Gibson v. Honnett

• Decision Date: 14 November 1903
• Citation: 82 S.W. 838
• Parties: GIBSON v. HONNETT.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

82 S.W. 838

GIBSON v. HONNETT.^*

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

November 14, 1903.

Appeal from Jefferson Chancery Court; John M. Elliott, Chancellor.

Suit by one Gibson against Albert S. Honnett. From a decree sustaining a demurrer to the bill, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

N. T. White and Ben J. Altheimer, for appellant. Irving Reinberger and M. A. Austin, for appellee.

BUNN, C. J.

The appellee, Albert S. Honnett, was the owner of a one-half interest in the plantation in Jefferson county known as the "Oliver Place," Charles Weil being the owner of the other half interest. He was also the owner of an undivided one-half interest in other lands in said county and various lots in the city of Pine Bluff, and was the owner in fee of lot 4 in block 5 in Jones' Addition to the city of Pine Bluff. On the ____ day of ____, 189-, the said Albert S. Honnett and his wife, Henrietta Honnett, his codefendant, executed and delivered their deed of trust to M. E. Bloom as trustee to secure a note of $2,700, payable to Rachel Winklein, due one year after date, with 8 per cent. interest per annum from date, in which he conveyed said lot 4, block 5. Afterwards, on the 28th day of February, 1893, Honnett and wife executed and delivered to M. E. Bloom, as trustee, a certain other deed of trust as an additional security of the same note, in which they conveyed all of the lands and lots aforesaid except said lot 4 in block 5. The plaintiff avers that the first deed of trust was ample security for the payment of said note, and charges that the second deed of trust was made to delay, hinder, and defraud the creditors of A. S. Honnett. On the 21st February, 1898, A. S. Honnett made a deed of trust to Charles Weil, as trustee, in which he conveyed all the lands aforesaid, except said lot 4, block 5, to secure a note to the Citizens' Bank of $1,000, made by the Honnett Dry Goods Company, dated November 4, 1897, due four months after date; three notes held by Charles Triplett, made by said Dry Goods Company (one for $1,000, made October 23, 1897, due four months after date, drawing 8 per cent. per annum interest from date; one note for $1,000, dated November 4, 1897, due four months after date, with 9 per cent. per annum interest from date; one for $1,500, dated December 8, 1897, due March 31, 1898, with 9 per cent. per annum interest from date); three notes to the Merchants' & Planters' Bank, aggregating $10,000 (one for $4,000, dated October 12, 1897, due four months thereafter; one dated November 11, 1891, for $4,000, due four months thereafter; and one dated January 25, 1898, for $2,000, due in thirty days thereafter), all bearing interest at the rate of 9 per cent. per annum from date. The plaintiff charges that the said debt to the Citizens' Bank and the debt to C. H. Triplett had been fully paid off, and that the records should be satisfied as to them; that the debt to the Merchants' & Planters' Bank had been materially reduced, the exact amount of the reduction not known to the plaintiffs, but he charges that only the sum of $3,000, or less, of said indebtedness was owing. On the 21st February, 1898, the said Honnett executed and delivered to M. L. Altheimer a deed of trust on all the lands afore described, except said lot 4 in block 5, in the city of Pine Bluff, to secure a note of $4,000 held by M. Gans, dated Oct. 4, 1897, due six months after date; also two notes held by Rothschild Bros., one for $1,500 dated Oct. 18, 1897, due 4 months thereafter, bearing ten per cent. interest, and the other for $1,000 dated December 4, 1897, due four months after date, bearing 8 per cent. per annum from date. The plaintiff charges that the debt purporting to be owing to Gans is wholly or in part fictitious, and that, if anything be due thereon, it does not exceed $1,000, and that the deed of trust made to secure the same was made without consideration and for the sole purpose of aiding and assisting the said A. S. Honnett in delaying, hindering and defrauding his creditors. Plaintiff also charges that the debt alleged to be due to said Rothschild Bros. has been wholly paid, and that, if there is anything owing thereon, it does not exceed the sum of $195, and that the same, if any at all, has long since been due and payable. The plaintiff further states...