New-York tribune., 1871-08-25
THE COURTS.
FRAUDULENT CONvRYANCFs.


IMPORTANT DECISION BY JUDGE BLATCHFORD-
REAL ESTATE TRANSFERS RENDERED VOID
By AN INTENT TO DEFRAUD CREDITORS.
In the case of the United States against
Joseph H. Stiner Cornelius j. Dankle, Georgine Dankle
Bernard Heller and Adolph Isaacson action brought
q creditors bill founded Judgment recovered by
the United States in the District Conr of this District
against the defendants Stiner Cornelius j. Danke and
Heller on March 49, 1870 and docketed against them on
March 25, 1870 for slOiO on execution 500 u was
made, the expenses Of the Marshal deng $O9 l6 but
otherwise the Judgment and execution not satisfied
The judgment rendered against stner as prlnclpa
and the Others surees in stipulation given on tne
release OF property seized q suit in brought Dy
the United States against the disinery premises
Of stner for a forfeiture thereof on VIC
lation Of the Internal Revenue laws. The bill was
brought especially reacA real estate in Thirty tIu
and Twenty ffthsts., which formerly belonged 70 WI
neus ]. Dankle, and which he, by deed dated NOV;
TO the defendant IsaaesOn, and which lsaacsOh py
lease dated Nov 1862 and recorded June ~ lsU @ =,
TO Cornelius Dankle and which isaacsoh E2ens
the defendant Georgine Dankle the wife OF Nus
Danke, by deed dated Jan l. 1870 ana recolucd % y ~
the stipulation and prior 10 the recovery OF inc JUG
men and at or before the hour OF noon OH ~. 80 '
ure condemnng the property seized and decree OF CON
demnaton was thereupon duly enerea anu tra
several instruments were made without .
and not n GOOD faith but with the connvance OF the
Dankles and Of Isaacson In te design VI Iin
ing the plaintiffs. ana OF
the osensbe ownership the property In view OF ie
liability Of Cornelius ]. Dankle IN cOhseqcenSS n'
ana t6e Judgment and execution in pursuance there0 SO
as 10 prevent the plaintiffs from levylng upon anu
anv of fine property in satisfaction OF their recovery
Tbs Mn NAV for an Injunction restraining the Danhes
and Isaacson from alternating or ncumbering the real
eTtv of sfineT Cornelius j. Dankle and Heller.
In the of long decision given IN s case yes
teray in the United states CIRCUIT 0Ou' 'uuse Di"''H
iU The detsnsan DAnlle and WIFE made the r
Ie he
BY Mrs Ds1ke smm hat when psshe eon'eed me
% @ p :eoGs % pe1 a ee 9S SS' m &S 3 t The
plaintiffs have no ga e inquire into % any yg, & Tss s cne
cson made in pursuance Of an agreement made po 70 Nov
son % bsniS and the delivery Of the deed
certain grOnor notes to Dsnse and certain Other paynsn
@sd thereafter at certain speebed times 9ai the es payPs1 o
time the made and delivered IN pursuance ne agreement
that on 81 about jar o Ending d G@sSa unable TO py the
with Mira Dansle 20 sell the premise. TO her for valuable
then conveyed the premises to ber on terms satisfactory
So Up eroT Of pante at the time Of the eonyyanc 70
the Of the conveyance TO MIS- Dahke that por
part them and her money hsd been used by her bus
before eS SC1 1859 B 6ana and wife had taken . to %
Ies estate and hoa reference 70 the claims M any o
IL addition forth the b regard the deeds and
on The premises for dated Nov i ana Teo5dsd s y9S
and that lsea and bis vii, eIe9ied 70 JGh Peseh TogSss
the
Nay H. 1870 satisfaction Of which recored Jan. l6 1871
The the Of Dsntle and his WIFE, that e
plaintiffs they creditors Of Danke
This the Under the statute
under the decisions OF the Supreme
deraGd subsequent creditors
sufficient II IL either voluntary not
good there be doubt that the
whole scheme ~ the 10 sason plan Geau the
States approaching ra AMI the expected cOndm
Of DSnks dry properly and that Danke and acson
faith al before the
Mrs Dan the verdict Of condemnation rendered. the stipulation
having been previously given.
1t urged that this Cour Jurisdiction Of this that this is
time claimed that Of this sort could be an
Court that this Court has such jursbe
held in other districts and that the fact that such jurisdiction does
understood by the Bar the Courts that at the
session Congress introduced aud pending 70
confer jurisdiction The United States such
rort the jurisdiction oi the Colr not stated,
possible conceive wEstn This jurisdiction plainly
conferred by statute.
The plaintiff NAV h snggeSted and then Injunction
issue eroung Duke from making transfer Of Of bis prop
enoIag Mr. psuke from making transfer Of tie
ncumteTug the and receiver vii he a
and OF all the property equitable rieTetts
L and efec1 OF Danke