Hamner v. Freeman

• Decision Date: 23 January 1913
• Citation: 61 So. 106,181 Ala. 109
• Parties: HAMNER v. FREEMAN.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

61 So. 106

181 Ala. 109

HAMNER v. FREEMAN.

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 23, 1913

Rehearing Denied Feb. 14, 1913

Appeal from Chancery Court, Tuscaloosa County; A.H. Benners Chancellor.

Bill by S.M. Freeman against J.D. Hamner, Sr., and others, to declare certain deeds void for an accounting, and to declare a lien in favor of complainant upon certain property. Decree for complainant, and defendant named appeals. Corrected and affirmed.

The case made by the bill is that in the year 1907 J.D. Hamner Sr., was indebted in a large sum to the firm of Sloan &amp Freeman, composed of orator and E.F. Sloan, and that the firm affairs at that time were in the hands of George A. Searcy as receiver, who in that capacity filed a suit against Hamner on said indebtedness to Sloan & Freeman, and on the 27th day of January, 1908, recovered a judgment against said Hamner in the sum of $1,254.47, together with the costs, said judgment containing waiver of exemptions as to personal property. Execution was issued on the judgment, returned "not satisfied," and on July 15, 1909, a certificate of said judgment was issued and recorded in the probate office of Tuscaloosa county. It is alleged that complainant was the owner of said judgment, and that the same is still due and unpaid. The bill further shows that at the time of the filing of the suit by the receiver Hamner was seised in fee of 263 acres of land which is described by government subdivisions and that he was also owner of a mill and gin, boiler, and engine located on said land, which is substantially all of the property owned by said Hamner, and that on the 2d day of December, 1907, after the filing of the suit by Searcy as receiver, the said J.D. Hamner, Sr., and his wife executed two certain deeds reciting a consideration of $200 in each whereby they conveyed all of the above-mentioned land to their two sons, D.W. and J.D. Hamner. It is alleged that D.W. Hamner is dead, and has left surviving him a wife, now Mrs. Ida Graham, and three minor sons, whose names and ages are set out. It is then alleged that, notwithstanding the consideration expressed in the deed, no money was paid as an incident or inducement thereto, and that the conveyances were voluntary, wholly without consideration, and made for the purpose of hindering, delaying, or defrauding the creditors of said J.D. Hamner, Sr. It is also alleged that, if it be true that the consideration named was paid, it was grossly inadequate, and that the property was reasonably worth $2,500. And that these facts were well known to the parties to the conveyances, and that each and all of said parties in making said conveyances purposed and intended to place the property beyond the reach of the judgment heretofore set forth. The bill also alleges that in the making of the contract there was a private agreement between the grantors and grantees as a part of the consideration that the grantors should receive the benefit of the fruits, increase and use of said property thereafter, and should have a right to use said homestead after that time. Answer was interposed denying the allegations of the bill, and also setting up that a part of the land was a homestead, and that, therefore, complainants cannot complain, and the bill sets out the particular subdivisions constituting the homestead, and alleges it not to exceed in area 160 acres and in value $2,000.

...