Harrison v. American Agr. Chemical Co.

• Decision Date: 20 March 1930
• Docket Number: 4 Div. 456.
• Citation: 127 So. 513,220 Ala. 695
• Parties: HARRISON ET AL. v. AMERICAN AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL CO.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

127 So. 513

220 Ala. 695

HARRISON ET AL. v. AMERICAN AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL CO.

4 Div. 456.

Supreme Court of Alabama

March 20, 1930

Rehearing Denied April 17, 1930.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Covington County; Emmet S. Thigpen Judge.

Creditors' bill by the American Agricultural Chemical Company against J J. Harrison, G. H. Harrison, Robert B. Harrison, J. Willie Harrison, Joseph J. Harrison, Jr., David E. Murphy, and the First National Bank of Florala. From a decree for complainant, respondents Harrison appeal. Affirmed.

A Whaley, of Andalusia, for appellants.

A. R Powell, of Andalusia, for appellee.

BROWN J.

This bill was filed by the appellee, American Agricultural Chemical Company, a judgment creditor of J. J. Harrison, after return of execution "No property found," to set aside certain deed made by Harrison and his wife to their children, and a deed and mortgage made by said Harrison to his wife, all embracing real property, the title to which was in said Harrison at the time he contracted the debt, the foundation of the complainant's judgment.

The First National Bank of Florala and David E. Murphy, alleged to be the holder of mortgage executed by Harrison and his wife, antedating complainant's debt, were made parties defendant.

The averments of the bill are that said several conveyances made by Harrison and his wife to their children, who are made parties defendant, and said deeds and mortgage made by Harrison to his wife, also made a party defendant, were executed subsequent to the accrual of the indebtedness of Harrison to complainant; "were executed by orator's said debtor for no actual consideration but with the purpose and intent to hinder and delay orator in the collection of its said judgment and to defraud it from the payment and collection of its said debt." These averments, in connection with the other averments showing that the complainant was a judgment creditor with a lien, and that execution had been issued and returned "No property found," were sufficient to give the bill equity, and the general demurrer thereto was overruled without error. Code of 1923, §§ 7338, 7343, 8038; Cruise et al. v. Sorrell, 181 Ala. 237, 61 So. 894; Douglass Cotton Oil Co. et al. v. Alabama Machinery & Supply Co. et al., 205 Ala. 51, 87 So. 342.

The admissions in the answer and the proof establish the fact that the complainant's debt due from the defendant J. J. Harrison antedated the conveyances made by Harrison to his wife and children. This evidence made a prima facie case for the complainant, and carried to the defendant grantees the burden of showing that they paid an adequate and valuable consideration for the execution of said conveyances, or, under the issues as framed by the pleading, that the property embodied in said conveyances was purchased with the wife's money and the title taken in the husband's name without her knowledge and consent; that she was not guilty of laches in allowing the title to remain in him to enhance his credit or induce the belief that he was in fact the owner of the property. R. W. Allen & Co. v. Sands et al., 216 Ala. 106, 112 So. 528; 12 R. C. L. 522, § 51; note 90 Am. St. Rep. 523.

After careful consideration of the evidence, we are of opinion that the respondents failed to meet...