Wake v. Griffin
Nebraska Supreme Court
Tbis was an action of replevin. The defendant, who was plaintiff in the court below, claimed tbe title and right of possession to the property in question, by virtue of a bill of sale from John 0. McMahon to Mary McMahon, his wife, and a sale from Mary McMahon to himself.
Read the full summary
Tbis was an action of replevin. The defendant, who was plaintiff in the court below, claimed tbe title and right of possession to the property in question, by virtue of a bill of sale from John 0. McMahon to Mary McMahon, his wife, and a sale from Mary McMahon to himself. Plaintiff, as constable, claimed right of possession of said property by virtue of the levies of two executions issued out of the county court in favor of Steele & Johnson against said John C. McMahon and one John C. Wolfe, March 13, 1877. Upon a trial of the cause in the district court of Platte county, Post, J., instructed…
1Opinion of the CourtLake, J.
The property in controversy remaining in the possession and under the control of John C. McMahon after the pretended sales by him to his wife, and by *50her to Patrick S. Griffin, the defendant in error, and until after the execution was levied, and there being, as we think, no sufficient evidence that either of said sales was made in good faith on the part of any of the parties to them, they were clearly void as against the execution creditor.
In principle, the case is not different from Brunswick v. McClay, 7 Neb., 137. Indeed, in this case, the statutory presumption of fraud arising from such…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Emmanuel Brunswick & Co. v. McClayNebraska Supreme Court · 1878
3Cited by6 opinions
- Schriock v. SchriockNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1964
- Lipscomb v. LyonNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
- Hedrick v. StraussNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Luikart v. TidrickNebraska Supreme Court · 1934
- Eggleston v. SlusherNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.