Schneider v. Patton

• Decision Date: 17 March 1903
• Citation: 75 S.W. 155,175 Mo. 684
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court
• Parties: SCHNEIDER v. PATTON et al.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>

75 S.W. 155

175 Mo. 684

SCHNEIDER v. PATTON et al.^*

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

March 17, 1903.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES—ACTION TO SET ASIDE — PRAYER — RELIEF—AMENDMENT — FRAUDULENT GRANTEE—LIABILITY—NECESSARY PARTIES — FINAL JUDGMENT — NEW TRIAL.

1. While, under the general prayer for relief, a party may have any relief to which he may show himself entitled, such relief must be founded on and consistent with the allegations in the bill, and not such as may be proven at the trial.

2. Plaintiff, the assignee of certain judgments, alleged in his petition that the judgment debtor and one of the defendants owned certain real estate in equal shares; that they sold the same, taking notes secured by a trust deed on the property for the purchase price; that the trust deed was foreclosed after the rendition of the judgments, and the title taken by defendant, for the purpose of aiding the judgment debtor in delaying and defrauding his creditors; that defendant thereafter sold part of the land, taking a note in part payment therefor, and held the same in trust for the debtor. The petition then prayed that the conveyance by defendant be set aside, and the debtor's interest in the land be subjected to the lien of the judgments. Held, that the fact that during the trial plaintiff amended his petition, by adding an additional prayer "for such personal judgment against defendant as may be proper and legal," did not convert the petition into one charging defendant as a fraudulent grantee, and liable in equity to a personal judgment in plaintiff's favor.

3. As the petition in no way intimated, nor contained any allegations from which it would be inferred, on what account, if at all, a personal judgment against defendant would be asked, such judgment was unauthorized.

4. The court found that before the filing of the petition defendant turned over to the debtor the latter's share of the proceeds of the sale of the land. Held to discharge defendant from liability therefor.

5. In an action by a judgment creditor against a fraudulent grantee to set aside a conveyance of real estate by the judgment debtor for fraud, and to subject it to the payment of the judgment, the judgment debtor is not a necessary party.

6. A decree required, among other things, that within five days defendant indorse, assign and transfer a promissory note to the clerk of the court, to be held by the latter, for the use and benefit of plaintiff, until the further order of the court, and that, on failure to comply within the time named, plaintiff should have judgment against him for the face value of the note, with interest. It further decreed costs in plaintiff's favor. Held a final judgment, and a motion for a new trial was properly made after its rendition and before entry of judgment against defendant for the face value of the note.

7. The fact that the court thereafter made some changes in the decree did not rob it of its integrity as a final decree.

8. The decree was none the less final because defendant failed to comply therewith, and a final judgment was rendered against him for the face value of the note, with interest.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Buchanan County; A. M. Woodson, Judge.

Action by J. George Schneider against Bernard Patton and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Reversed.

Stauber, Crandall & Strop and H. M. Ramey, for appellants. Jas. W. Boyd, for respondent.

BURGESS, J.

This is a suit by a judgment creditor of one Thomas Maney, the object of which is to subject certain lands and lots of land owned by said Maney to the lien and payment of certain judgments held and owned by the plaintiff against him. The amended petition, omitting caption, is as follows:

