Mullins v. Hand's Adm'r

• Citation: 31 S.W. 726
• Parties: MULLINS et al. v. HAND'S ADM'R.
• Decision Date: 15 June 1895
• Court: Court of Appeals of Kentucky

31 S.W. 726

MULLINS et al. v. HAND'S ADM'R.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 15, 1895

Appeal from circuit court, Pendleton county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by J. S. Hand's administrator against B. B. Mullins and others to set aside a conveyance as in fraud of creditors. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. Reversed.

O'Hara & Rouse, for appellants.

Leslie T. Appelgate, for appellee.

LEWIS, J.

Appellee brought this action for the purpose and judgment was rendered setting aside a deed made April 2, 1887, by appellant B. B. Mullins to his daughter, also appellant, Olive Mullins, for about 38 acres of land lying near the town of Falmouth, Pendleton county, without consideration, and for the fraudulent purpose of hindering and delaying plaintiff in collecting a judgment rendered in his favor. The deed was made April 2, 1887, and, if made without consideration, was not done to hinder and delay collection of the judgment, as alleged, for it was not rendered until November 26, 1887. But it seems to us there is no evidence showing the deed was fraudulently made for the purpose of hindering and delaying plaintiff in collection of either a judgment or debt, before judgment was rendered therefor. The vendee shows she had, by teaching school, made money enough to make a cash payment of about $400, and satisfied balance of the consideration by agreement to pay a debt to a party who held a mortgage on the land, and whom she had since paid in full, or nearly so. Besides, the evidence shows the price agreed to be paid was about value of the land; and, as the land would have been liable to the mortgage debt, we do not see how plaintiff was injured or defrauded, especially as the cash payment was applied to payment of other debts which B. B. Mullins owed. It is true the land was, not long after the deed, sold to a company of capitalists and speculators, who made an addition of part of it to the town of Falmouth, and laid off town lots, whereby the land, as common about that time, was boomed, and sold at a speculative and unusual price. But that does not show the deed previously made was without consideration and fraudulently made. In our opinion the judgment was not authorized by the evidence, and is reversed and case remanded for dismissal of the action.