Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-07-31
SUPREME COURT.
FULL TEXT OF DECISION FILED.
William Henry, appellant, as. William, Hin
man and Albert Manley, Respondents.


man and Albert lnanley. Respondents.
OPINION.
From the findings of the court below it an
pears that the plaintiffs Judgment was recov-
cred upon an indebtedness which accrued
pricr to the conveyance by Human to
Marley, which is subject to be set aside in
this action, made with intent to defraud
plaintiff, SO that if it was made with that in
tent it might be set aside. The court in effect
finds against the allegation in the complaint,
that such conveyance was made with intent to
defraud, and if that finding stands plaintiff
cannot recover. But the finding is wholly
unauthorized by the evidence. The evidence
given for plaintiff is explicit, and no attempt
was made to contradict it, that Human
made the conveyance of the real
estate and also transferred all his
personal property of every description
to Manley on the same day and upon the same
consideration. The defendant introduced the
bill of sale of the personal property, and it was
the only evidence offered by defendant to show
the character of the conveyance. This bill of
sale purports to have been made in considera-
ton of the covenants therein contained on the
part of Manley of one dollar in hand paid by
Marley, and for divers other good causes and
considerations. The covenants mentioned are
that he, the said Albert Manley, his heirs
executors, administrators and assigns. SHALL
and will, at his and their cost, charges and ex
pe1ses, maintain and keep the said William
Hinman, the remainder of bis life with good
aud sufficient meat, drink, washing, lodging
and clothing at his, the said Manley's own
dwelling house." Two witnesses swore to the
admissions of Manl.y made under oath, and
there was no attempt to contradict them,
that the only consideration for
and transfer of the personal property was the
one dollar and the covenant to support. The
value of the property was over two thousand
dollars. No attempt was made to show that
Hinman had any other real estate or anything
left which his creditors could reach. An exc
| cution on plaintiff s judgment was issued to
| the county clerk where Human resided and
| returned no property found. Hinman was a
! brother-in-law of Manley and at the time of
| the conveyance was an inmate of his family.
| The case is one, then of a party who being in
| debt transfers to relative all his personal
property and all his real estate which can be
| reached by execution issued to the county
where he lives upon the nominal consideration
of one dollar and the actual consideration of a
promise to support him while he lives. By
such transaction he attempts to place the prop
erty beyond the reach of creditors and
| to secure the consideration to his own
use, so that he shall also be beyond Their
reach. It is in the absence of proof of other
property left to satisfy creditors. A clear p,.i
ma tdcie case of an intent to defraud creditors
one which requires strong evidence to overcome
| and the defendants made no efforts to over
come it. It was Of such a character as to bea,
| on its face notice of the intent with which tht
| transfers were made SO that Hanley is charged
| BILE with such notice.
After this action was commenced the judg
ment Of the plaintiff was vacated by the court
in which it was rendered, but before the tria
of this action the order vacating it was reversed
| by this court SO that at the time of the tria
| the judgment stood though the order hae
not been made, and the case was no way af
| feeted by it.
The judgment is reversed and new trial or
dered. GILFnIAN, G. j.