Moore v. Waldstein
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Jefferson Chancery Court. At 'common law any conveyance made by a testator, even though void, was held to revoke a will. 29 Am. & Eng. Enc. Eaw, 308; 1 Jar.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jefferson Chancery Court. At 'common law any conveyance made by a testator, even though void, was held to revoke a will. 29 Am. & Eng. Enc. Eaw, 308; 1 Jar. Wills, 308; 1 Woerner, Adm’n, § 53; Sand. & H. Dig. § § 7397-8; 84 N. W. 293; 15 S. E. 584. A fraudulent conveyance is good as between the parties. 11 Ark. 41 x ; 47 Ark. 301; 52 Ark. 171; 67 Ark. 328. The interest of Eizette Wald-stein, which was held in trust, passed to her heirs. 45 Ark. 410; 43 Ark. 420; 44 Ark. 365; 30 Ark. 136. Cases where the fraudulent conveyance had been made before the passage of the act were as much…
1Opinion of the CourtBattue, J.
On January 8, 1891, Mrs. Eizette Waldstein made a will, devising her property, consisting of real estate in Jefferson County, in this State, to her son Henry, to be held by him for twenty years for the use of her children, and then distributed among them.
On April 8, 1895, she, in consideration of $10 and love and affection, executed a deed to her son Henry, conveying to him all her property, worth $25,000 or $30,000, evidently for the purpose' of hindering, delaying or defrauding her creditors. The statement of the evidence of that fact in this opinion can serve no useful purpose.
On December…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bate v. . GrahamNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Tuck v. . WalkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
3Cited by10 opinions
- Johnson v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Davis v. DavisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- Deniston v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- Thomas v. TimondsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Murphy v. MurphySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.