete  novation,  the  substi- 
tution of  a  new  obligation  for  an  old  one,  which  is  thereby  ex- 
tinguished, the  debtor  being  released  and  the  other  creditors  ac- 
cepting the  obligation  of  the  purchasing  creditor  in  the  place  of 
that  of  the  debtor,  the  transaction  is  not  fraudulent.'^  A  stipula- 
tion whereby  the  right  is  reserved  to  the  debtor  to  direct  what 
claims  shall  have  preference  as  to  payment  from  the  surplus  is 
not  objectionable  as  being  a  reservation  of  a  benefit  to  him.^  But 
a  stipulation  that  the  transferee  or  vendee  shall  have  power  to 
prefer  creditors  of  the  debtor  at  his  discretion  will  render  the  con- 
veyance or  transfer  invalid.** 

§  32.  Creditor's  promise  to  compound  felony. — ^A  transfer  of 
property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  in  payment  of  a  debt  is  not  fraud- 
ulent in  law,  within  a  statute  providing  for  the  reaching  of  prop- 
erty fraudulently  conveyed  by  a  debtor  with  intent  to  defeat,  delay 
or  defraud  creditors,  merely  because  the  compounding  of  a  felony 
was  a  part  of  the  transaction.*^ 


80.  N.  y. — Hine  ▼.  Bowe,  9upra. 
U,  S. — ^Randolph  v.  Allen,  supra. 
Ala. — Goetter  t.  Smith,  9upm. 
Ind. — ^Wilooxson  v.  Annesley,  Mipro. 
loioa. — ^Lyooming    Rubber    Go.    v. 
King,  Bupra. 
Wis, — ^Ingram  v.  Osbom,  supra. 

00.  Hine  v.  Bowe,  supra;  Royer 
Wheel  Go.  v.  Fielding,  101  N.  Y.  604. 

01.  McOann  ▼.  Dillabaugb,  117 
Mich.  446,  75  N.  W.  929,  distinguish' 
ing  HiU  t.  Mallory,  112  Mich.  387, 
70  N.  W.  1016;  Allen  v.  Stingel,  96 


Mich.  196,  64  N.  W.  880. 

02.  Hine  t.  Bowe,  supra;  Goetter 
▼.  Smith,  supra.  See  also  Resenra- 
tion  of  power  to  direct  applieation 
of  surplus  proceeds,  chap.  X,  §  9, 
supra. 

03.  Strong  v.  Skinner,  4  Barb.  (N. 
Y.)  646;  Boardman  ▼.  Halliday,  10 
Paige  (N.  Y.),  223;  Barnum  t. 
Hempstead,  7  Paige  (N.  Y.),  668. 
See  also  Delegation  of  power  to  pre- 
fer, chap.  XI,  9  9,  supra. 

04.  Traders'  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Steere^ 


508 


FSAUDULENT   CoNVETANCBS. 


§  33.  Preferences  between  relatives  generally. — A  oonveyanoe 
of  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor  to  relatives  in  discharge  of  an 
indebtedness  to  them,  made  in  good  faith,  is  valid  as  against  the 
grantor's  other  creditors,  being  only  a  preference  given  by  him 
to  the  daim  of  his  relatives  over  that  of  the  others.*^  Transactions 
between  relatives  whereby  property  is  transferred  from  one  credi- 
tor to  another  in  payment  of  an  alleged  past-due  indebtedness,  by 
reason  of  which  other  creditors  are  deprived  of  their  just  dues, 
will,  however,  be  scrutinized  very  closely,  and  the  bona  fides  of 
such  transactions  must  be  clearly  established.*^  Belationship  is 
not  a  badge  of  fraud,  though  it  may  require  that  the  dealings  of 
the  parties  be  treated  with  suspicion;  but  suspicion  is  not  proof 
of  fraud.  Fraud  must  be  proved  not  by  surmise,  but  by  evidence 
which  rises  above  the  realm  of  mere  suspicion,  and  to  the  dignity 
of  proof ;  otherwise  it  would  be  next  to  impossible  to  sustain  transr 
actions  between  near  relatives  upon  any  other  theory.  In  the  ab- 
sence of  actual  fraud,  a  preference  given  for  a  valid  subsisting 
debt  by  a  debtor  to  a  member  of  his  family  or  other  relative  is 
as  valid  as  if  made  to  any  other  creditor.*^     There  is  no  law 


166  Mass.  389,  43  N.  E.  187.  And 
see  In  re  Mapleback,  4  Ch.  D.  160, 
13  Oca  C.  C.  374,  36  L.  T.  R.  N.  S. 
603,  26  Wkly.  Rep.  103. 

