Case ID: nj-eq_120/html/0523-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Lewis, V. C.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lucille Weinberg, complainant, v. Morris Bolton and Beyla Bolton (also known as Bertha Bolton), his wife; Jacob Lapoff and Celia Lapoff, his wife; Harry Frumovitz and Anna Frumovitz, his wife, and Harana Realty Company, Incorporated, a corporation of the State of New York, defendants.
    [Decided September 17th, 1936.]
    
      Mr. Harold B. Bloch, for the complainant.
    
      Mr. Harry S. La Poff, for the defendants.
   Lewis, V. C.

This is a suit to set aside conveyances of premises owned by the defendants Bolton, as being in fraud of creditors. Complainant is the assignee of a judgment entered November 23d, 1931, on a bond given by the Boltons and Samuel Subotnik and his wife to Jerry Sanders, who obtained the judgment. The bond was executed in August, 1930, and payable in one year. During this year, and on the 18th of May, 1931, the Boltons conveyed the premises in question to defendants Jacob and Celia Lapoff, who a few weeks later, conveyed the premises to Harry Erumovitz, who, in turn, conveyed to defendant Harana Bealty Company. The Lapoffs are sister and brother-in-law of the Boltons and Harry Erumovitz is their son-in-law. Defendant Bolton has lived in the premises ever since these conveyances were made and from September 1st, 1931, collected the rents therefrom, and according to his answer to an interrogatory, stated that he accounted to defendant Erumovitz individually and as an officer of the Harana Bealty Company. Erom his answer to another interrogatory, it appears that he had no other property out of which to pay the judgment.

These suspicious circumstances require explanation which, in my opinion, the defendants have not satisfactorily done. After the suit was set down for hearing, defendants obtained leave to amend the answer by setting up payment by Subotnik as an additional defense. He testified as to certain payments he made to Sanders, but his evidence was confused and contradictory and not at all convincing. In addition, substantially all the alleged payments on account of the bond were made before the judgment in the law courts thereon and accordingly are res judicala on this issue.

Defendants allege that Jacob Lapoff paid $4,300 for the property and as evidence thereof produced two checks by Lapoff, aggregating that amount. No satisfactory explanation was given as to where the money came from to make these checks good and it is a suspicious circumstance that about the time of the cashing of the checks Bolton withdrew substantial sums from a bank account he then had. Bolton’s explanation of what became of the $4,300 is also suspicious. In answer to an interrogatory he stated that part of the sum was used for payment of current expenses and part was given to the defendant Harry Erumovitz for his business. It is this same Harry Erumovitz who took title from Lapoff and then conveyed the premises to the corporation owned and controlled by him, taking in payment thereof, stock in his own corporation.

I accordingly find that the various conveyances were made in fraud of complainant’s assignor and that they are to be set aside.