Legal Opinion

Second National Bank of Beloit v. Merrill

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 17, 1891PublishedCited by 15 opinions

APPEAL from tbe Circuit Court for Hock County. Garnishment. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtOetoN, J.

This is another of the garnishee actions in the main action of the respondent bank against Merrill & Houston Iron Works, Sereno T. Merrill and 0. F. G. Collins, as set out in the preceding case, ante, p. 142. As the result of the trial of the garnishee issue, the circuit court found and adjudged the deed executed by S. T. Merrill to Jame B. Merrill, his wife, on November 28, 1882, of a triangular piece of land in the city of Beloit, was so made with intent to defraud creditors, and is void, and other *153things hereafter mentioned. The following are believed to be the main facts established by…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gray v. . BartonNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
  2. Barnett v. HarshbargerIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Dice v. IrvinIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Henschel v. MaurerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Brader v. BraderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Morrish v. MorrishSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  3. Fawcett v. FawcettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Charmley v. CharmleyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Banfield v. SchuldermanOregon Supreme Court · 1931

10 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