06.  Silvers  v.  Potter,  48  K.  J.  Eq. 
639,  22  Atl.  684. 

06.  Fisher  t.  Herron,  22  Neb.  183, 
34  N.  W.  366. 

07.  y.  y.— Lindsley  ▼.  Van  Cort- 
landt,  67  Hun,  146,  22  N.  Y.  Supp. 
222,  alfd  142  N.  Y.  682,  37  N.  E. 
826;  Toffey  v.  V^illiams,  6  Thomp.  ft 
C.  294. 

17.  £f.— Davis  v.  Scliwartz,  166  U. 
S.  631,  16  Sup.  Ct  237,  39  L.  Ed. 
289;  V^alker  v.  Houghteling,  120 
Fed.  928,  67  C.  C.  A.  218;  Corwine 
V.  Thompson  Nat.  Bank,  106  Fed. 
196,  44  C.  C.  A.  442;   Vansiekle  v. 


Wills,  100  Fed.  26;  Hinchman  v. 
Parlin,  74  Fed.  698,  21  C.  C.  A.  273, 
41  U.  8.  App.  301;  Buford  v.  Cook,. 
36  Fed.  21. 

Ala, — ^Worthington  v.  Bogan 
(1898),  26  So.  299;  Owens  v.  Hob- 
ble, 82  Ala.  467,  3  So.  146;  Crawford 
V.  Kirksey,  60  Ala.  290. 

Ark. — ^Hemsiead  v.  Johnston,  18 
Ark.  123,  66  Am.  Dec  468. 

Cal.— RoberU  v.  Burr,  136  CaL 
166,  67  Pac.  46. 

/tt.— Schuberth  v.  Schillo,  177  lU. 
346,  62  N.  £.  319,  affg  76  HL  App. 
366;  Victor  v.  Swisky,  87  HI.  App. 
688. 

Ind, — ^Rockland  County  v.  Som- 
merville,  139  Ind.  696,  39  N.  B.  307; 
Adams  v.  Curtis,  137  Ind.  176,  86  N. 


PS£FBBENGE8  TO  CsEDITOBS* 


609 


which  forbids  persons  standing  in  near  relations  of  consanguinity, 
affinity,  or  business,  from  dealing  with  each  other,  or  which  re- 
quires them  to  conduct  their  business  with  each  other  differently 
from  the  manner  in  which  they  conduct  it  with  other  persons." 
In  accordance  with  the  general  rules  stated  in  the  first  section  of 
this  chapter,  a  debtor  has  a  legal  right  to  give  a  preference  for  a 
bona  fide  debt  to  his  father,"  to  his  mother,^  to  his  brother,^  to 


E.  1005;  Jones  t.  Snyder,  117  Ind. 
229,  20  N.  E.  140;  Wilson  ▼.  Wilson, 
113  Ind.  415,  15  N.  £.  513;  Goff  ▼. 
Bogera,  71  Ind.  459. 

Iowa, — ^Roberts  v.  Brothers,  119 
Iowa,  300,  93  N.  W.  280;  Brooks  ▼. 
Jones  (1900),  82  N.  W.  434;  StroiT 
v.  Swafford,  81  Iowa,  605,  47  N.  W. 
1023;  Roekford  Boot,  etc.,  Mfg.  Go. 
V.  Mastin,  75  Iowa,  112,  30  N.  W. 
210;  Wise  ▼.  Wilds,  47  Iowa,  586, 
42  K.  W.  553. 

Xofi.— Winfield  Nat.  Bank  v. 
Crooo,  46  Kan.  620,  26  Pac.  042; 
Bliss  ▼.  Couch,  46  Kan.  400,  26  Pac 
706;  Cooper  v.  First  Nat.  Bank,  40 
Kan.  5,  18  Pac.  037. 

£y.— Stokes  ▼.  Coffey,  71  Kj.  533; 
Young  ▼.  Stallings,  44  Ky.  307. 

Md. — Commonwealth  Bank  v. 
Keams,  100  Md.  202,  50  Atl.  1010. 

JfioA.— Webber  v.  Webber,  109 
Mich.  147,  66  N.  W.  960;  Leppig  ▼. 
Bretzel,  48  Mich.  321,  12  N.  W.  190. 

Miaa. — Donoghue  v.  Shull,  85  Miss. 
404,  37  So.  817. 

Mo. — ^Ridge  ▼.  Greenwell,  53  Mo. 
App.  470. 

Neh, — ^Blair  State  Bank  ▼.  Bunn, 
61  Neb.  464,  85  N.  W.  527;  Farring* 
ton  T.  Stone,  35  Neb.  456,  53  N.  W. 
380. 

V.  ./.—Silvers  t.  Potter,  48  N.  J. 
Eq.  530,  22  AU.  584. 

OMo.— Thacker  v.  Newall,  7  Ohio 
Dec  (Reprint)  576,  3  Cine  L.  Bui. 
1159. 


Or.— Hesse  ▼.  Barrett,  41  Or.  202, 
68  Pac.  751;  Feldman  ▼.  Nioolai,  28 
Or.  34,  40  Pac.  1010;  Jolly  ▼.  Kyle, 
27  Or.  05,  30  Pac  000. 

