Loucheim & Co. v. First Nat. Bank of Talladega
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Talladega Chancery Court. Tried before the Hon. S. K. McSpadden. The bill in this case was filed by Loucheim & Co., a partnership, against E. B. Eulmer, J. E. Denny, and the Eirst National Bank of Talladega, and sought to set aside, as fraudulent and void against the complainants, a deed of trust executed by • said E. B. Eulmer to the said Eirst National Bank of Talladega, conveying a stock of goods in store at Syllacauga, with a provision that said Denny should…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Talladega Chancery Court. Tried before the Hon. S. K. McSpadden. The bill in this case was filed by Loucheim & Co., a partnership, against E. B. Eulmer, J. E. Denny, and the Eirst National Bank of Talladega, and sought to set aside, as fraudulent and void against the complainants, a deed of trust executed by • said E. B. Eulmer to the said Eirst National Bank of Talladega, conveying a stock of goods in store at Syllacauga, with a provision that said Denny should take charge of the same as trustee, and sell and pay the debts due to said bank by said Eulmer. The facts alleged in the…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.
The general averments of tbe bill tbat tbe deed of trust executed by Fulmer to secure certain recited indebtedness to tbe Bank of Talladega was tbe consummation of a plan conceived by all tbe defendants for tbe purpose of hindering, delaying and defrauding tbe complainants and other creditors of Fulmer, are of no consequence in passing upon tbe demurrers to tbe bill, aside from the facts alleged therein as constituting tbe fraud com|)lained of, and relied on as a predicate for tbe relief prayed. Or, in other words, tbe inquiry of fraud vel non on tbe averments of tbe bill is to be determined…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Globe Iron Roofing & Corrugating Co. v. ThacherSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Mobile Savings Bank v. McDonnellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
- Perry Insurance & Trust Co. v. FosterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Murray, Dibrell & Co. v. McNealy & CuretonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Harris v. RussellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
3Cited by15 opinions
- McDonald v. PearsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Peters Mineral Land Co. v. HooperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Allen v. RiddleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1904
- Cannon v. Birmingham Trust & Savings Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1915
- Coal City Coal & Coke Co. v. Hazard Powder Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1895
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.