"Plaintiff for his amended petition states: That on or about the 3d day of October, 1893, the state of Missouri, at the relation and to the use of Francis T. Conrad, recovered judgment in the circuit court of Buchanan county, Missouri, against Thomas Maney and others, for the sum of $13,413.97, which said judgment was based upon the bond of James Walsh, as administrator of the estate of Thomas Conrad, deceased, which said bond was in the sum of sixty-five thousand dollars; but the amount of the recovery for the breach of said bond was the sum hereinabove stated. That on or about said date the state of Missouri, at the relation and to the use of Martha Clark, recovered judgment in the said court against Thomas Maney and others on the same bond, for the breach thereof, the sum of $7,613.51. And the state of Missouri, at the relation and to the use of Agnes Conrad, about said date, recovered in said court judgment against said Thomas Maney on said bond, for damages on account of the breach of said bond, the sum of $7,613.51. That on or about the 31st day of August, 1894, each and every one of the said judgments were duly and legally, for value received, assigned and transferred by the relators therein and respective owners and holders thereof to J. George Schneider, the plaintiff herein. That on or about the 25th day of September, 1896, the lien of said judgment on the said real estate of Thomas Maney was duly and legally revived by an order and judgment of this court, duly and legally made in each one of said cases, upon writs of scire facias duly and legally served in due time upon the defendants in said cases, respectively; and the lien of said judgment upon the real estate of said Thomas Maney has been continuously alive and in full force and effect ever since the 3d day of October, 1893. That the plaintiff is now the owner and holder of the aforesaid judgments, and the respective liens thereof, and all the rights and interests pertaining to said judgments and liens. That the aforesaid bond of said Walsh as administrator of the estate of Thomas Conrad, deceased, upon which the said judgments were rendered, was executed on the ____ day of ____, 1885. That on or about the 11th day of March, 1889, the Brick & Terra Cotta Manufacturing Company, a corporation, executed to Thomas F. Ryan its certain deed of trust, whereby it conveyed to said Thomas F. Ryan, as such trustee, certain real estate, situated in the county of Buchanan and state of Missouri, described as follows: Five (5) acres of land described and surveyed as follows: Beginning at a point in the middle of Weston avenue, on the south line of the northwest quarter of section number twenty-nine (29), in township fifty-seven (57), of range number thirty-five (35), as shown by the plat of Sulphur Springs; running thence northeasterly, with said avenue, fourteen hundred and eighty-two (1,482) feet to a point; running thence west, parallel with the south line of said quarter section, to the east line of the St. Joseph & Iowa Railroad's right of way; thence running south and east far enough to include five acres of land (exclusive of said avenue), which shall be bounded on the east by said avenue and on the west by the said St. Joseph & Iowa Railroad's right of way; also lots numbered fifty-one (51), fifty-two (52), fifty-three (53), fifty-four (54), and fifty-five (55) of Sulphur Springs, as is shown by the plat filed in the recorder's office of Buchanan county, Missouri, on the 22d day of December, 1858, by F. W. Smith, the said lots and land containing nine and forty hundredths (9 40/100) acres, more or less—to secure the payment to Bernard Patton and Thomas Maney the sum of $18,144.42, being five promissory notes, each for the sum of $3,628.80. That each one of said promissory notes so secured was executed and made payable to the joint order of Bernard Patton and Thomas Maney, and bore interest from the date thereof at the rate of 8 per cent. per annum. That at the time said judgment was rendered, and ever since that time, said Thomas Maney was and has been largely indebted, was totally insolvent, and an execution against him was and would be totally unavailing and useless; and during said time, as hereinafter stated, he has attempted to fraudulently conceal his property, so as to hinder, delay, and defraud his creditors and avoid the payment of his debts. That on or about January 1, 1895, said Maney did, with the fraudulent purpose of cheating, hindering, and delaying his creditors, and especially the plaintiff herein, assign and transfer to defendant Bernard Patton all his rights, title, and interest in and to the five promissory notes and deed of trust, and said defendant Patton took and received said Maney's right, title, and interest in and to said notes and deed of trust, for the purpose of aiding and assisting said Thomas Maney to hinder, delay, and cheat and defraud his creditors, and especially said plaintiff. That said Thomas Maney's interest in and to said notes amounted to and was one-half part thereof, all of which said defendant Patton obtained and received as aforesaid, without paying or agreeing to pay any consideration whatever therefor, and solely for the purposes aforesaid. That on or about February 2, 1895, the said real estate was sold by said trustees under and by virtue of said deed of trust, and at said sale the defendant Patton bid for and purchased it at and for the price and sum of $15,600, and received a deed from said trustee therefor. That said Patton bid for and purchased, and obtained a deed from said trustee for, said land, for the joint use and benefit of himself and said Thomas Maney, and with the fraudulent purpose, on his part and on the part of said Thomas Maney, to conceal said property from the lien of plaintiff's judgments, and to hinder, delay, cheat, and defraud the plaintiff herein, and prevent him from collecting his said debts from said Maney. That said Maney's interest in and to said land was and is an undivided one-half part thereof. That said Bernard Patton paid no consideration whatever for the said lands, and he obtained a deed therefor from said trustee by giving to said Brick & Terra Cotta Manufacturing Company, in accordance...