Legal Opinion

Erickson v. . Quinn

New York Court of Appeals

Decided February 6, 1872PublishedCited by 27 opinions

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, entered upon report of a referee. This action is in the nature of a creditor’s bill, brought to reach certain real estate, alleged to have been conveyed to defendant, Mary A. Quinn, with intent to defraud the creditors of James O’Maley. Said O’Maley was originally one of the defendants.

Read the full summary

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, entered upon report of a referee. This action is in the nature of a creditor’s bill, brought to reach certain real estate, alleged to have been conveyed to defendant, Mary A. Quinn, with intent to defraud the creditors of James O’Maley. Said O’Maley was originally one of the defendants. He died before trial, and defendant, Mary A. Quinn, was appointed administratrix, and the action was revived against her as such. The referee found that on the 21st…

1Opinion of the CourtRapallo, J.

The referee has found, as a conclusion of law, that the action was not barred by the statute of limitations.

To sustain the conclusion, he must have found, as a fact, that the action was commenced within six years after the discovery of the facts constituting the fraud.

The only express finding on this point contained in the case or report is, that neither the plaintiffs nor their assignors discovered that the deed was made without consideration until within six years.

This finding must be taken in connection with the finding also contained in the case, that at the time of giving this deed…

2Cited by27 opinions

  1. Smith v. . ReidNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. Sears v. . ShaferNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
  3. Lehrenkrauss v. . BonnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
  4. Royer Wheel Co. v. . FieldingNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
  5. Rose v. DunkleeColorado Court of Appeals · 1899

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API