Trimble v. Woodhead v. 98 20

Decision Date01 October 1880
Citation102 U.S. 647,26 L.Ed. 290
PartiesTRIMBLE v. WOODHEAD. Glenny v. Langdon (98 U. S. 20) reaffirmed
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Kentucky.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Mr. John G. Carlisle for the appellant.

Mr. Stanley Matthews and Mr. William M. Ramsey, contra.

MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the court.

The ppellant, James S. Trimble, who was complainant below, brought his bill in chancery, which was dismissed on final hearing upon it, the answer, replication, and proofs.

Its substance is that Joshua Woodhead was largely indebted to the complainant for government bonds and money loaned, and that the judgment which had been rendered against him therefor proved unavailing; that Ann Woodhead, his wife, held the legal title to certain valuable lands, which were purchased with his money, and conveyed to her with intent to defraud his creditors; and that valuable improvements had been placed on the lands, the payment for which was made with his money. It prayed that the lands be subjected to sale for the payment of the judgment.

The answer of Ann denied all this, and also set up as a bar to the relief prayed a former suit in one of the State courts concerning the same subject between the same parties. The record of the proceedings in the State court is set out in full, and much evidence on both sides as to the main allegation of fraud alleged in the bill in the present suit is found in the record, all of which, in the view we take of the case, is immaterial.

The defendant, Joshua, answered 'that long before the bringing of this suit this defendant had filed his petition in this honorable court under the bankrupt law of the United States, and the said orator, the said James S. Trimble, was duly notified of the same, and the claim of the said orator was therein set forth, and after the proper proceedings as prescribed in said law, this defendant was on his petition adjudged a bankrupt, and by a judgment of this court he was finally discharged from all of his indebtedness, and the claim of the orator was one of the debts from which he was thus discharged; he files herewith a copy of his judgment of discharge as part hereof.'

The proceedings in bankruptcy are not set forth in this record, nor have we been able to find in it a copy of Woodhead's discharge; but his answer is sworn to. The complainant also filed an amended bill, making John T. Levis, the alleged assignee in bankruptcy of Joshua, a defendant, and he says that the judgment in the State court was rendered in his favor after Joshua's discharge as a bankrupt.

It may, therefore, be accepted as established by the pleadings that Woodhead was regularly discharged of all his debts by proceedings in bankruptcy, and that in those proceedings John T. Levis was made the assignee with the usual effect of such an appointment.

It is as well to observe here that while the amended bill of the complainant made Levis a defendant in his character of assignee, and the record shows an order of court for process to issue, no writ, nor any other notice to him, nor the entry of his appearance in person or by attorney, is found in the record. As to him, therefore, and the rights which he represented, the bill is of no effect.

The case of Glenny v. Langdon (98 U. S. 20) conclusively establishes the proposition that the rights asserted in this bill passed to the assignee in bankruptcy, and that a creditor of Woodhead...

To continue reading

Request your trial
79 cases
  • Macdonald v. Rumer
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 3 Julio 1928
    ...conveyance of a bankrupt is vested in the trustee in bankruptcy. Bankruptcy Act, secs. 67, 70; Glenney v. Langdon, 98 U.S. 20; Trimble v. Woodhead, 102 U.S. 647; Moyer v. Dewey, 103 U.S. 301; Blake v. Meadows, 225 Mo. 26; Riggs v. Price, 277 Mo. 333. (2) A stranger cannot voluntarily inject......
  • Holders v. Large Private Beneficial Owners (In re Tribune Co. Fraudulent Conveyance Litig.)
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 29 Marzo 2016
    ...but clear. The principal Supreme Court precedent held that such claims are the property of the debtor's estate. Trimble v. Woodhead, 102 U.S. 647, 649, 26 L.Ed. 290 (1880). It is a very old decision but has not been expressly overruled. Subsequent court of appeals decisions are bountiful in......
  • In re Tribune Company Fraudulent Conveyance Litigation
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 29 Marzo 2016
    ...but clear. The principal Supreme Court precedent held that such claims are the property of the debtor’s estate. Trimble v. Woodhead, 102 U.S. 647, 649, 26 L.Ed. 290 (1880). It is a very old decision but has not been expressly overruled. Subsequent court of appeals decisions are bountiful in......
  • In re Tribune Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 23 Septiembre 2013
    ...Creditors, Defendants cite the Bankruptcy Act of 1867 and the Supreme Court's interpretation of that statute in Trimble v. Woodhead, 102 U.S. 647, 649, 26 L.Ed. 290 (1880). Although the Court in Trimble barred a creditor from pursuing a state-law avoidance claim after the trustee had failed......
  • 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