Letz v. Smith

• Decision Date: 05 April 1895
• Parties: LETZ v. SMITH ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

94 Iowa 301

62 N.W. 745

LETZ

v.SMITH ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

April 5, 1895.

Appeal from district court, Adair county; J. H. Henderson, Judge.

This is a suit in equity to subject certain real estate to the payment of a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and against the defendant J. D. Smith. The defendants are husband and wife. After the cause of action upon which the judgment was rendered accrued, but before suit was brought thereon, the husband conveyed the real estate to his wife, and the plaintiff claims that the conveyance was fraudulent as to the creditors of the husband. There was a decree for the plaintiff, and the defendant Sarah J. Smith appeals. Affirmed.Seever & Neal, for appellant.

Storey & Gaines, for appellee.

ROTHROCK, J.

The land sought to be subjected to the payment of the judgment consists of a farm of 160 acres, which the defendants occupy as a home. The decree from which the appeal is taken exempts the homestead from its operation. The question to be determined is whether the title taken by the wife from the husband is valid as against the plaintiff's judgment. This must be determined by the evidence. Without repeating the testimony in detail, we will state the facts which appear to us to be established by a fair preponderance of the evidence. The defendants were married in the year 1855, at Pella, in this state. In 1861 they removed to the state of Indiana, where the father of J. D. Smith resided, and they remained there until 1865, when they returned to this state. The real estate the title to which is in question in this suit was purchased and conveyed to the husband in the year 1872, and he held the title for 21 years, when he made the conveyance in question. At the time that the conveyance was made to the wife, the husband made a bill of sale of all the personal property on the farm except such as was exempt from execution. The evidence conclusively shows that the conveyance was made to prevent the plaintiff herein from collecting the claim held against the husband.

The ground upon which the title in the wife is sought to be maintained is that she was a creditor of the husband; that he was indebted to her in the sum of $1,800, with interest thereon from about the year 1865. The evidence upon which it is sought to establish the fact that the husband was actually indebted to the wife in the sum of $1,800, with interest for about 28 years, consists of the testimony of the wife. We concur with the...