Pa. — Candee's  Appeal,  101  Pa.  St. 
644,  43  Atl.  1003;  Kitchen  ▼.  Mc- 
aoskey,  150  Pa.  St.  376,  24  Atl.  688, 
80  Am.  St.  Rep.  811;  Collins  ▼. 
Cronin,  117  Pa.  St.  35,  11  Atl.  860. 

8.  C. — ^Mechanics'  Bldg.,  etc., 
Assoc.  ▼.  Fowler,  57  S.  C.  110. 

8.  D.— Studebaker  Mfg.  Co.  v. 
Zollars,  12  S.  D.  206,  81  N.  W.  202. 

Teim. — ^Miller  v.  Winton  (Ch.  App. 
1900),  56  S.  W.  1049;  Maryville 
Bank  ▼.  Thorton  (Ch.  App.  1895),  35 
S.  W.  565. 

Va, — Johnson  ▼.  Lucas,  103  Va.  36, 
48  8.  E.  497. 

Eng.—QngMn  ▼.  Cooke,  2  Ball  ft  B. 
234. 

08.  Johnson  ▼.  Lucas,  103  Va.  36, 

48  S.  E.  497. 


f actnrtnc  corporatlom  may  pre- 
fer its  directors,  or  creditors  on 
whose  claims  the  directors  are  sure- 
ties, though  their  votes  are  necessary 
therefor,  and  though  loss  is  thereby 
caused  to  persons  having  claims 
against  the  corporation,  the  directors 
owing  no  duty  to  creditors.  Nap- 
panee  Canning  Co.  ▼.  Reid,  159  Ind. 
614,  64  N.  £.  870,  1115,  59  L.  R.  A. 
199. 

•9.  y.  7.— Lindsley  t.  Van  Cori* 


510 


FkAUDULENT   CoirVETANCES. 


his  sister/  or  to  his  child/  to  the  same  extent  as  he  might  prefer 
other  creditors.    Where  there  is  no  fraud,  parents  may  lawfully 


Undt,  67  Hun,  146,  22  N.  T.  Supp. 
222,  affd  142  N.  Y.  6S2,  37  N.  E. 
825. 

Ind, — ^Rockland  County  v.  Summer- 
▼ille,  139  Ind.  696,  39  N.  E.  307;  Mo- 
Fadden  v.  Ross,  126  Ind.  341,  26  N. 
£.  78. 

iotoa. — First  Nat.  Bank  v.  Bru- 
baker,  128  Iowa,  587,  105  N.  W.  116. 

JficA.— State  Bank  v.  Whittle,  48 
Mich.  1,  11  N.  W.  756. 

Minn, — Ferguson  v.  Kumler,  11 
Minn.  104. 

Neh, — ^Peregoy  v.  Krants,  31  Neb. 
68,  47  N.  W.  422. 

1.  Leach  v.  Flack,  31  Hun  (N. 
Y.),  606;  Auburn  Exch.  Bank  v. 
Fitch,  48  Barb.  (N.  Y.)  344;  Roberts 
▼.  Burr,  135  Cal.  166,  67  Pac.  46; 
Coley  V.  Coley,  14  N.  J.  £q.  350; 
Jones  V.  Naughright,  10  N.  J.  Eq. 
298;  Uoyd  v.  Williams,  21  Pa.  St. 
327. 

2.  Ala, — ^Moog  V.  Farley,  79  Ala. 
246. 

CaL — Saunderson  v.  Broadwell,  82 
Cal.  132,  23  Pac.  36. 

Colo. — ^Krippendorf-Dittman  Co.  ▼• 
Trenoweth,  16  Colo.  App.  178»  64 
Pac.  373. 

Iowa, — ^Adams  ▼.  Ryan,  61  Iowa» 
733,  17  N.  W.  159. 

Ky. — Shaw  v.  Bhaw,  15  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  692,  24  8.  W.  630. 

Pa, — ^Kitchen  ▼.  McCloskey,  150 
Pa.  St.  376,  24  AU.  688,  30  Am.  St. 
Rep.  811.  See  also  Candee's  Appeal, 
191  Pa.  St  644,  43  Atl.  1093,  where 
one  member  of  a  debtor  firm  was  a 
brother  of  a  member  of  the  creditor 
firm. 

8,  C, — Sloan  ▼.  Hunter,  66  8.  C. 
386,  34  S.  £.  668,  879,  76  Am.  St. 


Rep.  551 ;  Thorpe  v.  Thorpe,  12  S.  C. 
154. 

3.  Toffey  v.  Williams,  5  Thomps. 
&  C.  (N.  Y.)  294;  Cahn  ▼.  Groves, 
46  Mo.  App.  263. 

4.  N,  7.— National  Bank  ▼.  Port 
Jervis  v.  Bonnell,  26  Misc.  Rep.  541, 
67  N.  Y.  Supp.  486;  Hyde  v.  Houston, 
29  N.  Y.  Supp.  818. 

