Evans v. Staalle
| Decision Date | 09 January 1903 |
| Docket Number | 13,333 - (191) |
| Citation | 92 N.W. 951,88 Minn. 253 |
| Parties | D. H. EVANS v. MARY STAALLE |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Murray county, P. E. Brown, J. Affirmed.
Action to Enforce Trust.
Certain land was conveyed to the defendant by third parties, and one-third of the purchase price therefor was paid by her husband. The plaintiff, at the time the conveyances were made, was a judgment creditor of the husband, and this action was brought against the defendant alone to enforce a trust in the land to the extent necessary to satisfy the plaintiff's judgment. Held, that the complaint states a cause of action, that the discharge of the husband from his debts in bankruptcy did not affect the plaintiff's right to enforce the trust, that the plaintiff had a right to call the defendant and examine her touching the issues in the action without the consent of her husband, and that the evidence sustains the findings of fact of the trial court.
M. E Mathews, for appellant.
Jay Henry Long and N. J. Robinson, for respondent.
Action in the district court of the county of Murray to enforce a resulting trust in favor of the plaintiff as a creditor of the defendant's husband, Christ Staalle, hereafter designated as the "debtor."
The facts, in brief, as established by the verdict of the jury and the findings of the trial judge, are substantially these: In the year 1892 the debtor was indebted to the plaintiff in the aggregate sum of $117.25, and on November 11, 1897, the plaintiff duly recovered and docketed a judgment against him therefor in the sum of $224.17, including interest and costs. On March 19, 1901, execution was duly issued on the judgment, and returned wholly unsatisfied. On November 28 and December 19, 1900, respectively, land aggregating one hundred sixty acres, being the two tracts of eighty acres each described in the complaint, was conveyed to the defendant by the then owners thereof. The debtor paid one-third of the consideration for the conveyance of such tracts of land, and the title was taken in the name of the defendant as grantee to hinder and defraud the creditors of the debtor. This action was commenced in April, 1901, and the complaint alleged, with others, the facts we have stated.
The answer of the defendant to the complaint admitted that the tracts of land described in the complaint were conveyed to her at the dates stated in the complaint, and denied the other allegations thereof. On April 6, 1902, the defendant moved the court for leave to serve an amended and supplemental answer, setting up the fact that on November 16, 1901, the debtor, Christ Staalle, was discharged in bankruptcy from all of his debts existing on January 19, 1901, on which day he filed his petition for adjudication under the act of congress relating to bankruptcy. The motion was denied, and the trial proceeded upon the original pleadings.
The trial court, as a conclusion of law, directed judgment in favor of the plaintiff to the effect that the defendant holds the title to an undivided one-third of the two tracts of land here in question in trust for the plaintiff to the amount of his judgment, which is a lien thereon, and, further, that the plaintiff is entitled to a lien on a third tract of land to the extent of $51.92, as to which it is unnecessary to state the facts. Judgment was so entered, from which the defendant appealed.
1. The first assignment of error to be considered is that the complaint does not allege facts constituting a cause of action, because it does not state that the debtor was ever the owner of any interest in the land in question nor that he was ever the owner of any of the consideration paid therefor, nor any facts tending to show any intention to defraud any of his creditors, or that any of them were defrauded. No one of these objections to the complaint is well taken. The complaint alleges that the land in question was conveyed to the defendant, and that the purchase price thereof was paid by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial