Court Opinion

ID: 3590618
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-05 23:39:20.599331+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:06.812815
License: Public Domain

[EDITORS' NOTE:  THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 171 
I am unable to perceive any error in this case. The case ofBooth v. Bunce (24 N.Y., 592) is much *Page 172 
relied on by the defendants' counsel. There the execution creditor, who had levied on and purchased the property in question, offered to prove that the corporation, from whose possession it was taken, was organized to defraud the creditors of the debtor in the execution. The Court of Appeals held that it was error to exclude such evidence.
The question in this case is not at all the same. Here the offer was to prove that the plaintiff allowed the execution debtor to use her name and credit to carry on business for his sole benefit. There is no fraud in such facts, nor can any be deduced from them. She might have allowed the use of her name and capital, giving the whole profits to her step-son, without any injury to his creditors. If he acquired any property thereby, it would belong to his creditors, but clearly not her property which the step-son or debtor was allowed to use. It is the same with property acquired on her credit. The property so acquired belongs to her.
If there is any evidence showing fraud or a fraudulent intent, the case must go to the jury; but I am entirely unable to discover any facts in this case that would support any such conclusion. It is not in question by any fact in the case that the wagon levied on was made with materials and labor procured on her credit. She was the owner of the wagon, and there was nothing in the evidence on which the jury could find her title to be fraudulent. The judgment should be affirmed with costs.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed. *Page 173