Williamson v. Wachenheim

• Decision Date: 22 April 1882
• Citation: 12 N.W. 302,58 Iowa 277
• Parties: WILLIAMSON ET AL. v. WACHENHEIM ET AL
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

12 N.W. 302

58 Iowa 277

WILLIAMSON ET AL. v. WACHENHEIM ET AL

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

April 22, 1882

Appeal from Warren Circuit Court.

THE defendant Wachenheim was the owner of a half-lot in the city of Indianola, and also a tract of real estate adjoining the city. On the 5th day of June, 1876, he conveyed the last named premises to his co-defendant Boehler, and on the 22d of January, 1877, he conveyed the half-lot to Boehler. On the 12th day of January, 1878, the plaintiffs commenced an action against the defendant Wachenheim, claiming of him $ 500 for professional services. The action was commenced by attachment, which was levied upon said real estate. On March 15, 1878, a judgment was rendered for the plaintiffs for $ 500, and special execution awarded against the attached property, upon which a sale was had to the plaintiffs, May 6 1878, and on July 19, 1879, a sheriff's deed of the property was made to the plaintiffs. By this action, which was commenced in February, 1880, it is sought to set aside and cancel the conveyances made by Wachenheim to Boehler upon the ground that the same were made for the purpose of cheating and defrauding the plaintiffs and others, creditors of Wachenheim. Issue having been joined there was a trial to the court and a decree was entered for the plaintiffs. The defendants appeal.

MODIFIED AND AFFIRMED.

P. F Bartle and H. McNeil, for appellants.

Henderson & Berry, for appellees.

OPINION

ROTHROCK, J.

I.

As to the conveyance made in June, 1876, there is no foundation in the evidence for the decree. There is no evidence whatever that it was made with the intent or purpose to hinder, delay or defraud creditors. It does not appear that Wachenheim was indebted to any one at that time, nor that he made the conveyance in contemplation of incurring indebtedness thereafter. The land conveyed adjoined the city of Indianola. The city authorities instituted proceedings to annex the land to the municipality, and the conveyance was made to make one more freeholder to resist the proposed annexation. It was done under the advise of the plaintiff as counsel. Under these circumstances the court should have entered a decree quieting the title of Boehler to the land conveyed to him in June, 1876, as prayed in a cross-petition filed by him.

II. The main controversy is as to the half-lot conveyed in January 1877. Counsel for appellants make some question in regard to the validity of the claim of plaintiffs for counsel fees. That question has been adjudicated. Whether unjustly or not is a question which cannot now be inquired into. Some claim is made also to the effect that the plaintiffs were not creditors of Wachenheim at the time the conveyance was made. The evidence shows that at that time Wachenheim was having serious trouble on account of a certain indictment for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors, and a civil action was pending against him in which $ 5,000 was claimed as damages by the wife of one Lippencott for the alleged unlawful sales of intoxicating liquor to him. In short, Wachenheim had established himself at or near Indianola, at a place which he named and designated as the "Blue Goose," for the purpose of selling intoxicating liquors. He was prosecuted before a justice of the peace upon some thirteen informations. It was sought to annex his property and place of business to the corporation and bring it within the city which he resisted by legal proceedings. In all these prosecutions and proceedings the plaintiffs were his legal advisers and counsel. We think it sufficiently appears that he was indebted to them when he made the conveyance.

The conveyance was made as has been said on the 22d of January 1877. The civil action for $ 5,000 damages was then pending. There had been a trial on the indictment and a verdict of guilty had been returned, and the cause was standing on a ...