Shelton v. Church
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Trespass de bonis asportatis; brought to the Court of Com- . mon Pleas, and tried to the jury before Willey, J. The plaintiff claimed title to the goods in question under a bill of sale from Henry P. Horton, dated November 19th, 1870, for the consideration therein expressed of seventy-five dollars, eighty-nine cents.
Read the full summary
Trespass de bonis asportatis; brought to the Court of Com- . mon Pleas, and tried to the jury before Willey, J. The plaintiff claimed title to the goods in question under a bill of sale from Henry P. Horton, dated November 19th, 1870, for the consideration therein expressed of seventy-five dollars, eighty-nine cents. Horton, prior to the execution of the bill of sale, had hired the store containing the goods from the defendants Hall and Lewis; and the ground of defence was that the defendant Church, as a constable, had taken the goods by virtue of a writ of attachment against Horton, in favor…
1Opinion of the CourtButler, C. J.
We are all satisfied that the evidence detailed on the record in this case shows that the conveyance from Horton to Shelton was poisoned by a trust, and therefore fraudulent and void as against the creditors of Horton.
It is elementary law that “ in every instance where a creditor or purchaser obtains the estate of an insolvent debtor at an under rate, there is a violent presumption of a secret trust and fraudulent intent”, (1 Swift Dig., 275), and such presumption unless rebutted is conclusive.
In this case the facts clearly show that the vendor was in*421solvent, and that all his property was…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. CarlandMontana Supreme Court · 1884
- Dodson v. CooperSupreme Court of Kansas · 1893