Thompkins v. Adams

Decision Date09 February 1889
Citation41 Kan. 38,20 P. 530
PartiesMARY H. THOMPKINS v. J. Q. ADAMS
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Error from Sedgwick District Court.

THE opinion contains a sufficient statement of the facts.

Judgment affirmed.

Hatton & Ruggles, for plaintiff in error.

Sluss & Stanley, for defendant in error.

SIMPSON C. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

SIMPSON, C.:

The material facts are comprised in the following special findings of fact made by the trial court at the February term, 1886:

"1. On the 5th day of April, 1883, P. H. Thompkins executed an instrument in writing whereby he purported to assign and convey to William G. Randall all his real and personal property for the benefit of his creditors, and which assignment purported to be made under and in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the state of Illinois, entitled 'An act concerning voluntary assignments, and conferring jurisdiction therein upon county courts,' approved March 22, 1877.

"2. At the time of said assignment the said P. H. Thompkins resided and was doing business and had the greater part of the assigned property in Woodford county, in the state of Illinois.

"3. Said William G. Randall did not accept said assignment, or the trust thereby created.

"4. On the 5th day of April, 1883, the said instrument of assignment was filed for record in the office of the recorder of deeds of Woodford county, Illinois.

"5. At the time of the execution and recording said assignment there was no schedule of the property attached to or filed with said assignment, describing the property intending to be assigned. The said assignment contained the statement that the property thereby intended to be assigned was 'fully and particularly enumerated and described in an inventory under oath of said assignor, thereto annexed, marked 'Schedule B,' and made part thereof.'

"6. On the 11th day of April, 1883, there was made and filed in said recorder's office a statement under oath of said P. H. Thompkins of the assets of said assignor, and attached to said assignment, and intended to operate as such 'Schedule B' thereto.

"7. In said statement of assets was contained a description, among others, as follows: N. E. qr. sec. 9, T. 34, R. 2 E., Sumner Co., Kansas; S. E. qr. sec. 9, T. 34, R. 2 E., Sumner Co., Kansas; N.W. qr. sec. 22, T. 28, R. 2 W., Sedgwick Co., Kansas. But the same in no way described any land in section 4, township 34, range 2 east, in said county of Sumner.

"8. On the 12th day of April, 1883, the said P. H. Thompkins signed and acknowledged two quitclaim deeds, in which 'David A. Espey, assignee in trust for the benefit of my creditors,' was named as grantee, one of which said deeds purported to convey to said Espey the northwest quarter of section 22, in township 28 south, range 2 west, in Sedgwick county, Kansas, and one of which purported to convey to said Espey the southeast quarter of section 4 and the northeast quarter of section 9, in township 34 south, of range 2 east, in Sumner county, Kansas. Neither of said deeds was delivered to said Espey, nor accepted by him.

"9. On the 16th day of April, 1883, the said P. H. Thompkins filed said first deed for record in the office of the register of deeds of Sedgwick county, Kansas, and on the 16th day of April, 1883, at one o'clock P. M., filed said second deed for record in the office of the register of deeds of Sumner county, Kansas."

"11. There was no consideration whatever for the execution of either of said quitclaim deeds, and they were both executed for the purpose of preventing the creditors of said Thompkins from levying legal process upon said land until said assignment should be accepted by said Randall, or an assignee should be appointed in his stead by the county court of Woodford county, Illinois.

"12. On the 14th day of April, 1883, the plaintiff commenced this action against the said P. H. Thompkins in this court, in which he obtained personal service upon said Thompkins, and on the same day procured an order of attachment to be issued in said action directed to the sheriff of Sedgwick county, Kansas, which attachment was on the 14th day of April, 1883, duly levied upon the northwest quarter of section 22, in township 28, range 2 west, in Sedgwick county, Kansas; and on said 14th day of April, 1883, said plaintiff procured an order of attachment to be issued in said action directed to the sheriff of Sumner county, Kansas, which attachment was on the 16th day of April, 1883, at 3 o'clock P. M., duly levied on the southeast quarter of section 4, and the northeast quarter of section 9, in township 34, range 2 east, in Sumner county.

"13. At the June term, 1883, of this court, which term began on the 5th day of June, 1883, the plaintiff obtained judgment against said P. H. Thompkins in said action, for the sum of $ 1,572.80, and an order for the sale of the above-described attached real estate to satisfy the same.

"14. On the 26th day of April, 1883, the county court of Woodford county, Illinois, appointed David A. Espey assignee of said estate of the said P. H. Thompkins in the place of the said William G. Randall, who had failed to accept said assignment; and the said David A. Espey then and there accepted said trust, and qualified as such assignee under the act of the legislature of Illinois, aforesaid.

"15. On the 29th day of June, 1883, the said assignment, and said schedule of assets, and a copy of the order of the county court of Woodford County, Illinois, appointing said David A. Espey assignee thereof, were filed for record, and recorded in the office of the register of deeds of Sedgwick county, Kansas. And on the 17th day of August, 1883, the same were filed for record, and recorded in the office of the register of deeds of Sumner county, Kansas.