U.  £f.— Mioou  ▼.  First  Nat.  Bank, 
104  U.  S.  630,  26  L.  £d.  834;  Vattier 
V.  Hinde,  7  Pet.  252,  8  L.  Ed.  675. 

/iid.~Clow  y.  Brown  (1904),  72 
N.  E.  534. 

lotoa, — ^Riddick  v.  Parr,  111  Iowa, 
733,  82  N.  W.  1002;  Sands  ▼.  Pier- 
son,  61  Iowa,  702,  17  N.  W.  107. 

Kan, — ^Pettyjohn  ▼.  Newhart,  7 
Kan.  App.  64,  61  Pac.  969;  Nurray 
y.  First  Nat.  Bank,  5  Kan.  App.  456, 
49  Pac.  326. 

ir^.~-Sei]er  v.  Wak,  100  Ky.  105, 
29  S.  W.  338,  31  S.  W.  729,  17  Ky. 
L.  Rep.  301;  Caldwell  v.  Deposit 
Bank,  18  Ky.  L.  Rep.  166,  35  8.  W. 
626;  Spurrier  v.  Haley,  4  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
364. 

Jfce.~Thompson  v.  Williams,  100 
Md.  195,  60  Atl.  26. 

JfiM.— Donly  y.  Ray  (1889),  6  So. 
324. 

Mo, — ^Ullard  ▼.  Johnson,  148  Mo. 
23,  49  S.  W.  889;  Ridge  y.  Green- 
well,  63  Mo.  App.  479. 

Neb, — Carson  y.  Murphy,  1  Neb. 
(Unoff.)  619,  96  N.  W.  110. 

N.  J. — ^Doremus  y.  Daniels  (Ch. 
1890),  20  Atl.  147. 

Tenn, — ^Nelson  y.  Kinney,  93  Tenn. 
428,  25  8.  W.  100. 

Wm.— Barr  y.  Church,  82  Wis. 
382,  62  N.  W.  591. 

Can.— Gurofski  y.  Harris,  27  Ont. 


Pbbfbbbncxs  to  Cbeditobs. 


511 


receive  pay  or  take  security  from  their  son,  who  is  indebted  to 
them,  though  they  know  that  the  result  will  be  to  delay  or  defeat 
his  other  creditors.^  Where  a  father  emancipates  his  child  so 
that  his  earnings  belong  to  him  and  thereafter  borrows  the  same 
from  him,  a  conveyance  from  the  father  to  the  child  to  repay  the 
same  is  not  fraudulent  as  to  existing  creditors  of  the  father.* 
As  a  general  rule  a  transfer  of  property  by  an  insolvent  debtor 
to  a  relative,  which  has  the  effect  of  hindering  or  delaying  other 
creditors  in  the  collection  of  their  debts,  will  be  subjected  to 
greater  scrutiny  than  if  the  parties  to  the  conveyance  were 
strangers,  though  it  will  be  sustained  if  made  in  good  faith  and 
for  an  adequate  consideration^  Where  a  debtor  prefers  a  credi- 
tor related  by  blood  or  marriage,  clearer  proof  of  good  faith  is 
required  than  in  case  of  strangers,'  and  the  bona  fides  of  such 
transaction  must  be  clearly  established.* 


201,  alfd  23  Ont.  App.  717;  Smith  ▼. 
Wright.  2  N.  Brunsw.  Eq.  528. 

5.  First  Nat.  Bank  v.  firuhaker, 
128  Iowa,  587,  106  N.  W.  116. 

6.  McCaffrey  ▼.  Hickej,  66  Barb. 
(N.  T.)  480;  Flynn  ▼.  Baisley,  35 
Or.  268,  57  Pae.  008,  76  Am.  St.  Rep. 
496,  45  L.  R.  A.  645;  Bomar  v. 
Means,  53  S.  C.  232«  31  S.  E.  234; 
Roeenbaum  ▼.  Davis  (Tenn.  Ch.  App. 
1898),  48  S.  W.  706.  See  also  Wages 
of  debtor's  minor  child,  chap.  IV,  § 
10,  supra;  Earnings  of  minor  child, 
chap.  VIII,  §  57,  supra. 

7.  y.  y. — ^Lindsley  v.  VanCort- 
landt,  67  Hun,  145,  22  K.  Y.  Supp. 
222,  alfd  142  N.  T.  682,  37  N.  E. 
570. 

Ala.— Russell  v.  Davis  (1901),  35 
So.  514;  Calhoun  ▼.  Haanon,  87  Ala. 
277,  6  So.  291;  Moog  v.  Farley,  79 
AIa.  246. 

Md, — Commonwealth  Bank  ▼. 
Keams,  100  Md.  202,  59  Atl.  1010. 

