Dennistoun v. Malard
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Appeal from the Commercial Court of New Orleans, Watts, J. 1st. It was a giving in payment, nota sale, and thero was no real delivery. C. C. 2028, 2626. 2d. It was made when the seller, or rather the transferror, was insolvent. C. C, 1965, 1972. 3d. Such transfers, within a year .proceeding insolvency, are presumptive of fraud in both vendor and vendee, who must prove their good faith. Acts of 1840, p. 133, ss. 14,19. Hodge v. Morgan, 2 Mart. N. S. 61. 4th.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Commercial Court of New Orleans, Watts, J. 1st. It was a giving in payment, nota sale, and thero was no real delivery. C. C. 2028, 2626. 2d. It was made when the seller, or rather the transferror, was insolvent. C. C, 1965, 1972. 3d. Such transfers, within a year .proceeding insolvency, are presumptive of fraud in both vendor and vendee, who must prove their good faith. Acts of 1840, p. 133, ss. 14,19. Hodge v. Morgan, 2 Mart. N. S. 61. 4th. Malard's continuing in possessson was proof presumptive of fraud. C. C. 1915, 2456. 5 Touh, no. 41. Pierce v. Curtis, 6 Mart. 418.…
1Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the court was pronounced bjr
Seidell, J.
The plaintiffs leased to Malard a shop in tho city, and while he was in possession, on tho 14th day of January, 1843, being in insolvent circumstances, ho executed to John Hunt & Co., who were his creditors, and represented by an agent at New Orleans, a notarial bill of salo of all his stock in trade, then on the leased premises. The items forming tho consideration of tho sale wore all antecedent debts. Malard,, however, remained in possession of the store for several weeks. Tho understanding between him and Hunt & Co. seems to have been,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hyman v. Hibernia Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1916
- Duke v. Crawford, Jenkins & BoothSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Fertitta Bros. v. VanchiereLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1938