Vandall v. Vandall
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Clarke District Court. Bill to cancel a conveyance made for tbe purpose of defrauding creditors. Tbe court submitted tbe following special issues to a jury: ^ 1. Did tbe defendant, E. O. Yandal, make tbe conveyance in question to tbe other defendant, Isaac Eouch, for tbe purpose of and witb tbe intent of avoiding tbe payment of plaintiff’s claim, and to prevent a collection of tbe same ? 2. Did tbe defendant, Isaac Eouch, take tbe conveyance in question witb a…
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Clarke District Court. Bill to cancel a conveyance made for tbe purpose of defrauding creditors. Tbe court submitted tbe following special issues to a jury: ^ 1. Did tbe defendant, E. O. Yandal, make tbe conveyance in question to tbe other defendant, Isaac Eouch, for tbe purpose of and witb tbe intent of avoiding tbe payment of plaintiff’s claim, and to prevent a collection of tbe same ? 2. Did tbe defendant, Isaac Eouch, take tbe conveyance in question witb a knowledge that tbe same was made for tbe purpose and witb tbe intent of avoiding tbe payment, of plaintiff’s claim, and…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, C. J.
It is claimed by the counsel for the appellants, that the court erred in submitting the questions of fact arising in said suit to a jury, there being no question of fact therein involved in doubt, in which the court desired the finding of a jury. It appears from the record, that four questions of fact were submitted to the determination of a jury as arising out of the evidence and pleading in the cause. It is not denied by counsel but that a chancellor may submit, under our chancery practice, certain issues of fact for the special finding of a jury; but it is claimed that from the pleadings…
2Cited by1 opinion
- In the Interest of J.F.Court of Appeals of Iowa · 1986