Emery v. Bidwell
| Decision Date | 23 October 1885 |
| Citation | 140 Mass. 271,3 N.E. 24 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
| Parties | Samuel H. Emery, Jr., trustee, v. David H. Bidwell & another |
Bill in equity, filed January 17, 1884, against David H. Bidwell, and Nathan W. Harris, administrator of the estate of Henry A Bidwell, alleging the following facts:
On January 1, 1881, David H. Bidwell made four promissory notes payable, with interest, in six, eight, ten, and twelve months after date, respectively, to the order of Comstock, Castle, and Company. These notes, amounting in all to $ 1658, were indorsed by the payees to the plaintiff, and the defendant Bidwell owes the plaintiff the amount thereof, with interest.
The defendant Bidwell is the son of Henry A. Bidwell, who died intestate, leaving real and personal estate of great value, in which the defendant Bidwell has a distributive share. The defendant Harris is sole administrator of the estate, and no distribution of it has yet been made.
On September 5, 1882, the plaintiff brought an action on the promissory notes, against David H. Bidwell, in the Superior Court, in which action Harris, as administrator, was summoned as trustee. In answer to interrogatories, the trustee alleged that the defendant Bidwell was indebted to his father's estate, on certain promissory notes, to the amount of $ 6410.71, with interest thereon, and that said sum, with interest, being set off against the share or claim of the defendant, as heir or distributee of his said father, would exceed his distributive share in the estate. On the filing of these answers, the plaintiff applied to the court to frame issues to try the validity of the notes last mentioned; but the court refused the application.
Early in 1880, the defendant Bidwell went to Colorado and started in business, and obtained goods, wares, and merchandise on credit, representing that he had a large capital and was thoroughly solvent and entitled to credit. Among the goods so obtained were the goods for which the notes, now held by the plaintiff, were given in 1881. Bidwell bought and improved certain parcels of real estate in Colorado; and in November, 1880, made an assignment of all his property in Colorado, and by said assignment preferred his father, Henry A. Bidwell, and certain other creditors, but did not prefer the payees or holders of said last-mentioned notes. Bidwell, prior to the assignment, gave to Henry A. first mortgages, for a large amount, on his Colorado land. The assignee under said assignment has sold the assigned property for a sum sufficient to pay all the preferred claims; and the land covered by said mortgages is worth, at a fair market value, more than the amount of the mortgages.
The first note signed by the defendant Bidwell, and payable to Henry A. Bidwell, was either never delivered to Henry A. Bidwell for a valuable consideration, or, if it was ever so delivered to him, it is amply secured by said assignment and mortgages; and the other notes were either never delivered to Henry A. Bidwell, or, if they were ever delivered to him, were each and all made and delivered by David H. Bidwell wholly without consideration, and for the fraudulent purpose of covering up and concealing the distributive share of David in his father's estate, and of preventing the creditors of said David H. from having recourse to said share for the collection of their just claims. If the last-named notes were ever delivered to Henry, he accepted the same well knowing that each and all of them were wholly without consideration, and fraudulent and void, and combining and conspiring with David to defraud said David's creditors as aforesaid.
On a true showing of the accounts between David H. Bidwell and Henry A. Bidwell, it will appear that the said David did not owe the said Henry at the times at which the said notes purport to have been made and delivered, and at the time of the death of said Henry, the amounts represented by said notes; and it will further appear that said Henry at the time of his death held good and sufficient security for all the validly subsisting notes and obligations of said David to said Henry, and for all the other indebtedness of said David to said Henry; and that the said notes, or some of them, were made wholly without consideration, and are fraudulent and void.
The defendant Bidwell has no property which can be come at to be attached or taken on execution in a suit at law against him.
The defendant Bidwell, or the defendant Harris, or both of them, have in their possession, custody, or power certain books, papers, documents, or writings relating to the allegations or charges in this bill, and by which, if produced, the truth thereof, or of some part thereof, will appear.
Henry A. Bidwell died in March or April, 1882, and the defendant Harris was appointed administrator of his estate at some time prior to July 1, 1882. No application has been made to the probate court to determine the validity of the notes payable to Henry A. Bidwell, or to set off the same against the distributive share of the defendant Bidwell, but the defendant Harris pretends that it is his intention to make such application; and the plaintiff says that the discovery sought to be obtained by this suit will be of material benefit to him...
To continue reading
Request your trial