Case Name: Wright v. Thorpe et al.
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1898-01-25
Citations: 49 N.Y.S. 111
Docket Number: 
Parties: WRIGHT v. THORPE et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 49
Pages: 111–112

Head Matter:
(22 Misc. Rep. 284.)
WRIGHT v. THORPE et al.
(Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County.
January 25, 1898.)
Fbaudulent Conveyance.
An insolvent debtor transferred Ms business and all Ms property to trustees, who were to run the former an indefinite time, and out of the profits pay such creditors as should consent to the arrangement. If the business could be sold for a sufficient sum to pay such creditors, the proceeds were to be divided among them. Held, that the transfer was void as to creditors not consenting thereto.
Action by William A. Wright against John B. Thorpe and others, ■Judgment for plaintiff.
Action by a judgment creditor to set aside a transfer of property by his debtor as fraudulent and void against creditors. It is by a trust Instrument which transfers the business and all of the assets of the debtor therein, to trustees to hold the same, run the business for an indefinite time, and out of the profits pay in full such of the creditors as shall come in and agree-to such arrangement, and thereupon to transfer back to the debtor. It also provides that if at any time the said debtor shall provide a purchaser of the said business for a sum sufficient to pay such consenting creditors, the trustees shall transfer to such purchaser upon receiving the said sum, which they shall divide among the said creditors. • The property so transferred by the debtor was all that he had, and he was, insolvent when he made such transfer.
Clarence J. Shearn, for plaintiff.
Louis Wertheimer, for defendants.

Opinion:
GAYNOR, J.
This scheme hinders and delays all creditors who did not consent to it (of whom plaintiff is one), and is therefore void as to them. Sutherland v. Bradner, 116 N. Y. 410, 22 N. E. 554.
Judgment for the plaintiff.