Legal Opinion

Harbine v. Harper

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided January 24, 1936No. 1330PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*227OPINION

By BODEY, J.

“It is a well settled rule that it is only by force of statutory law that any objection can be taken to an insolvent’s paying off a portion of his debts or securing one or more of his creditors, although such payment or the giving of such security will enable one class of creditors to obtain an advantage over another. In Ohio, a preference, by a debtor who is insolvent, of some creditors over others has never constituted a fraud. A preferential conveyance is not deemed one to hinder, delay or defraud creditors. A preference, then, is not, merely because it is a preference,…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cellar Lumber Co. v. HolleyOhio Court of Appeals · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API