Sims v. Sims

• Decision Date: 26 May 1931
• Docket Number: Case Number: 19596
• Citation: 300 P. 692,1931 OK 297,150 Okla. 138
• Parties: SIMS v. SIMS.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

1931 OK 297

300 P. 692

150 Okla. 138

SIMS v. SIMS.

Case Number: 19596

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided: May 26, 1931

Syllabus

¶0 1. Fraudulent Conveyances--Statute.

"Every conveyance of real estate or any interest therein, and every mortgage or other instrument in any way affecting the same, made without a fair and valuable consideration, or made in bad faith, or for the purpose of hindering, delaying or defrauding creditors, shall be void as against all persons to whom the maker is at the time indebted or under any legal liability." Section 5271 C. O. S. 1921.

2. Same--Deserted Wife Regarded as Quasi Creditor in Relation to Alimony Awarded.

When a wife, whose husband has deserted her and refuses to perform the duties of maintenance, has been compelled to leave his house and commence a proceeding for maintenance, she should be viewed as quasi creditor in relation to the alimony which the court has awarded to her; and, when she is compelled to become a suitor for her rights, her relation becomes adverse,--that of a creditor in fact,--and she is not to be balked of her dues by his fraud. Adams v. Wallis, 94 Okla. 73, 220 P. 872.

3. Same--Liberal Construction of Statute.

The statute against fraudulent conveyance should be liberally construed so as to include within their protection all persons who have interest and demands of which they may be defrauded. Adams v. Wallis, 94 Okla. 73, 220 P. 872.

4. Same--Conveyance by Husband to His Brother Held Void as Attempt to Defeat Alimony

Where a husband, against whom there is due unpaid monthly installments in a divorce proceeding, transfers real estate to his brother, who takes the same with full knowledge thereof, and the same is given for the purpose and intent of cheating and defrauding his wife from receiving any alimony under said decree, the transfer is void in so far as the same affects the rights of his said wife.

Appeal from District Court, Seminole County; W. J. Crump, Assigned Judge.

Action by Quillie C. Sims against May Sims. Judgment against plaintiff and for defendant on her cross-petition, and plaintiff appeals. Modified and affirmed.

Billups & Billups, for plaintiff in error.

J. C. Helms, for defendant in error.

McNEILL, J.

¶1 This action comes to this court to review the judgment of the district court of Seminole county, Okla., rendered on the 25th day of June, 1928. The parties will be referred to as they appear in the trial court. Quillie C. Sims, plaintiff in error, as plaintiff, and May Sims, defendant in error, as defendant.

¶2 The plaintiff instituted suit to quiet title in plaintiff to an undivided one-twelfth interest in a tract of 120 acres of land in Seminole county. Said plaintiff alleged, in substance, that James W. Sims, his father, died on or about the 20th day of April, 1922, seized of 120 acres of land in Seminole county; that R. L. Sims, his son, was thereafter decreed by the county court of said county to be one of the heirs at law of said decedent, and as such, the owner of one-twelfth undivided interest in and to said premises; that on the 21st of February, 1927, the said R. L. Sims by warranty deed conveyed all his right, title, and interest in and to the same to the plaintiff herein, the present owner thereof; that on the 27th day of January, 1927, the defendant filed in the office of the county clerk in and for Seminole county a certified copy of the journal entry entered in the district court in and for Oklahoma county, cause No. 39874, entitled May Sims, Plaintiff, v. Roy Sims, Defendant, and alleged that the same purports to be a judgment and as such purports to constitute a lien upon the interest of the said R. L. Sims, otherwise known as Roy Lee Sims, in and to the said premises, and that the same is not a lien, but that the same constitutes a cloud upon the title of plaintiff in and to said premises, and by reason thereof prays that the title of plaintiff be quieted and confirmed.

