Robinson v. Dryden

• Citation: 24 S.W. 448,118 Mo. 534
• Parties: ROBINSON et al. v. DRYDEN.
• Decision Date: 11 December 1893
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri

24 S.W. 448

118 Mo. 534

ROBINSON et al. v. DRYDEN.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

December 11, 1893.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE — SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE — DIRECTING FINDINGS OF JURY — WHEN PROPER.

1. An insolvent debtor conveyed a farm to his well to do brother in a foreign state. The deed was recorded before delivery. The grantor continued to reside on the land after the transfer, and the expressed consideration was less than the value of the land. The grantee sold it three years afterwards at a profit of $200. Held insufficient to show that the conveyance was fraudulent.

2. Where, in an equitable action to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent, issues are submitted to a jury, and the charges made in the petition are not sustained, it is not error to direct the jury to find all the issues in favor of defendant.

Appeal from circuit court, Lincoln county; E. M. Hughes, Judge.

Action by Permelia Robinson and others against Littleton J. Dryden to set aside a deed executed to defendant by William J. Dryden, on the ground that the conveyance was fraudulent as to plaintiffs, who are creditors of the grantor. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

The other facts fully appear in the following statement by MACFARLANE, J.:

This is a suit in equity by judgment creditors of William J. Dryden to set aside as fraudulent a conveyance made by him to defendant of a tract of 290 acres of land in Lincoln county. The deed expressed a consideration of $2,500, was dated the 2d day of February, 1884, and was filed for record on the 7th day of the same month. The said William J. Dryden was a member of the firm of W. L. Sturgeon & Co. The firm and all the members failed in a few days after the record of the deed, and made a number of mortgages on their partnership and individual property to please their creditors. The evidence shows further that defendant was a brother of William J. Dryden, and lived in the state of California; that the grantor continued to reside on the farm, and manage it, until 1887; and when conveyed it was worth $15 per acre, though afterwards sold by defendant for $2,700. Defendant owned considerable other property in the neighborhood, and William J. acted as his agent in managing it. These were, in substance, all the facts proved which bear on the good faith of the parties to the deed. The evidence was all offered by plaintiffs. A jury was impaneled, and issues framed for submission to it. At the conclusion of the evidence offered by plaintiffs, at the request of defendant, the court instructed the jury to find all the issues for defendant, and judgment was entered accordingly. From this judgment plaintiffs appealed.

Martin & Avery, for appellants. R. H. Norton and Silver & Brown, for respondent.

MACFARLANE, J., (after stating the facts.)

1. The finding of issues in chancery cases is only advisory, and the chancellor is not bound by it. There was no error, therefore, in the court instructing the jury to find all the issues in favor of the defendant, if, upon all the evidence, the charges made in the petition were not established by the weight of the evidence. Cox v. Cox, 91 Mo. 71, 3 S. W. 585, and cases cited.

2. In order for the creditors of the grantor to defeat the deed for fraud it was incumbent on them to...