Anchor Buggy Co. v. Houtchens
| Decision Date | 15 July 1910 |
| Parties | ANCHOR BUGGY CO. v. HOUTCHENS et ux. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2. Appeal from Superior Court, Walla Walla County; Thomas H. Brents, Judge.
Suit by the Anchor Buggy Company against J. E. Houtchens and wife. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Cary M. Rader and Elihu F. Barker, for appellants.
Will H. Fouts, R. M. Sturdevant, M. O. Pickett, and T. P. & C. C. Gose, for respondent.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the superior court of Walla Walla county, declaring a deed given by J. S. Galloway and S.E. Galloway to appellant James E. Houtchens, purporting to convey title to certain tracts of land in Walla Walla and Columbia counties, state of Washington, to be fraudulent and void, and declaring the judgment of the respondent to be a valid lien upon the real estate described in said deed.
Conceding the correctness of the legal propositions submitted by the appellants, to the effect that a deed conveying real estate is presumed to have been made without a fraudulent intent; that fraud is never presumed, but must be established by the party alleging it; that a debtor, even in failing circumstances, may in good faith dispose of his entire property for the purpose of paying a portion of his debts, although other debts are left unsatisfied; that the circumstances relied upon must be such as to reasonably consist only with intent to defraud and be inconsistent with an honest intent; and that evidence that merely casts a suspicion on a transaction is not sufficient to vitiate it, we are yet of the opinion that the findings made by the court were fully justified by the testimony, and that the judgment properly followed the facts found by the court.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Berryman v. Dore
... ... 19, 113 P ... 356; St. Louis & S. F. R. R. v. Reed, 37 Okla. 350, ... 132 P. 355; Anchor Buggy Co. v. Houtchens, 59 Wash ... 697, 109 P. 1019; Allen v. Kane, 79 Wash. 248, 140 ... P ... ...
-
Brown v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, 34414
...v. Pac. Coast Coal Co., 25 Wash.2d 190, 170 P.2d 642; Pickle v. Lincoln County State Bank, 61 Wash. 545, 112 P. 654; Anchor Buggy Co. v. Houtchens, 59 Wash. 697, 109 P. 1019. In Dunlap v. Seattle Nat. Bank, 93 Wash. 568, 161 P. 364, 367, it is '* * * If, when all the facts and circumstances......
-
Columbia Intern. Corp. v. Perry
...Wash. 250, 161 P. 1189. Circumstances which are merely suspicious are not enough to render a conveyance fraudulent. Anchor Buggy Co. v. Houtchens, 59 Wash. 697, 109 P. 1019. All of the elements must be supported by very substantial proofs. It was said in Rohrer v. Snyder, 29 Wash. 199, 69 P......