Brown v. Austen
New York Supreme Court
THIS action was brought hy the plaintiffs, who were judgment creditors of David Austen, for the purpose of having three several deeds which had been executed by him, conveying land to his daughters, adjudged to he fraudulent and void as against the plaintiffs’ judgment; and to have such judgment declared to be a lien on the premises described in such deeds respectively.
Read the full summary
THIS action was brought hy the plaintiffs, who were judgment creditors of David Austen, for the purpose of having three several deeds which had been executed by him, conveying land to his daughters, adjudged to he fraudulent and void as against the plaintiffs’ judgment; and to have such judgment declared to be a lien on the premises described in such deeds respectively. The complaint stated the recovery of a judgment in this court, by the plaintiffs, on the 7th of October, 1851, against David Austen, John H. Austen, Charles B. Spicer, George W. Austen and James Austen, partners in business…
1Opinion of the CourtSutherland, J.
When the deeds to his three daughters were executed and delivered to Mr. Nicoll, Mr. Austen was perfectly solvent, and could make a settlement of the prop-, erty in question on them, without doing injustice to any creditor then existing. As between the parties, natural affection was a sufficient consideration to support the deeds. There is nothing in the case to show that by the transaction Mr. Austen intended to defraud any creditor then existing or subsequent.
The question as to the operation of the deeds, (independent of the question as to the delivery,) whether by them the grantor did or…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Wheelwright v. WheelwrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Jackson ex dem. Russell v. RowlandNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Church v. GilmanNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Verplank v. SterryCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1815
- Ruggles v. LawsonNew York Supreme Court · 1816
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Syracuse Trust Co. v. FullerNew York Supreme Court · 1930
- Utica City National Bank v. WilliamsNew York Supreme Court · 1888