Scheitlin v. Stone
New York Supreme Court
THIS action was brought by the plaintiffs as judgment creditors of the defendants, Edward Stone, William F. Kortright and James G. Littlewood, composing the firm of E. Stone & Go., after execution returned unsatisfied, to set aside a sale and transfer of the stock in trade of the firm to the other defendants, Edward F. Stone and John H. Hall, as being made to hinder, delay and defraud creditors.
Read the full summary
THIS action was brought by the plaintiffs as judgment creditors of the defendants, Edward Stone, William F. Kortright and James G. Littlewood, composing the firm of E. Stone & Go., after execution returned unsatisfied, to set aside a sale and transfer of the stock in trade of the firm to the other defendants, Edward F. Stone and John H. Hall, as being made to hinder, delay and defraud creditors. The complaint charged that previous to the pretended sale the firm had failed, and suspended payments, and declared themselves to be insolvent, and were in fact insolvent at the time of the sale; that…
1Opinion of the CourtIngraham, P. J.
I see nothing in the transaction in this case, upon the contract as made between the parties, which will warrant us in setting aside the sale.
The purchasers deny all knowledge of a fraudulent intent; they show that the sale, as made, was the best mode of getting the highest price for the property sold, and that the notes, when sold, were paid to the creditors, and have all been paid by the makers. I know of no principle of law that prevents a party who is involved in debt from selling his property, nor from making such sale on credit, nor from taking the notes received for his goods and…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Loeschigk v. . BridgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1870