Neh, — Blair  State  Bank  ▼.  Bumi» 
61  Neb.  464,  85  N.  W.  527  s  Stein- 


kraus  ▼.  Korth,  44  Neb.  777,  62  K. 
W.  1110;  Farrington  ▼.  Stone,  36 
Neb.  456,  53  N.  W.  389. 

N.  C— Mitchell  ▼.  Eure,  126  N.  C. 
77,  35  S.  B.  IdO;  Allen  ▼.  McLendon, 
113  N.  C.  321,  18  S.  E.  206. 

Or.— Feldman  v.  Nicolai,  28  Or. 
34,  40  Pac.  1010;  Jolly  ▼.  Kyle,  27 
Or.  95,  89  Pac.  999. 

Pa.— Lloyd  ▼.  Williams,  21  Pa.  St. 
327. 

Va. — Johnson  ▼.  Lucas,  103  Va. 
36,  48  S.  E.  497. 

8.  Schloss  V.  McOuire,  102  Ala. 
626,  15  So.  275;  Smith  v.  Collins,  94 
Ala.  394,  10  So.  334;  Owens  v.  Hob- 
ble, 82  Ala.  467,  3  So.  145. 

9.  Calhoun  v.  Hannan,  87  Ala. 
277,  6  So.  291;  Bonwit  ▼.  Heyman, 
43  Neb.  537,  61  N.  W.  716;  Plummer 
▼.  Rummel,  26  Neb.  142,  42  N.  W. 
336;  Bartlett  v.  Cheesbrough,  23 
Neb.  767,  37  N.  W.  652;  Brooks  ▼. 
Todd,  1  Handy  (Ohio),  169,  12  Ohio 
Dec  (Reprint)  84,  the  parties  must 
have  aoted  with  the  most  scrupulous 


512 


FbAUDULENT   OoHVEYAirOBS. 


§  34.  Preference  of  husband  and  wife. — ^It  is  quite  generally 
held  by  the  courts  that,  inasmuch  as  dealings  between  husband 
and  wife  which  result  in  the  appropriation  of  the  husband's  prop- 
erty for  the  payment  of  a  debt  claimed  to  be  due  the  wife,  to 
the  exclusion  of  other  creditors,  furnish  uncommon  opportuni- 
ties for  the  perpetration  and  concealment  of  fraud,  they  should 
be  carefully  and  rigidly  scrutinized,  especially  when  charged  to 
be  fraudulent ^^  Yet  it  is  a  well  established  rule  that  where  a 
wife  is  a  bona  fide  creditor  of  her  husband,  she  is  entitled  to 
security  or  payment,  the  same  as  any  other  creditor;  and,  al- 
though the  husband  is  insolvent  or  in  failing  circumstances,  he 
may  in  good  faith  prefer  her,  either  by  payment  of  money  or  the 
conveyance  of  property  still  under  his  control,  or  by  giving  se- 
curity, to  the  exclusion  of  other  creditors,  the  same  as  he  may 
prefer  any  pther  creditor,  and  such  a  preference  is  not  of  itself 
fraudulent,  and  will  not  be  set  aside  as  in  fraud  of  the  other 
creditors  of  the  husband,  unless  there  is  proof  of  a  fraudulent 
intent  on  the  part  of  the  husband.^    The  same  principles  apply 


good  faith,  taking  care  that  no  un- 
just or  unnecessary  delay  or  hind- 
rance is  offered  to  the  rights  of 
others. 

TraasaettoAi  held  feA«d«l«mt 
ma  to  vmaeewed  evedltors*— 
Arnold  V.  Wilds,  77  Iowa,  693,  42  N. 
W.  656;  Wise  ▼.  Wilda,  77  Iowa, 
686,  42  N.  W.  663. 

10.  White  ▼.  Benjamin,  160  K.  T. 
268,  44  N.  £.  966;  Manchester  ▼. 
Tibhetts,  121  K.  Y.  219,  24  N.  E. 
304,  18  Am.  St.  Bep.  816;  Hollis  v. 
Bodgers,  106  Ga.  13,  31  S.  E.  783; 
Vietor  ▼.  Swiskej,  200  III.  267,  66  N. 
E.  626;  Sutton  ▼.  Outhrie,  188  Pa. 
St.  359,  41  Atl.  628;  McElwee  v. 
Kennedy,  66  S.  G.  164,  34  S.  £.  86; 
Hairston  v.  Hairston,  36  S.  C.  298, 
14  S.  E.  634.  See  also  Transactions 
between   persons   in  confidential  re- 


lations— ^Husband    and    wife,    ehap. 
IX,  S  4,  tupro. 

