Legal Opinion

United States National Bank v. Penrod

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 26, 1946No. Appeal, 22PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Allen M. Stearns,

May a judgment creditor of a husband attach, in execution, the joint bank account of a husband and wife held as tenants by the entireties? The court below de,cided that the attachments were valid on averments that the fund was created in violation of the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act of May 21,1921, P: L. 1045, 39 PS, section 351 et seq. From the court’s refusal to grant defendant’s motion for judgment n. o; v. this appeal was taken. ■ ' ■ :

The facts are not in dispute. On and before October 1943 the husband was insolvent. Since 1933 he had been…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Madden v. Glosztonyi Savings & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  2. Gasner v. PierceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  3. Gallagher EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  4. Iscovitz v. FildermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  5. Wakefield v. WakefieldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Amadon v. Amadon Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  2. In Re WeissUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1980
  3. Constitution Bank v. OlsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. Taylor v. KaufholdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  5. Zipperlein EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API