Hall v. Feeney
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from Circuit Court, Stanley County. Hon. Lyman T. Boucher, Judge. Action by Robert I. Hall against Andrew Feeney. From a judgment for plaintiff on á directed verdict, defendant appealed. A debtor will not be permitted to alienate his property and place it in a position where it is not subject to process in behalf of his creditors, unless there be a consideration to stand in place of the property alienated.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Circuit Court, Stanley County. Hon. Lyman T. Boucher, Judge. Action by Robert I. Hall against Andrew Feeney. From a judgment for plaintiff on á directed verdict, defendant appealed. A debtor will not be permitted to alienate his property and place it in a position where it is not subject to process in behalf of his creditors, unless there be a consideration to stand in place of the property alienated. Smith v. Conkwright et al., 8 N. W. 876; Switz v. Bruce, 20 N. W. 639; Newell et al v. Wagness, 44 N. W. 1014. A delegation of power to prefer creditors is void, and a fraud at law.…
1Opinion of the CourtCorson, J.
This is an appeal by the defendant from a directed verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The action was instituted by the plaintiff in claim and delivery to recover the possession of a certain stock of merchandise, consisting of intoxicating liquors, saloon furniture, fixtures, etc., levied upon and taken into possession by the defendant as sheriff of Stanley county, under and by virtue of a warrant of attachment issued in favor of Ferdinand West-heimer & Sons against James Hall, the father of the plaintiff.
It is disclosed by the record that in June, 1906, the said James Hall was the owner of a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Seger's Sons v. Thomas Bros.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Sandwich Manufacturing Co. v. MaxSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- Hill v. MalloryMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Newell v. WagnessNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1890
- Smith v. ConkwrightSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Walklin v. HorswillSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
- M. & N. Freight Lines Inc. v. Kimbel Lines, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1943
- Mercantile Trust Co. v. OlsanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1923