11.  y.  7.— Maaehester  ▼.  Tlb- 
betts,  121  N.  Y.  219,  24  N.  E.  304, 
18  Am.  St  Bep.  816;  Baker  v. 
Qeorgi,  10  App.  Div.  249,  41  K.  Y. 
Snpp.  1030;  First  Nat.  Bank  ▼. 
Hamilton,  76  Hun,  613,  27  N.  Y. 
Supp.  1029;  Jewett  v.  Noteware,  30 
Hun,  192;  Woodworth  ▼.  Sweet,  44 
Barb.  268,  affd  61  N.  Y.  8;  Doty  ▼. 
Clint,  11  St.  Bep.  (N.  Y.)  87. 

U.  H.— New  York  Fourth  Nat. 
Bank  ▼.  American  Milla  Co^  137  U. 
8.  234,  11  Sup.  Ct  62,  34  L.  Ed. 
666;  Jewell  v.  Knight,  123  U.  S. 
426,  8  Sup.  Ct.  193,  81  L.  Ed.  190; 
Magniae  v.  Thompson,  7  Pet.  348, 
afTg  10  Fed.  Cas.  No.  8,960,  Baldw. 
344;    Vansickle   ▼.   Wella,    106    Fed. 


Pb£i?eh£nces  to  Ckeditoks. 


513 


between  husband  and  wife  as  between  any  other  persons  occupj- 


10;  Hinohman  ▼.  Parlin,  etc.,  Co.,  74 
Fed.  698,  21  C.  C.  A.  273. 

Ala. — Beddow  v.  Sheppard,  118 
Ala.  474,  23  So.  662;  National  Bank 
of  Bepublie  ▼.  Dickinson,  107  Ala. 
265,  18  So.  144;  Kilgore  ▼.  Stoner 
(1892),  12  So.  60;  Whaun  v.  Atkin- 
son, 84  Ala.  692,  4  So.  681;  North- 
ington  V.  Faber,  62  Ala.  46. 

Cal — ^Roberts  v.  Burr,  135  Cal. 
156,  67  Pac.  46. 

CoZo.— First  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Kava- 
nagh,  7  Colo.  App.  160,  43  Pac.  217; 
Stramann  v.  Scheeren,  7  Colo.  App. 
1,  42  Pac.   191. 

Fla.— Hill  V.  Meinhard,  39  Fla. 
Ill,  21  So.  805. 

Go. — ^Simms  v.  Tidwell,  98  Ga. 
686,  25  S.  £.  555;  Comer  v.  Allen, 
72  Ga.  1. 

III. — German  Ins.  Co.  v.  Bartlett, 
188  111.  165,  58  N.  E.  1075,  80  Am. 
St.  Rep.  172,  52  L.  R.  A.  283,  a1F9 
89  111.  App.  469;  Tomlinson  v.  Mat^ 
thews,  98  ni.  178;  Earl  y.  Earl,  186 
111.  370,  57  N.  E.  1079,  rev'g  87  HI. 
App.  491;  Cooke  ▼.  Peter,  93  111. 
App.  1;  Cartwright  v.  Cartwright, 
68  111.  App.  74;  Hensley  v.  Hensley, 
65  111.  App.  195;  Hughes  v.  Bell,  62 
HI.  App.  74;  Fleming  v.  Weagley, 
32  111.  App.  183. 

Ind. — Brig^iam  ▼.  Hubbard,  115 
Ind.  474,  17  N.  £.  920;  Dice  v.  Iryin, 
110  Ind.  561,  11  N.  E.  488;  Hoes  t. 
Rojer,  108  Ind.  494,  9  N.  E.  427; 
Bragg  V.  Stanford,  82  Ind.  234;  Sims 
▼.  Rickets,  35  Ind.  181,  9  Am.  Bep. 
679;  Kyger  ▼.  F.  Hull  Skirt  Oo.,  34 
Ind.  249.  ' 

/otoa.— Olark  v.  Ford,  126  Iowa, 
460,  102  N.  W.  421;  Meredith  ▼. 
Schaap  (1901),  85  N.  W.  628;  Muir 
▼.  Miller,  103  Iowa,  127,  72  N.  W. 

33 


409;  Sprague  v.  Benson,  101  Iowa, 
678,  70  N.  W.  731 ;  Fowler  Co.  ▼.  Mc- 
Donnell, 100  Iowa,  536,  69  N.  W. 
873;  Jones  v.  Brandt,  59  Iowa,  332, 
10  N.  W.  854,  13  N.  W.  310. 

JTon.— Fuller  v.  Croco,  46  Kan.  634, 
26  Pac.  944;  Winfleld  Nat.  Bank  t. 
Croco,  46  Kan.  629,  26  Pac.  942;  De 
Ford  V.  Nye,  40  Kan.  665,  20  Pac. 
481;  Cooper  v.  First  Nat  Bank,  40 
Kan.  5,  18  Pac.  937;  Chapman  t. 
Summerfield,  36  Kan.  610,  14  Pac. 
235;  Miller  v.  Krueger,  36  Kan.  344, 
13  Pac.  641;  Kennedy  v.  Powell,  34 
Kan.  22,  7  Pac.  606. 

iTy.-— Taylor  v.  Cooley,  20  Ky.  L. 
Rep.  1365,  49  S.  W.  335.  See  also 
Cochran  v.  Rennison,  23  Ky.  L.  Rep. 
2326,  67  S.  W.  5 ;  McCandless  ▼.  Rea, 
21  Ky.  L.  Rep.  1687,  56  S.  W.  10. 

