Ecklor v. Wolcott
| Decision Date | 19 May 1902 |
| Citation | 115 Wis. 19,90 N.W. 1081 |
| Parties | ECKLOR v. WOLCOTT ET AL. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from circuit court, Pepin county; E. W. Helmes, Judge.
Suit by Frank Ecklor, as administrator of the estate of Josiah B. Loomis, deceased, against Phoebe Wolcott and another. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.C. M. Hilliard and C. A. Ingram, for appellant.
William E. Plummer and S. G. Gilman, for respondents.
This is an action in equity, brought by the plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of Josiah B. Loomis, deceased, intestate, for the purpose of setting aside a certain deed of real estate and certain transfers of personal property made by the deceased to his daughter, the defendant Phoebe Wolcott, shortly prior to his death, on the ground that the deceased was then mentally incompetent, and that said deed and transfers were made without consideration, and under undue influence. The defendants answered, admitting the deed and transfer, and denying the remaining allegations of the complaint. The case was tried, and the court made findings negativing the allegations of the complaint, and the court dismissed the action. No evidence was offered or received showing that there were any creditors of the estate, or that there was or would be any deficiency of assets in the estate to meet all proper claims against it of any nature. There is no right on the part of the administrator to attack alleged fraudulent transfers of property made by his intestate except under the provisions of section 3832, Rev. St. 1898. Under this section it must appear, in order to entitle the administrator to maintain it, that there is or will be a deficiency of assets to pay creditors existing at the time of the transfer. Andrew v. Hinderman, 71 Wis. 148, 36 N. W. 624;O'Malley v. O'Malley, 102 Wis. 639, 78 N. W. 753. This consideration necessarily results in affirmance of the judgment regardless of any question as to the correctness of the judgment upon the merits.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sawyer v. Metters
...going to Bigelow, Minn., he earned some money. The court concluded as matter of law that under the rule laid down in Ecklor v. Wolcott, 115 Wis. 19, 90 N. W. 1081, the plaintiff could not recover, and ordered the action dismissed. Judgment was entered for the defendant. The plaintiff appeal......
- Hubbard v. McLean
- Gutzman v. Clancy
-
In re Zartner's Will
...counsel that only the heirs could maintain an action to set aside the conveyance, and to this proposition they cite Ecklor v. Wolcott, 115 Wis. 19, 90 N. W. 1081, an action brought under section 3832, Stats. For reasons later stated we do not find it necessary to decide whether the distribu......