Plaintiff v. Valentine

• Decision Date: 20 February 1886
• Citation: 27 W.Va. 677
• Parties: Parker et al. v. Valentine et al
• Court: West Virginia Supreme Court

27 W.Va. 677

Parker et al.

v.Valentine et al

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

Submitted February 2, 1886.

Decided February 20, 1886.

1. Where a suit has been brought to set aside a deed as fraudulent and subject the land to the payment of a judgment, which with interest is less than $100.00, but the land is worth $150.00, the judgment-debtor and grantor is not entitled to appeal from a decree declaring the deed fraudulent, but the grantee, whose land is subjected, the value thereof being more than $100.00, is entitled to an appeal, (p. 680.)

2. The record must show, that this Court has jurisdiction of the appeal; and where the amount in controversy is the value of a tract of land, and it appears that the appellant bought the land for $150.00, and had actually paid $113.00 thereon, it does appear from the record, that the amount in controversy is over $100.00. (p. 680.)

3. Fraud may be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case; and if these facts and circumstances are such as to make a prima facie case of fraudulent intent, they are to be taken as conclusive evidence of such intent, unless rebutted by other facts and circumstances in the case. (p. 680.)

4. A case in which it was held, that the prima facie evidence of fraud was clearly rebutted, (p. 681.)

5. A decree for sale of land, which does not require the commissioner appointed to make the sale to first execute bond, will be reversed, (p. 681.)

H. C. Showalter for appellant. R. S. Blair for appellee. Johnson, President:

A. R. Parker and others filed their bill against William A. Valentine and Julia A. Valentine to enforce the lien of a judgment against thirty acres of land conveyed to Julia A. Valentine by one William H. Pierpoint. The suit was brought in the circuit court of Ritchie county, in which county the land was situated and the judgment recorded. The judgment was tor $55.46 with interest from January 5, 1875, and the costs. The bill further alleges that on Octo- ber 13, 1883, William A. Valentine having purchased a tract of thirty acres of land in Ritchie county of William H. Pierpoint caused the deed therefor to be made to his sister Julia A. Valentine; that the consideration for said purchase was $150.00, $75.00 of which was paid by an order ot the county court to William A. Valentine, and that afterwards said William A. Valentine paid $38.00 in cash on said purchase. The bill charges that the deed was made to Julia A. Valentine with intent to hinder, delay and defraud the creditors of William A. Valentine. The bill prays that the said deed be set aside as fraudulent as to the said judgment, and the land subjected to the payment thereof.

William A. Valentine answered the bill denying the fraud charged. He avers that he as the agent of his sister purchased said land and had it conveyed to her; that the defendant at the time owed his sister$150.00 tor which he had executed to her his note, and that the order he paid for her and also the $38.00 in money, for which he was to be credited on the note, he owed to her.

Julia A.Valentine also answers the bill; and in her answer she avers, that in January, 1882, she had sold to Wm. A. Valentine a mare and wagon for $150.00; that he executed his note to her therefor; that at the time the land was purchased the note was due; that she authorized her brother to buy the land for her, and it was agreed, that whatever amount he further paid to Pierpoint on the land she would credit him therefor on the note; that there is a balance due from her to Pierpoint on the land, for which he holds a vendor's lien; that she is illiterate, and because of that fact she had her brother to buy the land for her. She denies all fraud in the transaction.

The plaintiffs took the deposition of W. H. Pierpont. He says: "I contracted to sell a tract of land to him (Valentine). He told me he would find me a purchaser. The contract price was $150.00, and when it come to making a conveyance, he told me to make the deed to Julia A. Valentine, his sister. He was to pay me $75.00 and the residue in one year from date ot deed." He further said in answer to a question: "I think the deed was already made when the payment of $75.00 was made, and I delivered the deed, when the payment of $75.00 was made. "The contract for the purchase, he says, was a verbal one. He executed the deed within two weeks from the time the verbal contract was made.

Valentine and his sister in their depositions say, that Julia had worked out for a number of years and had saved some money. William says he owed his sister $150.00, and at her request bought the land for her and paid the money for her, tor which he was to receive credit on the note, which he owed his sister. He says Pierpoint knew he was buying the land for his sister; says he told Pierpoint he was not able to buy the land for himself and did not want it. Julia A. Valentine exhibits with her deposition the following note, which she says was executed to her on the day it bears date:

" For value received I promise to pay Julia A. Valentine the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars, due from date. Given under my hand and seal this January 2, 1882.

" W. A. Valentine. [Seal.]"

On the note are the following endorsements: November 21, 1883, credit to cash $75.00 paid to W. H. Pierpont; November 29, 1884, credit to cash $38.00 paid to W. H. Pierpont."

D. A. Hosteter in his deposition says, that the note was executed in the...