Moses v. Katzenberger
Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati
The facts in this case, as they appear from the petition, answer, and proof of plaintiff himself, are, that the plaintiff, being indebted to the defendants and other creditors, in the amounts specified in three several judgments, entered into an agreement with the defendants, by which the latter undertook to procure from the other creditors of the plaintiff, a release of their several judgments, on payment of twenty five cents on the dollar; in consideration of which, the…
Read the full summary
The facts in this case, as they appear from the petition, answer, and proof of plaintiff himself, are, that the plaintiff, being indebted to the defendants and other creditors, in the amounts specified in three several judgments, entered into an agreement with the defendants, by which the latter undertook to procure from the other creditors of the plaintiff, a release of their several judgments, on payment of twenty five cents on the dollar; in consideration of which, the defendants were 'to receive twenty five per cent, additional. In pursuance of this agreement, an instrument was drawn up,…
1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.
Upon a view of the entire Case, the Court is of opinion with the plaintiff, that the contract is void, as being made in fraud of third persons.
Both parties agree, that one shall use' his exertions to procure a release from the other creditors, on a supposition by the latter that all creditors are faring alike; whilst, in fact, the defendants are to receive double the amount that the others receive. But, the agreement is not void for the excess merely ; if at all, it is void in tolo. Where one creditor makes a stipulation for an additional benefit or security to himself, without the knowledge…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hooker v. De PalosOhio Superior Court, Cincinnati · 1873