"16. On the 20th day of September, 1883, the said David A. Espey presented to the county court of Woodford county, Illinois, the following petition:

"'STATE OF ILLINOIS, WOODFORD COUNTY, ss.--COUNTY COURT, September Term, 1883.--In the matter of the assignment of Philip H. Thompkins: Now comes David A. Espey, assignee in the said matter, by Hopkins & Hammond, his attorneys, and shows to this honorable court, that among other assets of the said estate assigned to and inventoried by him, are the following tracts of land, viz.: Block 14 in Gibson's addition to the town of El Paso, containing about fifteen acres; also the northeast quarter of section number 9, township number 34 north, range number 2 east, in Sumner county, Kansas; also the southeast quarter of the section last aforesaid; also the northwest quarter of section 22, township number 28 north, range 2 west, in Sedgwick county, Kansas. The said tracts of land are all of them seriously incumbered by mortgages, tax liens, attachment suits now pending and undetermined, and the dower right of Mary H. Thompkins, the wife of said assignor, rendered it difficult to sell said land at any adequate price; and further shows that said Mary H. Thompkins has offered to purchase the title vested in him as such assignee upon the following terms, viz.: To give for said first-named tract the sum of seven hundred dollars in cash, and take the same subject to all existing liens and incumbrances; to give for the second and third tracts above named the sum of three hundred dollars, and take the same subject to all incumbrances. To give for the last tract above named the sum of four hundred dollars, and take the same subject to all liens and incumbrances; and further, to give your petitioner a quitclaim deed, releasing all her homestead and dower rights in all other real estate vested in said petitioner by said assignment. And petitioner shows that in its involved condition said property could not be advantageously sold at auction; that he has made diligent effort to dispose of the same at private sale, and has not been able to obtain any better offer than the one above named. He believes it will be for the best interests of the estate to accept said offer.

"'Wherefore, he most respectfully asks the order and direction of this honorable court in said matter. DAVID A. ESPEY, Assignee.'

"17. On the 20th day of September, 1883, the county court of Woodford county, Illinois, made the following order:

"'STATE OF ILLINOIS, WOODFORD COUNTY, ss.--COUNTY COURT, September Term, 1883.--In the matter of the assignment of Philip H. Thompkins: This day this matter coming on for further hearing upon the petition of the assignee herein for leave to sell block number 14 in Gibson's addition to the town of El Paso, in the county of Woodford and state of Illinois, also the northeast quarter and the southeast quarter of section number 9, in township 34, range 2, Sumner county, Kansas, also the northwest quarter of section 22, in township number 28, range number 2, in Sedgwick county, Kansas, to Mary H. Thompkins, in consideration of fourteen hundred dollars, and a release of her dower and homestead rights in all other lands belonging to said estate, and the court having heard the proofs and examined the facts in the matter, and finding that in the present involved and incumbered condition of said property it will be for the best interest of the creditors of said estate to accept said offer, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the said David A. Espey, assignee, be and is hereby authorized and directed, upon the receipt from the said Mary H. Thompkins of fourteen hundred dollars and a deed of quitclaim of all her interest in all the other lands belonging to said estate to him, the said assignee, to execute, acknowledge and deliver to said Mary H. Thompkins a good and sufficient assignee's deed of the aforesaid lands and premises, and thereof make report to this court. W. S. GIBSON, County Judge.'

"18...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Continental Oil Co. v. American Co-Op. Ass'n
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • July 29, 1924
    ... ... no application in this instance, because of the fact that no ... dividend was declared or paid; and cite Thompkins v ... Adams, 41 Kan. 38, 20 P. 530, in support of this ... contention. But no such exception is made in this court in ... Greene v. Gross, ... ...
  • Williams v. Kemper, Hundley & McDonald Dry Goods Co.
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • February 13, 1896
    ... ... against this rule: Alabama, Massachusetts, Iowa, and possibly ... others. We have been cited the case of Thompkins v ... Adams, 41 Kan. 38, 20 P. 530, as holding that a deed of ... assignment for benefit of creditors made in Illinois was ... ineffectual to ... ...
  • McNutt v. Nellans
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • May 7, 1910
    ... ... There ... is no serious contention here that the deed of the foreign ... assignee conveyed any title. (Thompkins v. Adams, ... 41 Kan. 38, 20 P. 530; Watson v. Holden, 58 Kan ... 657, 50 P. 883.) The defendant concedes that his title was ... defective, but ... ...
  • Liberty Oil Co. v. Condon Nat. Bank
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • July 9, 1923
    ... ... on an order by and with the approval of a court of competent ... jurisdiction of the state of Kansas. Thompkins v ... Adams, 41 Kan. 38, 20 P. 530; Watson v. Holden, ... 58 Kan. 657, 50 P. 883; McNutt v. Nellans, 82 Kan ... 424, 108 P. 834. This action was ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT