White's Bank v. Farthing

• Decision Date: 26 January 1886
• Citation: White's Bank of Buffalo v. Farthing, 101 N.Y. 344, 4 N.E. 734 (N.Y. 1886)
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: WHITE'S BANK OF BUFFALO et al., Respondents, v. MATILDA FARTHING et al., Appellants.

101 N.Y. 344

4 N.E. 734

WHITE'S BANK OF BUFFALO

v.FARTHING and others.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Filed January 26, 1886.

Adelbert Moot, for appellants.

Truman C. White, for respondents.

ANDREWS, J.

The judgments in favor of the German American Bank were recovered November 13, 1883, and the deficiency judgment in favor of the banks other than the plaintiff, April 8, 1884. The judgment in favor of the plaintiff's bank was recovered February 4, 1884, and this action was commenced November 14, 1884. The several judgments became liens on lands fraudulently conveyed by Matilda Farthing, the judgment debtor, in the order of their docketing, and they could have been sold on executions issued on the judgments. The plaintiff, however, elected to bring its action to remove the alleged fraudulent obstruction created by the conveyances. If it succeeds in establishing the fraud, it will be entitled to a judgment setting aside the conveyances simply, in which case it can proceed to enforce its judgment by a sale of the land on execution, unembarrassed by the cloud created; or the court may proceed further, and compel the fraudulent grantees to convey the lands to a receiver, to be sold to satisfy the plaintiff's judgment.

The judgments in favor of the other banks will in no way be affected, whichever form the judgment in this action may take. If it simply sets aside the fraudulent conveyances, the land will remain charged with the liens of the several judgments in the order of their docketing, and the proceedings to enforce them will be regulated by the statute. If it goes further, and appoints a receiver, and directs a conveyance to him, a purchaser under the receiver's sale will take title as of the time of the debtor's conveyance to the receiver, subject, however, to the judgment in favor of the banks other than the plaintiff. Chautauque Co. Bank v. Risley, 19 N. Y. 369. The result of the plaintiff's action will not, therefore, affect the lien of the judgments in favor of the other banks who seek to intervene in this action.

The plaintiff seeks, also, to charge the Swan street lot with the lien of its judgment, on the ground that George Farthing caused it to be conveyed to Kelly as security for a debt owing by him to Kelly, which has been since paid, and that the judgment debtor, Matilda Farthing, as the devisee of George Farthing, is entitled to the land. The other banks may commence similar actions to reach the Swan street lot, and the plaintiff's action, followed by...