BUDLoNe v. KENT. 18
Bunnone and others v. KENT and others.
Nonwnemn Pnow Co. v. SAME.
(Circuit Court. D. Nebraska. July 15, 1886.)
Fnnunumnnr CONVEYANCES—CONBIDERATION—SATISFACTION or Dnnrs.
At a hearing in equity, on pleadings and proofs in support of a credito1·s’
bill, where it fairly appears that defendant actually owed the party to whom
he has conveyed, and that the value of the property transferred was not out
of proportion to the debt, with accruing interest, and the expense of hand-
ling the property, the conveyance will not be disturbed.!
C·reditors’ bills to set aside a conveyance of lands and goods made
by the defendant to one of his creditors at about the time the grantor
failed in business. Heard on pleadings and proofs.
Harwood, Ames at Vielly and Chas. O. Whedon, for complainants.
R. St. Clair and A. H. Connor, for defendants.
BREWER, J. These are creditors’ bills. The complainants are
judgment creditors of one Smith P. Tuttle, who, in the latter part
of 1884, failed in business. At about the time of his failure he con-
veyed certain real estate and his stock of goods to the officers of the
First National Bank of Minden, to secure his indebtedness to the
bank. These conveyances are challenged by the bills as fraudulent.
The complainants have clearly failed to make out a case. Tuttle
was indebted to the bank in the sum of about $9,000. The bona jides
and amount of this debt are undisputed. It is doubtful whether the
property conveyed equaled in value the debt. The highest estimate
placed by complainants witnesses upon its value is only $13,900,.
while the defendants’ witnesses all place it below the face of the
debt. Even if it were acfually worth all that complainants claim, it
would not be sufficient to impugn the good faith of the transfer, for
the debt bears constant interest, and it costs something to dispose of
real estate and a stock of goods. If more than the debt should be
realized, garnishment proceedings will reach the excess. The testi·
mony shows that Tuttle used other property to pay other debts, and
fails to show that he retained anything except that which was ex-.
empt.
The representations made by oiiicers of the bank, even if all made
as claimed, work no estoppel. No debt was created on the faith of
them, and they were simply expressions . of confidence in Tuttle’s
financial condition, which the conduct of the bank shows it believed `
to be well founded.
Decree will be entered in favor of the defendants.
1For a full discussion of the question of fraudulent conveyance, see Platt v. Scbreyu,
25 Fed. Rep. 83, and note, 87-94.