Chandler v. Fleeman
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Cedar Circuit Court. The testimony does not disclose a fraudulent intent. (12 Mo. 169.) Debtors may give preference to creditors. (45 Mo. 431.) A bona fide purchaser for a valuable consideration is protected, although he purchase from a fraudulent grantor.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cedar Circuit Court. The testimony does not disclose a fraudulent intent. (12 Mo. 169.) Debtors may give preference to creditors. (45 Mo. 431.) A bona fide purchaser for a valuable consideration is protected, although he purchase from a fraudulent grantor. (16 Mo. 594.) When the facts are submitted to the court, the judgment will not be reversed and new trial ordered upon exceptions taken to the weight of testimony (1 Mo. 444); or unless it is clearly against the weight of evidence (4 Mo. 518; 6 Mo. 250); or unless the record shows that the court below was called upon to decide…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
We see no sufficient reason for disturbing the judgment in this case. The allegation was fraud, and the evidence failed to sustain it. Fraudulent acts need not be proved by positive testimony, but there should be a chain of circumstances such as would reasonably satisfy the mind of their commission. The suit was brought by the plaintiff, who purchased the land at a sale under execution, for the purpose of setting aside a conveyance as fraudulent, made by the defendant Hezekiah Fleeman to his two sons, who are also made defendants. The conveyance of the lands was made many years prior to the…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Wells v. GoforthSupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
- Rowe v. Farmers Ins. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1985
- Black v. EpsteinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Fearey v. O'NeillSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- State v. BurksSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.