Murray v. Heard

• Decision Date: 16 May 1894
• Parties: MURRAY ET AL. v. HEARD ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

15 So. 565

103 Ala. 400

MURRAY ET AL. v. HEARD ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

May 16, 1894

Appeal from chancery court, Butler county; John A. Foster Chancellor.

Bill by Murray, Dibbrell & Co. and others against George P. Heard and others. There was a decree for defendants, and complainants appeal. Affirmed.

On January 10, 1891, Murray, Dibbrell & Co. and O'Bryan Bros. filed a bill of complaint against George P. Heard, A A. Heard, and W. L. Tillman, in which the complainants alleged that they were creditors of said George P. Heard that on the 5th day of January, 1891, the said George P Heard conveyed to his wife, A. A. Heard, certain lands, upon the recited consideration of $1,100, in payment of an alleged antecedent debt due to her by the said George P. Heard; that the said George P. Heard also conveyed to W. L. Tillman certain other lands and personal property, upon the recited consideration of $4,084.58, in payment of an alleged antecedent debt. The bill averred that the considerations recited in the respective deeds were fictitious and simulated; that the property conveyed was greatly disproportionate to the debts; and that the conveyances were fraudulent and void. The prayer of the bill was that these conveyances be declared fraudulent and void as to complainants, and that the property therein described and attempted to be conveyed be subjected to the debts of the complainants. Shortly after the filing of this bill, there were two other bills filed by the creditors of the said George P. Heard. Each of these bills was substantially a copy of the first, with the exception of the amounts claimed and the names of the complainants. The respondents answered and defended separately these three bills of complaint, and in their answers denied that said George P. Heard was indebted to either of the complainants at the time of the execution of the conveyances to A. A. Heard and W. L. Tillman, or at the time of the filing of the respective bills, and they affirmed in their answer the existence and validity of George P. Heard's indebtedness to each of the other respondents, the sufficiency of the consideration of each of the conveyances, and that no reservation of an interest in said property was reserved to the said George P. Heard, and that the conveyances were not executed for the purpose of hindering, delaying, or defrauding his other creditors. The evidence in each of the cases was the same. The opinion renders it unnecessary to set out this evidence. The three causes were submitted together, and upon the final hearing, upon the pleadings and proof, it was decreed that the complainants in each of the bills were not entitled to the relief prayed for, and each of the bills was dismissed. From this decree, Murray, Dibbrell & Co. prosecute the present appeal, and assign the same as error.

Stallings & Wilinson, for appellants.

J. C. Richardson, for appellees.

COLEMAN J.

The appellants, creditors of George P. Heard, filed the present bill in the chancery court, and sought to set aside and annual certain conveyances of land and a bill of sale executed by the debtor to Mrs. A. A. Heard and William L Tillman, the former being the wife and the latter the brother-in-law of the debtor. There were separate conveyances, and for separate property, to each of the grantees. The proof shows that the claims of the complainants were bona fide,...