¶3 To this petition, May Sims, the defendant herein, who was the plaintiff in said cause No. 39874, entitled May Sims v. Roy Sims, filed an answer and cross-petition. She alleged, in substance, that said Roy Lee Sims and R. L. Sims are one and the same person, and is the husband of said defendant; that said defendant filed on the 27th day of January, 1927, in the office of the court clerk of Seminole county, a certified copy of the said journal entry of judgment as the same appears of record in the district court of Oklahoma county in the aforesaid action No. 39784 and the same shows the amount due upon said judgment and that no sum has ever been paid thereon to the clerk of the district court of Oklahoma county as provided by said judgment; that the aforesaid conveyance from her husband, R. L. Sims, to Quillie C. Sims, the plaintiff herein, is fraudulent, illegal, and void, and of no force and effect in that the said brothers connived, conspired, and confederated together for the sole purpose of placing all property of said Roy Sims out of the name and ownership of the said Roy Sims and beyond the reach of said defendant herein; that said scheme and said conspiracy was agreed upon by and between said brothers to cheat and defraud said defendant out of her just and equitable interest, lien, and ownership in and to said premises; that said plaintiff knew that said defendant was the wife of said Roy Sims and knew that the said Roy Sims attempted to procure a divorce from the said plaintiff on and before the 22nd day of September, 1923, and that his petition for divorce in aforesaid action No. 39874 was by the district court of Oklahoma county refused and denied; and that said defendant herein did procure the judgment attached to plaintiff''s petition allowing her support money in the sum of $ 75 per month; also that said plaintiff knew that said Roy Sims had paid no part of said judgment and was seeking to evade the same; that said plaintiff herein knew that the said Roy Sims had fled and departed from Oklahoma county to parts unknown, and said plaintiff knew the whereabouts of said Roy Sims, and having full knowledge of all these facts and circumstances, the two brothers entered into said conspiracy to defeat the defendant from procuring the satisfaction of her said judgment; that the said plaintiff paid no consideration for said property, is holding the same for and in behalf of his brother, the said Roy Sims, and for the sole and only purpose of cheating and defrauding the defendant herein; that the said Roy Sims has always ignored said judgment and refused to comply with the same, and that said judgment remains wholly unpaid and unsatisfied and defendant prays that the relief of plaintiff be denied; that the certified copy of the judgment be a valid and subsisting lien upon the real estate of Roy Sims of Seminole county, Okla., from and after the 27th day of January, 1927; that the attempted conveyance of warranty deed from Roy Sims to his brother, Quillie C. Sims, as evidenced by warranty deed as attached to plaintiff''s petition, be vacated and set aside and held for naught and be declared of no force and effect, and that defendant have such other and further relief as to the court may seem just and equitable.

¶4 The plaintiff filed a reply by way of general denial, and the matter came on for hearing on the 25th day of January, 1928 before the Honorable W. J. Crump, assigned district judge. The court held that the burden of proof was upon the defendant to establish her allegation of fraud and conspiracy, and after evidence was introduced from both sides the court found that the said conveyance from R. L. Sims was made to his brother, Quillie C. Sims, the plaintiff herein, for the purpose of defrauding defendant herein out of her rights under the judgment rendered by the district court of Oklahoma county and ordered the said deed canceled, vacated, and set aside, and decreed and impressed a lien upon the land in controversy for all sums then due under the judgment rendered in the district court of Oklahoma county. The court denied the plaintiff relief in his action to quiet title in and to himself to the premises in question.

¶5 The evidence showed that R. L. Sims filed a suit for divorce against May Sims, defendant herein, in Oklahoma county, Okla., and that said defendant filed therein an answer and cross-petition praying for separate maintenance. The court denied R. L. Sims a divorce and granted a decree to said defendant for separate maintenance, requiring said plaintiff to pay to his said wife the sum of $ 75 per month. No appeal was ever taken therefrom. This decree was granted September 22, 1923. It seems that no money was ever paid by the said Roy Sims for maintenance under said decree, and that thereafter his whereabouts were unknown to said defendant. James W. Sims, the father of Quillie C. Sims, the plaintiff herein, and R. L. Sims, the husband of defendant herein and the grantor of the said deed of conveyance to said Quillie C. Sims, died on the 20th of April, 1922, seized of 120 acres of land in Seminole county at the time of his death. R. L. Sims was decreed by the county court of Seminole county to be the owner of an undivided one-twelfth interest therein on the 27th day of February, 1927. The evidence on the part of Quillie Sims shows that his brother, R. L. Sims, returned to Oklahoma and visited him and his mother sometime in June, 1926, and at that time discussed with him and his mother about making a deed to his part of the estate of his deceased father to his brother, Quillie C. Sims. Quillie C. Sims states that the consideration was, using his own language, as follows: "* * * If I would stay with mother and take care of her he would deed me that property." At this time the said Quillie C. Sims was a minor, about 20 years of age, living with his mother and attending school. The land was transferred by said R. L. Sims to his brother, Quillie C. Sims, on the 21st day of February, 1927, and acknowledged before a...