Legal Opinion

Scholle v. Finnell

California Supreme Court

Decided December 12, 1913No. Sac. No. 1915PublishedCited by 19 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

This action was brought in Tehama County by the plaintiff as a creditor of John Finnell, deceased, to have set aside several separate conveyances of real property made by him to the four appellants, his sons, all of which, it is claimed, were made by him when insolvent and in fraud of his creditors, particularly the plaintiff; that he be adjudged to have a lien on said property, and for an equitable execution to satisfy it.

The plaintiff had judgment setting aside three of the conveyances as fraudulent and void and granting the relief prayed for, and each of the defendants appeals from that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Brown v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Hager v. ShindlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
  3. Chalmers v. SheehyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Judson v. LyfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Ohm v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Newport v. HattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Cox v. SchnerrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Campbell v. GenshleaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Scholle v. FinnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Strangman v. DukeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956

14 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