Coolidge v. Melvin
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
This was an action of trover for a quantity of corn, brought October 24, 185T; and from the agreement of the parties and copies of the papers exhibited, it appeared that by indentures between the plaintiff, John T. Coolidge, and Charles Coolidge, of September 1, 1841, the latter conveyed to the plaintiff his dwelling-house, in Lynn, Massachusetts; the indenture reciting that said Charles wished to settle the property on his wife and children; that he owed some debts; that…
Read the full summary
This was an action of trover for a quantity of corn, brought October 24, 185T; and from the agreement of the parties and copies of the papers exhibited, it appeared that by indentures between the plaintiff, John T. Coolidge, and Charles Coolidge, of September 1, 1841, the latter conveyed to the plaintiff his dwelling-house, in Lynn, Massachusetts; the indenture reciting that said Charles wished to settle the property on his wife and children; that he owed some debts; that the plaintiff had agreed to advance $500 to pay them, and would advance more, if needed, in consideration that Charles…
1Opinion of the CourtBellows, J.
The main question in this case is whether the conveyance by Charles Coolidge to the plaintiff was fraudulent and void in respect to subsequent creditors, and bearing upon this question are numerous decisions in this state, arising under the statute of 18 Eliz., ch. 5, in some of which, and especially in Coburn v. Pickering, the law has been discussed with signal ability. In order to make a correct application of the principles established to the case before us, it may be useful to review briefly these decisions.
In the case of Coburn v. Pickering, 3 N. H. 415, it was decided, upon great…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sexton v. WheatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Hinde's Lessee v. LongworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1826
- Reade v. LivingstonNew York Court of Chancery · 1818
- Hyslop & Cambpell v. ClarkeNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Hallett v. ThompsonNew York Court of Chancery · 1836
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Corning v. RecordsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1898
- Lang v. StockwellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875
- In re: DBMP LLC, Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants, and Sander L. Esserman, in his capacity as Legal Representative for Future Asbestos Claimants, each on behalf of the estate of DBMP LLC v. CertainTeed LLC, CertainTeed Holding Corporation, and Saint-Gobain CorporationUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2026