Legal Opinion

Smith v. Deidrick

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 15, 1882PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Wa-seca county, Buekham, J., presiding. The case is stated in the opinion. If the bankrupt act had not been in force when the transfer was made by John Deidrick to his wife, and the consideration on which it was made were a valid debt, then John Deidrick had a right to prefer his wife to other creditors. But the bankrupt law was in force and declared such conveyances void. U. S. Bev.

Read the full summary

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Wa-seca county, Buekham, J., presiding. The case is stated in the opinion. If the bankrupt act had not been in force when the transfer was made by John Deidrick to his wife, and the consideration on which it was made were a valid debt, then John Deidrick had a right to prefer his wife to other creditors. But the bankrupt law was in force and declared such conveyances void. U. S. Bev. St. § 5128. This court, like all state courts, is bound by the federal statute, which was then the paramount law. It is true that this is a state…

1Opinion of the Court

Mitchell, J.*

This is an action brought by plaintiff, a judgment creditor of defendant John Deidrick, in aid of his execution, and to reach, for the satisfaction of his judgment, certain real estate, the' title of which is in defendant Catherine, wife of said John, but which plaintiff claims is, as to creditors, the property of John. The pleadings and findings of the court are very voluminous, containing much *62that is not here important. ' The following statement of facts, although not full, and possibly not entirely accurate in immaterial details, will be sufficient for the purposes of this…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Mann v. FlowerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Mackellar v. PillsburySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  2. Berry v. O'ConnorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
  3. Crookston State Bank v. LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  4. Farmers Co-Operative Assn. of Bertha v. KotzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  5. Smith v. BrainerdSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887

2 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