Crockett & Risque v. Maguire
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from the St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. Where there is a deed fraudulent because made to hinder and delay creditors, and subsequent conveyances are made by the fraudulent grantor, and by the fraudulent grantee, the title will, pass by the subsequent deed, which is first in point of time. 3 J. C. R. 371; Anderson vs. Roberts, 1 Day’s Rep. 527, N. S.; Preston vs. Crafeet, 18 Johns.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. Where there is a deed fraudulent because made to hinder and delay creditors, and subsequent conveyances are made by the fraudulent grantor, and by the fraudulent grantee, the title will, pass by the subsequent deed, which is first in point of time. 3 J. C. R. 371; Anderson vs. Roberts, 1 Day’s Rep. 527, N. S.; Preston vs. Crafeet, 18 Johns. Rep. 515; Anderson vs. Roberts, on appeal, 15 Wend. 588. This is a case which is analagous in principle to the present, and the' Court held the vendee bound to enquire whether the recorded sheriff’s deed was bona…
1Opinion of the Court
Scott J.,
delivered the opinion of the Court.
This was a bill in equity, brought by Crockett & Risque, the appellants, against the appellee Maguire. “The bill charges that Witherill & Foster purchased of Charles Collins, two lots of ground in St. Louis, and that for the purpose of defrauding their creditors, they caused Collins to convey said lots to Wm. P. Foster, the father-in-law of Witherill, in trust for the use of Virginia Witherill, the wife of John Witherill, one of the persons above named of Foster & Witherill.
Collins received no part of the purchase money fom Wm. P. Foster, or…
2Cited by11 opinions
- McQuade v. WilcoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
- Gross v. WattsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- King v. St. Louis Union Trust Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- Rankin v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Digman v. McCollumSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.