Legal Opinion
Peerless Manufacturing Co. v. Goehring
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided June 8, 1944PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDickenson, J.
The plaintiff brought this action to recover a debt owed to it by the named defendant and to set aside as fraudulent a conveyance of real estate made by him to his wife, the other defendant. Judgment was rendered against the husband, William E. Goehring, by default and against the defendant Olive Goehring upon the trial of the case. She has appealed. Since our determination of the claimed error in the court's conclusion that both defendants participated in the conveyance with fraudulent intent is decisive of the appeal, we confine our discussion to that issue.
The facts material to that issue,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Allen v. RundleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1882
- Boiselle v. RogoffSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Mathews v. ConverseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1910
- Trumbull v. HewittSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
- D'Addario v. AbbottSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. RuizSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
- Adams v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1978
- Rocklen, Inc. v. RadulescoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987
- Coan v. Andersen (In Re Andersen)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · 1994
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.