Legal Opinion

Lyons v. Urgalones

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 27, 1905PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLoring, J.

[After the foregoing statement of the case.] We are of opinion that the demandant was not entitled to go to the jury on the ground that the conveyance of the tenant was a fraudulent conveyance as against the demandant who was a subsequent creditor. There was no evidence that Mrs. Tutlis was insolvent or in pecuniary difficulties at any time. The demand-ant, on cross-examination, testified that when the mortgage for $1,000 was made by the tenant, out of which he received $600, he “ didn’t think that Agnes Tutlis intended to defraud me, and I didn’t think that the property was conveyed in…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Snow v. PaineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
  2. Skehill v. AbbottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
  3. Bresnihan v. SheehanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
  4. Warren v. ChildsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
  5. Rawson v. PlaistedMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Pollock v. PollockMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  2. Cunningham v. BrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  3. Holden v. WalkerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Malden Trust Co. v. GeorgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  5. Citizens Bank v. ColemanMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2013

1 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