Hendrickson v. Winnie
New York Supreme Court
The Plaintiff had two judgments against Peter B. Winne, upon which, executions had been returned unsatisfied; he filed a creditor’s hill upon the judgments, and made the other Defendants, who were the sons of Peter B. Winne, parties, alleging that prior to the recovery of the judgments, Peter B. Winne had fraudulently conveyed to them his property, including certain real estate described in the bill.
Read the full summary
The Plaintiff had two judgments against Peter B. Winne, upon which, executions had been returned unsatisfied; he filed a creditor’s hill upon the judgments, and made the other Defendants, who were the sons of Peter B. Winne, parties, alleging that prior to the recovery of the judgments, Peter B. Winne had fraudulently conveyed to them his property, including certain real estate described in the bill. The bill having been taken as confessed by all of the Defendants, the counsel for the Plaintiff, moved for a decree declaring the conveyance fraudulent and void, and directing the receiver to be…
1Opinion of the Court
Harris, Justice.
The bill having been taken as confessed by the Defendants, the Plaintiff is entitled to such a decree as the state of facts presented in his bill will justify. His counsel is mistaken in supposing that because the Defendants have admitted all the allegations and charges in the bill, they have thereby consented that a decree shall be entered against them as prayed for in the bill. It is the duty of the court to see that the appropriate decree in the case is entered, without reference to what is asked for in the prayer of the bill. The allegations of fraud in respect to the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Bryer v. FoersterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897