Beall v. Lehman-Durr Co.

• Decision Date: 25 July 1895
• Citation: 110 Ala. 446,18 So. 230
• Parties: BEALL ET AL. v. LEHMAN-DURR CO.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

18 So. 230

110 Ala. 446

BEALL ET AL. v. LEHMAN-DURR CO.

Supreme Court of Alabama

July 25, 1895

Appeal from chancery court, Crenshaw county; Jere N. Williams Chancellor.

Bill by the Lehman-Durr Company against Beall & Coston and another to set aside a conveyance for fraud. Defendants' demurrer to the bill was overruled, and they appeal. Affirmed.

The Lehman-Durr Company filed this bill against Beall & Coston and George A. Folmer, to set aside as constructively, or as actually fraudulent, a deed executed by said Beall & Coston to said Folmer, on the 20th of October, 1894, by which they conveyed to said Folmer their entire stock of goods and merchandise, in their two stores in which they carried on a mercantile business at Luverne, Ala. It is alleged, that said Beall & Coston were indebted to complainants, before the date of the execution of said deed, in the sum of $7,000 as evidenced by their two promissory notes, the one for $3,500 dated 3d of May, 1894, payable 1st of October after date with interest from date; and the other for $1,500, dated June 18, 1894, payable on the 15th of September, 1894; and, that subsequently and prior to the 20th of October, 1894, said parties become indebted to complainants in the sum of $2,000 by open account for money advanced, and for work and labor done, and that all of said debts were partnership debts of said Beall & Coston, and were due and owing by them as partners. It is further averred, that the goods and merchandise so transferred, assigned and delivered to the said Folmer, were of value, of, to wit, $12,000. The allegations of fraud, upon which the deed is sought to be set aside, are, (1) "That there was no consideration for said transfer and delivery of said stock of goods to the said Folmer; that it was taken by the said Folmer in payment of an alleged indebtedness due by the said Beall & Coston to him. But orators aver that the said Beall & Coston were not indebted to the said Folmer in any sum; that the said indebtedness which is the alleged consideration for said transfer and delivery of the said stock of goods, was entirely fictitious." The other alternative averment for relief, as contained in the fourth paragraph of the bill, is (2) "But should orators be mistaken in this, then they aver, that if there was any debt due by the said Beall &amp Coston to the said Folmer, or any other consideration paid by the said Folmer for the transfer and delivery of said stock of goods, that the consideration so paid was greatly inadequate; that the value of said stock of goods was greatly in excess of any debt due by said Beall & Coston to the said Folmer, or any consideration paid by the said Beall & Coston to the said Folmer, or any consideration paid by the said Folmer to them for the said transfer and delivery of said stock of goods. That the said stocks of goods were reasonably worth at the time of said transfer and delivery, the sum of $12,000 as hereinabove alleged; that this fact was well known to the said Beall & Coston, and to the said Folmer, and if the said Beall & Coston were indebted to the said Folmer in any sum, or if he paid them anything for the said stock of goods, the amount of such indebtedness, or the amount paid for such stocks of goods, did not exceed the sum of five thousand dollars. And orators further aver, that the said facts as to the amount of such indebtedness, and the value of such stocks of goods, were well known to the said Beall &amp Coston and to the said Folmer at the time, and the purpose of each and all of said parties in making said transfer, was to place the said stock of goods beyond the reach of orators, and the other creditors of Beall & Coston, and was to hinder, delay, and defraud orators and said other creditors. Orators are further informed and believe, and upon such information and belief aver and state, that there was a private understanding and agreement between the said Beall & Coston and the said Folmer, which constituted a part of the agreement under which the transfer and delivery of the stocks of goods were made, whereby, there was a reservation of a benefit to the said Beall in the said transaction, in this: that it was agreed and understood that the said Folmer was to pay to the...