Wolf v. Erwin & Wood Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Union Circuit Court in Chancery. Charles W. Smith, Judge. The pretended deed of trust was a part of the scheme to defraud.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Union Circuit Court in Chancery. Charles W. Smith, Judge. The pretended deed of trust was a part of the scheme to defraud. Appellees could not profit by it. 33 Ark. 63; 21 Ark. 22. The directors were trustees of the property of the company for creditors. 33 Ark. 305; 38 Ark. 17. As a director, Albie could not be a bona fide purchaser. 130 U. S. 43. He was charged with notice of the fraud. 63 Eed. 496. The pretended mortgage was not authorized. 55 Ark. 473. The law of Iowa will be presumed the same as ours. 58 Ark. 26; 50 Ark. 237; 51 Ark. 459; 17 Ark. 154; 43 Ark. 209. The…
1Opinion of the CourtBunn, C. J.
At the October term, 1896, the plaintiffs, Wolf & Bro., a mercantile firm doing business in the city of Little Bock, filed a creditors’ bill in the Union circuit court in chancery against the Erwin & Wood Co., C. M. Cook, trustee, and W. T. and J. M. Parnell as garnishees. Subsequently E. W. Albie, intervener in certain prior attachment suits, was made defendant -also. The defendants filed their answers, talcing issue on all'the controverted allegations of the bill. We gather, from statement of counsel in the case, that the only ground for the attachment upon which the bill is based was that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gauss Sons v. Doyle & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1885
- Simon v. Sevier Ass'nSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
- Fink v. Ehrman Bros.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
3Cited by4 opinions
- Merchants & Farmers Bank v. Harris Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Foster v. BlackwellLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1999
- Elkins v. Huntington-Midland Highway DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Rives v. McGaugheySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1946