Rinehart v. Long

• Decision Date: 04 June 1888
• Citation: 95 Mo. 396,8 S.W. 559
• Parties: RINEHART v. LONG et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

8 S.W. 559

95 Mo. 396

RINEHART v. LONG et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

June 4, 1888.

1. FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES — ACTION TO SET ASIDE — PLEADING — BILL — WHEN NOT MULTIFARIOUS.

Where an insolvent purchased several tracts of land with his own money, but had the deeds made to his wife, and the land was subsequently sold under execution

against the husband, a bill by the purchaser, reciting the facts as to each deed, and asking relief separately, praying that the deeds be set aside as in fraud of creditors, is based upon one general right, and is not multifarious, and the court properly refused to compel plaintiff elect upon which cause of action he will proceed.

2. SAME — ACTIONS TO SET ASIDE — PLEADING — SUFFICIENCY OF BILL.

An allegation, in a bill to set aside certain conveyances as fraudulent, that at the dates of the deeds defendant was wholly insolvent, owing some $14,000, and that his property was wholly inadequate to satisfy his indebtedness, sufficiently shows that defendant had no other property out of which the debts could be made.

3. SAME — ACTIONS TO SET ASIDE — RIGHTS OF PURCHASER AT EXECUTION SALE.

A purchaser at an execution sale, in seeking to set aside or defeat a fraudulent conveyance, made by the judgment debtor, occupies the same position and has all the advantages of the judgment creditor.

4. SAME — ACTION TO SET ASIDE, BY EXECUTION PURCHASER — INADEQUACY OF PRICE AT EXECUTION SALE.

Inadequacy of consideration is no defense in a suit by the purchaser of land at an execution sale to set aside a prior conveyance as fraudulent, where the land is incumbered, and the judgment debtor disclaimed ownership of the land, and gave notice that whoever bought the land would buy a lawsuit.

5. SAME — ACTIONS TO SET ASIDE — PROOF OF FRAUD.

Where lands are paid for by an insolvent debtor, but the deeds are made to his wife, who pays no part of the consideration, the husband owning other real estate, heavily incumbered, which had been sold under legal process, claimed to be invalid by the husband, who had been ousted from such land in an ejectment suit, the conveyances to the wife are fraudulent as to creditors of the husband.

Appeal from circuit court, Randolph county; BURCKHARTT, Judge.

Bill in equity by Stephen C. Rinehart against Sarah F. Long and Joseph Long, her husband, to set aside deeds alleged to have been made to Sarah F. Long for lands paid for with the money of her husband, in fraud of creditors. Plaintiff was purchaser at sheriff's sale on an execution against Joseph Long. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.

O. D. Jones, for appellants. W. C. Hollister and E. E. Chesney, for appellee.

BLACK, J.

The defendant Joseph Long purchased three tracts of land, — one from Greenwood in August, 1881, one from Mackey on August 12, 1882, and the other from Brown on the 31st of August, 1882. Deeds of the lands were made to Sarah F. Long, wife of Joseph Long, conveying to her in all 280 acres in Adair county. In December, 1883, the plaintiff recovered two judgments against Joseph Long, one in his own right, for $956.73, based on a note made in 1877, the other as administrator of Abraham Rinehart for $1,325.79, based upon a note made in the same year. Both notes were given by Long for borrowed money. Plaintiff purchased the lands described in the several deeds at a sale made under executions issued upon his judgments. He then commenced this suit to set aside the deeds to Mrs. Long, and vest the title in him on the ground that they were made in fraud of the creditors of Joseph Long.

1. The petition, in form, sets out three causes of action, with a prayer for relief to each. The only difference in these counts or causes of action is that one sets out the Greenwood deed, another the Mackey deed, and the third the Brown deed. A petition in equity will not be multifarious where ...