Farmer v. Hawkins
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 33 — EQUITY APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. There is no substantial allegation in the pleading of appellee that' the assignment was made in contemplation of insolvency. The liability was incurred simultaneously with the mortgage. Hawkins was not, in fact, then unable to pay his debts. 2. There was no intent to defraud creditors. The creditors of Hawkins had notice of the mortgage by the recitals of the deed of assignment. (Swigertv.
Read the full summary
Case 33 — EQUITY APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. There is no substantial allegation in the pleading of appellee that' the assignment was made in contemplation of insolvency. The liability was incurred simultaneously with the mortgage. Hawkins was not, in fact, then unable to pay his debts. 2. There was no intent to defraud creditors. The creditors of Hawkins had notice of the mortgage by the recitals of the deed of assignment. (Swigertv. Bank of Ky., 17 B. Mon., 268; Bennett v. Titherington, 6 Bush, 196; Underwood v. Ogden, 6 B. Mon., 607; Ward v. Orotty, 4th Met., 61; Gen. Stat., 259;…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Cofer
The facts in this case are, in substance, these: Hawkins,, being insolvent, and liable to Farmer as surety for his. (Hawkins’) son, on a note for $500, Farmer loaned Haw-' kins $1,000, and surrendered the $500, and took a mortgage on Hawkins’ land for $1,500.
The mortgage was not recorded nor lodged for record for some months after its date. In the meantime, Hawkins made a general assignment for the benefit of all his creditors, but referring in the deed of assignment to the mortgage to Farmer in such way as to give notice to all claiming under the deed of the existence of the mortgage. In a…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McCutcheon & Co. v. Caldwell & SonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1890