Me. — Ferguson  ▼.  Spear,  65  Me. 
277;  French  v.  Motl^,  63  Me.  326. 

Jfd.— Crane  v.  BarkdoU,  59  Md. 
634. 

Ma88. — ^Atlantic  Nat.  Bank  v.  Tave- 
ner,  130  Mass.  407,  where  the  con- 
veyance was  made  through  a  third 
person. 

Mioh.—OAe  v.  Cole,  126  Mich.  569, 
85  N.  W.  1098;  Strauss  v.  Parshall, 
91  Mich.  475,  51  N.  W.  1117;  Dull  v. 
Merrill,  69  Mich.  49,  36  N.  W.  677; 
Leppig  V.  Bretzel,  48  Mich.  321,  12 
N.  W.  199;  Hyde  v.  Powell,  47  Mich. 
156,  10  N.  W.  181 ;  Jordan  v.  White, 
38  Mich.  253;  Allen  ▼.  Antisdale,  38 
Mich.  229;  HiU  v.  Bowman,  35  Mich. 
191. 

Minn. — Frost  ▼.  Stede,  46  Minn. 
1,  48  N.  W.  413. 

Miaa. — Savage  ▼.  Dowd,  54  Miss. 
728.  And  see  Magnum  ▼.  Finucane, 
38  Bfisa.  354. 


514 


Fbaudulent  Conveyakces. 


ing  the  relation  of  debtor  and  creditor  toward  each  other,^  and 
a  married  woman  who  has  a  bona  fide  claim  against  her  husband 
is  entitled  to  the  same  legal  rights  as  any  other  creditor,  except  as 
to  remedy.^'  The  validity  of  a  preference  by  an  insolvent  hus- 
band to  his  wife  is  not  affected  by  the  fact  that  it  was  for  money 
loaned  by  the  wife  from  the  proceeds  of  her  separate  estate,  which 
had  been  previously  given  to  her  by  her  husband,  when  he  was  sol- 
vent and  it  was  not  done  in  fraud  of  creditors,  prior  or  subsequent,^* 


Ifo.— See  Third  Nat.  Bank  ▼.  Cra- 
mer, 78  Mo.  App.  476. 

Mont. — ^Lambrecht  ▼.  Patten,  15 
Mont.  260,  38  Pac.  1063. 

Neb. — Dayton  Spioe-Mills  Go.  ▼. 
Sloan,  49  Neb.  622,  68  N.  W.  1040; 
Ward  V.  Parlin,  30  Neb.  376,  46  N.  W. 
629. 

y.  e/.— Taloott  v.  Arnold,  64  N.  J. 
Eq.  670,  35  Atl.  532;  Brock  ▼.  Hnd- 
Boa  County  Nat.  Bank,  48  N.  J.  Eq. 
615,  23  Atl.  269,  27  Aul  St.  Rep. 
451. 

Or.— Sabin  v.  Wilkina,  31  Or.  450, 
48  Pac.  425,  37  L.  R.  A.  465. 

Pa. — Benson  ▼.  Maxwell  105  Pa. 
St.  274,  10  Pa.  Cas.  380,  14  Atl.  161 ; 
Labr's  Appeal,  90  Pa.  St.  507;  Mat- 
ter of  Bradway,  1  Asbm.  212. 

8.  O.— McElwee  v.  Kennedy,  56  S. 
C.  154,  34  S.  E.  86;  McGbee  v.  Wella, 
52  S.  C.  472,  30  S.  E.  602;  Gerald  v. 
Gerald,  28  S.  C.  442,  6  S.  E.  290. 

Tea?.— McCrory  v.  Lutz,  94  Tct 
650,  64  S.  W.  780;  Tbompson  v.  Wil- 
son, 24  Civ.  App.  666,  60  S.  W.  354; 
Massie  v.  McKee  (Civ.  App.  1900), 
56  S.  W.  119;  Jacobs  ▼.  Womack 
(Civ.  App.   1894),  26   S.  W.  431. 

W.  Va.— Bennett  v.  Bennett,  37 
W.  Va.  396,  16  S.  E.  638,  38  Am.  St. 
Rep.  47;  Cale's  Adm'r  v.  Sbaw,  33 
W.  Va.  299,  10  S.  E.  637. 

Wm.— Brickley  v.  Walker,  68  Wis. 
563,  32  N.  W.  773. 


