Torrey Cedar Co. v. Eul
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Oconto county: S. D. Hastings, Je., Circuit Judge. This is a creditors’ suit. The plaintiff was a judgment creditor of the defendant Theodore Eul, Sr., by judgment for $2,637.72, rendered and docketed December 14, 1891, on which execution had been returned unsatisfied.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Oconto county: S. D. Hastings, Je., Circuit Judge. This is a creditors’ suit. The plaintiff was a judgment creditor of the defendant Theodore Eul, Sr., by judgment for $2,637.72, rendered and docketed December 14, 1891, on which execution had been returned unsatisfied. November 12, 1889, and after the incurring of the indebtedness on which said judgment was rendered, the defendant Eul, Sr., who was then sixty years of age, conveyed to his son and daughter (Theodore, Jr., and Grace), in common, 220 acres of land, which he had owned for a number…
1Opinion of the CourtWiNslow, J.
The findings of fact cannot be disturbed, because they are supported by sufficient evidence. The transfer of the homestead cannot be attacked, because it w;as exempt. The $1,700 mortgage was practically a first lien on the 180 acres of land outside of the homestead, because that must first be sold in case of foreclosure. Rozek v. Redzinski, 87 Wis. 525. There was left, therefore, an equity of redemption amounting to $300 in the non-exempt land, which the appellant could reach in case the conveyance was fraudulent. The court below was- of opinion that the children paid a full and adequate…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rozek v. RedzinskiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by1 opinion
- Michaud v. MichaudSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1930