41 Mo. App. 291 | Mo. Ct. App. | 1890
In September, 1888, the plaintiff bank, being a creditor of defendant Price, in the sum of three thousand dollars, sued defendant by attachment. The ground of attachment, as set out in the affidavit, was “ that defendant had fraudulently conveyed or assigned his property and effects so as to hinder or delay his creditors.” Defendant joined issue with the plaintiff by filing his plea in abatement denying such allegation. The matter thus at issue was tried in the circuit court before a jury, a finding and judgment was had for defendant and plaintiff has appealed to this court.
I. Aside from other manifest errors appearing in this record we call attention to one, all-sufficient to warrant a reversal.
The evidence is undisputed, that a few days prior to the institution of this suit defendant conveyed away all his property, so that indeed (as he stated to plaintiff’s cashier) he did not have left “ a dollar’s worth of property.” A portion of this was transferred to the
II. It matters not as to Price’s motives in the matter, the law fixes the character of the transaction as fraudulent, regardless of such motives. Hence the court erred in declaring to the jury “that to render
Since then from the undisputed facts it appears defendant did fraudulently convey or assign his property so as to hinder and delay his creditors; and since it is admitted that plaintiff was, at the time, one of such creditors, it follows that the court below, on the issue made by the plea in abatement, should have instructed the jury to find for the plaintiff.
The judgment is clearly for the wrong party, and will be reversed and the cause remanded, with directions to the circuit court to enter a judgment sustaining the attachment.