Hopkins v. Joyce

• Decision Date: 13 January 1891
• Citation: 47 N.W. 722,78 Wis. 443
• Parties: HOPKINS ET AL. v. JOYCE ET AL.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

78 Wis. 443

47 N.W. 722

HOPKINS ET AL.

v.JOYCE ET AL.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Jan. 13, 1891.

Appeal from circuit court, Milwaukee county; D. H. JOHNSON, Circuit Judge.

The action is in the nature of a creditors' suit to subject certain lots in the city of Milwaukee (the record title to which is in the defendant Alice M. Joyce) to the lien of a certain judgment of the plaintiffs against the defendant Gilbert S. Joyce. The testimony satisfactorily shows that before and at the time Gilbert S. contracted the indebtedness to plaintiffs for which their judgment against him was recovered he was the owner of another lot in that city, (which for convenience will be designated as lot 2,) and that about the time such judgment was obtained he and his wife conveyed the same to one Mapes, who, in exchange therefor, conveyed to Mrs. Joyce the lots in controversy. Plaintiffs gave credit to Gilbert S., and rendered him professional services as attorneys at law, in reliance upon his statement to them that he was the owner of lot 2. Mrs. Joyce claimed to be the real owner of lot 2, but it appears she knew the title thereto was in her husband, and permitted it so to remain “because of business conveniences and considerations,” as she and her husband state in their answer. The circuit judge found the facts as above stated; also the return of an execution issued upon plaintiffs' judgment unsatisfied; and further, that if Mrs. Joyce was the equitable owner of lot 2, she could not, under the circumstances of the case, be heard to assert such ownership against the superior equities of the plaintiffs. Judgment was accordingly awarded and duly entered subjecting the lots conveyed by Mapes to Mrs. Joyce to the lien of plaintiffs' judgment against Gilbert S. Joyce, as prayed in the complaint. The defendant Ulrich holds a mortgage on the Mapes lots executed to him by Joyce and wife after the lots were thus conveyed to Mrs. Joyce. He took his mortgage with full notice of plaintiffs' equities, and has made no defense to the action. The defendants Joyce appeal from the judgment.F. P. Hopkins, in pro per., for respondents.

Peter Doyle, for appellants.

LYON, J., ( after stating the facts as above.)

The case involves no disputed proposition of law, but turns entirely upon the facts. These are few, and are clearly proved, as found by the court. The inevitable deduction from them is that the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief demanded, which the circuit court...