Bridges v. Bidwell
Nebraska Supreme Court
Appeal from Johnson county district court. Broady, J. A gift by a debtor to his son, prior to insolvency, is not fraudulent as to subsequent creditors. Plinde’s Lessee v. Longworih, 11 Wheat., 200. Sexton v. Wheaton, 8 Wheat., 229. It will be considered as an advancement. Vanzant v. Davies, 6 Ohio St., 52. Infancy cannot be used as a protection for fraud. Tyler, Inf. & Cov., p. 140, § 94. Elliott v. Horn, 10 Ala., 848, 353.
1Opinion of the Court
Maxwell, Ch. «T.
This is an action to foreclose a mortgage on real estate. The plaintiffs allege in their petition that Otto Bidwell and Clara Bidwell are partners under the name of Bidwell & Brother; "that Henry E. Bidwell and Mary Bidwell are the-father and mother of said Clara and Otto Bidwell; that during and prior to the year 1884, Bidwell Bro. carried on business in Sterling, Nebraska.
On October 1st Bidwell & Bro. were indebted to Bridges & White for flour furnished in the sum of $1,121.13, and on said day executed and delivered to Bridges & White-their promissoiy note for said sum, due…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Keener v. HarrodCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1852
- Abbott v. Omaha Smelting & Refining Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1876
- Fry's v. Lexington & Big Sandy RailroadCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1859
- Weisbrod v. Chicago & North-Western Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1864
- McMurtry v. BrownNebraska Supreme Court · 1877
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cram v. CotrellNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
- Mulligan v. SnavelyNebraska Supreme Court · 1929
- Schmidt v. HortonNevada Supreme Court · 1930