Can. — Fkir  ▼.  Toung,  26  Grant  Cfc. 
(U.  C.)  544. 

CottTeyaaee  gegarded  m  atmrt* 
Ki^so* — ^A  oonveyanee  to  a  wife  by  a 
busband  in  failing  cireamstanoes  ia 
not  absolutely  void  as  against  cred- 
itors, but  is  valid  as  a  mortgage, 
wbere  the  facts  were  that  she  had  bor- 
rowed money  for  him  on  her  property 
on  condition  that  he  would  make  the 
conv^ance  as  security.  Baker  v. 
Georgi,  10  App.  Div.  (N.  T.)  249,  41 
N.  Y.  Supp.  1030.  And  see  Brock  v. 
Hudson  County  Nat.  Bank,  48  N.  J. 
Eq.  615,  23  Atl.  269,  27  Am.  St.  Rep. 
451. 

Failure  of  tlie  wife  to  auika 
her  elalm  known  will  not  deprive 
her  of  her  rights  as  a  creditor  even 
as  against  one  of  the  husband's  cred- 
itors who  gave  credit  to  him  in  ignor- 
ance of  the  wife's  claim.  Dull  v. 
Merrill,  69  Mich.  49;  Hyde  v.  Powell, 
47  Mich.  156. 

12.  Victor  V.  Swisky,  87  HI.  App. 
583;  Rudershausen  v.  Atwood,  19  111. 
App.  58 ;  Torrey  v.  Oamenm,  73  Tcr. 
583,  11  S.  W.  840. 

13.  Righter  v.  Riley,  42  W.  Va. 
633,  26  S.  E.  357. 

14.  De  Prato  v.  Jester  (Ark. 
1892),  20  S.  W.  807;  KnoK  v.  Clark» 
15  Colo.  App.  356,  62  Pac.  334;  Laird 
V.  Davidson,  124  Ind.  412,  25  N.  E.  7. 


Pbefebences  to  Cbeditobs. 


51S 


or  the  purchase  money  for  which  had  been  furnished  by  the  husband 
when  solvent.^  And  it  is  immaterial  that  the  statute  of  limita- 
tions had  run  against  the  debt  or  a  portion  of  the  debt  preferred, 
since  the  husband  was  not  obliged  by  any  duty  he  owed  his  other 
creditors  to  interpose  the  statute  as  a  defense."  Neither  the  stat- 
ute of  limitations,  nor  the  presumption  of  payment  arising  from 
lapse  of  time,  applies  to  a  loan  made  by  the  wife  to  the  husband, 
so  as  to  render  a  preference  of  such  debt  by  him  fraudulent."  But 
the  fact  that  the  debt  or  a  portion  thereof  was  barred  by  limita- 
tions is  admissible  in  evidence  in  support  of  the  claim  that  the 
conveyance  was  fraudulent,  to  be  considered  on  the  question  of 
good  faith,^  or  whether  or  not  an  actual  indebtedness  existed.** 
A  conveyance  by  a  debtor  to  his  wife  has  been  held  to  be  volun- 
tary as  to  creditors,  where  the  only  consideration  therefor  was 
certain  sums  of  money  furnished  him  by  her  at  various  times, 
ranging  from  seven  to  thirty  years,  before  the  conveyance  was 
made,  for  which  no  note,  acknowledgment,  or  promise  of  pay- 
ment, was  taken,  no  account  kept,  nor  payment  of  interest  re- 
quired.*^ 


15.  Bean  v.  PatterBon,  122  U.  S. 
496,  7  Sup.  Ct.  1298,  30  L.  Ed.  1126. 

16.  Manchester  v.  Tibbetts,  121  N. 
Y.  219,  24  N.  E.  304,  18  AnL  St.  Rep. 
816;  Vansickle  ▼.  WeUs,  106  Fed.  16; 
Kennedy  v.  Powell,  34  Kan.  22;  Frost 
V.  Steele,  46  Minn.  1,  48  N.  W.  413. 
See  also  French  v.  Motley,  63  Me. 
326,  the  fact  that  the  debt  waa  barred 
by  the  statute  is  not  conclusive  evi- 
dence of  a  want  of  good  faith.     See 


Debts    barred    by    limitation,    chap. 
VIII,  §  22,  supra, 

17.  Rudershausen  v.  Atwood,  1^ 
HI.  App.  58;  Dice  y.  Irwin,  110  Ind. 
561,  11  N.  E.  488. 

18.  Vansickle  y.  Wells,  Fargo  k 
Co.,  105  Fed.  16. 

19.  HoUis  y.  Rodgers,  106  Ga.  13, 
31  S.  E.  783. 

SO.  Dillman  v.  Nadelhoffer,  162 
ni.  625,  45  N.  £.  680,  afTg  56  lU. 
App.  617. 


a  blQS  Qb  lib  SAH  1 

STANFORD  UNlVEfiSllY  LAW  liBBOT