Dwight v. Brown
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was a bill in chancery, stating, That on the 19th of June 1829, Thomas Brown was indebted to the plaintiffs, severally, in divers sums of meney particularly specified; that with intent to hinder, delay and defraud them, and to prevent the payment and collection of their debts, and to place his property out of the reach of legal process, and preserve it for his own use, he then combined and conspired with his sons Thomas A. Brown, Owen Brown, and Fenner Brown, to give…
Read the full summary
This was a bill in chancery, stating, That on the 19th of June 1829, Thomas Brown was indebted to the plaintiffs, severally, in divers sums of meney particularly specified; that with intent to hinder, delay and defraud them, and to prevent the payment and collection of their debts, and to place his property out of the reach of legal process, and preserve it for his own use, he then combined and conspired with his sons Thomas A. Brown, Owen Brown, and Fenner Brown, to give them promissory notes, and procure writs of attachment, and obtain judgments and executions thereon, and cause said…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmek, Ch. J.
In this case several objections have been made to the determination of the superior court, which excite no difficulty.
Of this description are those, which relate to two of the plaintiffs.
The declaration of Thomas Broum that he owed Á. Steere and had made to him a lease of the manufactory, was good evidence, under the circumstances of the case, to show, that he was indebted to A. & C. Steere, who, under this firm, were traders in company. The debt from Brown was charged on book, by the company; nor has' it been suggested in proof, that he owed A, Steere individually. A. Steere…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cook v. SwanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1823
3Cited by3 opinions
- KimberlySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1896
- Chesnut-Hill Reservoir Co. v. ChaseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1840
- Ross v. WebsterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893