Brooks v. Wimer
Decision Date | 31 March 1855 |
Parties | BROOKS, Appellant, v. WIMER et al., Respondents. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
1. Under the first section of the act concerning “fraudulent conveyances,” (R. C. 1845,) a deed of a stock of goods to a trustee, for the benefit of creditors, which on its face, reserves to the grantor the right to continue to sell the goods in the usual course of his business until default made in the payment of the debts intended to be secured, is, as a matter of law, void against existing and subsequent creditors and purchasers.
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas.
This was an action commenced August 27, 1853, by Brooks, to recover in the form of damages the value of the stock of goods seized and sold by the defendant, Wimer, as sheriff of St. Louis county, under executions in favor of the other defendants against William W. Price, dated respectively June 16th, and July 14th, 1853. The plaintiff claimed the goods under a deed from William W. Price to him as trustee, for the benefit of certain creditors of Price, dated March 5th, acknowledged March 15th, and recorded March 30th, 1853. This deed was set out at large in the petition and made part of it.
The deed after reciting that Price had already obtained from certain enumerated creditors an extension of time upon their demands against him, for which, in pursuance of the extension, he had executed various notes, the earliest of which was payable six months from February 10th, 1853, and that he expected to obtain a like extension from other creditors, to-wit: Carter & Rees, Campbell, Chess & Co., and Marshall & Brother, proceeded as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McFarland v. Bishop
...whether they are fraudulent or not. Jamison v. Mississippi Valley Trust Co., 207 S.W. 788; Robinson v. Robards, 15 Mo. 466; Brooks v. Wimer, 20 Mo. 503; Walter Wimer, 24 Mo. 63. (c) The interests of Graham's children under the instrument of May 23rd, are entirely contingent, just as were th......
-
Armstrong v. Tuttle
...and with the right of using and selling the same in the regular course of their said business, which was the millinery business. (Brooks v. Wimer, 20 Mo. 503; Zeigler v. Maddox, 26 Mo. 577.) H. Hitchcock, for appellants. The deed of trust, read in evidence in this cause, was not void upon i......
-
Barton v. Sitlington
...is deemed in law for the use of the mortgagor, and for that reason is void under the statute." Robinson v. Robards, 15 Mo. 459; Brooks v. Wimer, 20 Mo. 503. And numerous other cases. Smith v. Ham, 51 Mo.App. 436. (3) "If the mortgage was made in part -- not only to secure the mortgagees but......
-
Thompson v. Foerstel
...Billingsley v. Bunce, 28 Mo. 547; Cator v. Collins, 2 Mo. App. 234; The State v. Tasker, 31 Mo. 445; Lodge v. Samuels, 50 Mo. 204; Brooks v. Wimer, 20 Mo. 503; White v. Graves, 68 Mo. 218. The fact that the sales were to be made only with the consent of the mortgagee does not distinguish th......