Hopkins ex rel. Williams v. Sievert

• Decision Date: 31 October 1874
• Citation: 58 Mo. 201
• Parties: SAMUEL W. HOPKINS, to use of KING L. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. FREDERICK SIEVERT, et al., Respondents.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

58 Mo. 201

SAMUEL W. HOPKINS, to use of KING L. WILLIAMS, Appellant,

v.FREDERICK SIEVERT, et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1874.

Appeal from St. Charles Circuit Court.

F. F. Williams, for Appellant.

Nat. C. Dryden, for Respondents.

SHERWOOD, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit brought on a bond given by defendant and his sureties, to indemnify the sheriff who levied an execution on and sold certain saloon property, liquors and fixtures as the property of one Early.

The answer denied that King L. Williams, to whose use this suit was brought, had in reality bought the goods; but alleged that his purchase was only a pretended one, made with intent to hinder, delay and defraud the creditors of Early.

The instructions, as well on behalf of plaintiff as on the part of defendants, were entirely unexceptionable. But it is claimed that there is no evidence whatever in support of the verdict.

In reference to this it may be replied that evidence of a fraudulent transfer or disposition of property, is rarely of a direct or positive character; and for the obvious reason, that those engaged in such questionable transactions, do not court the light of day. Very slight circumstances, therefore, may, although apparently trivial and unimportant of themselves, afford, when combined together, irrefragable proof of fraudulent intent. With this view of the subject, and after a careful consideration of the testimony, we are not prepared to say that the triers of the fact were without the necessary basis whereon to build their verdict.

The judgment is affirmed; the other judges concur.