Chapman v. White Sewing Machine Co.
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the chancery court, second district, of Hinds county. Hon. Henry C. Conn, Chancellor. The White Sewing Machine Company, the appellee, was the complainant in the court below; the appellants, William C. Chapman and others, were defendants there.
Read the full summary
From the chancery court, second district, of Hinds county. Hon. Henry C. Conn, Chancellor. The White Sewing Machine Company, the appellee, was the complainant in the court below; the appellants, William C. Chapman and others, were defendants there. The sewing machine company had procured a judgment against William C. Chapman, and the object of the bill of complaint was to vacate and annul the deed made by the debtor to his wife and son, mentioned in the opinion, and to subject the property therein attempted to be conveyed to the payment of the. judgment. It appeared that at the time the deed…
1Opinion of the CourtWhitfield, J.
The testimony shows clearly that, as to Mrs. Chapman, the deed to her one-half interest was delivered to and accepted by her, with full knowledge of its contents, for a valuable consideration, long antedating appellee’s claims. As to the son, the testimony is too uncertain to show delivery to him, or to his mother for him. He never saw the deed; says it never was delivered to him. And there is nothing to show that it was ever delivered to the mother for him. There is no fraud whatever shown on the part of the mother or son, and the father had the right to prefer them. He did this effectually…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Anderson v. AndersonMississippi Supreme Court · 1960
- Chapman v. White Sewing Machine Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1900
- Day v. OldMississippi Supreme Court · 1882