Bache v. Hammett

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bache v. Hammett

61 Mo. App. 457, 1895 Mo. App. LEXIS 92

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 26, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 61 Mo. App. 457 (Bache v. Hammett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bache v. Hammett, 61 Mo. App. 457, 1895 Mo. App. LEXIS 92 (Mo. Ct. App. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Bond, J.

—This is a creditors bill against a defendant corporation and its grantees, averring a fraudulent conveyance of the assets of said corporation to its co-defendants, and asking the appointment of a receiver and the annulment of said conveyances and the subjection of the assets, attempted to be transferred, to the satisfaction of plaintiffs claim and those of other creditors. It is averred that the claim of plaintiffs is more than $1,000, and that of all the creditors is not less than $18,000. The assets sought to be reached are: First, a leasehold of real estate and certain fixtures and machinery, of the value of $7,000; second, certain choses in action conveyed to D. R. Francis, of the value of $1,500; and, third, a general assignment to F. A. Wind of assets worth $1,400. Defendants answered, asserting the validity of the transaction sought to be impeached, and a decree was rendered in their favor, from which this appeal was taken.

It appeared on the trial that $3,800 had been realized on a sale of the mortgaged leasehold, and $1,200 on the accounts transferred to D. R. Francis. Omitting other assets, these sums aggregate $5,000. It is not clear from an examination of this record whether this cause is within the pecuniary limit of the jurisdiction of this court. It will, therefore, be transferred for determination to the supreme court, with a copy of this order, in pursuance of Revised Statutes of 1889, section 3300. It is so ordered.

All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bond, J.

—This is a creditors bill against a defendant corporation and its grantees, averring a fraudulent conveyance of the assets of said corporation to its co-defendants, and asking the appointment of a receiver and the annulment of said conveyances and the subjection of the assets, attempted to be transferred, to the satisfaction of plaintiffs claim and those of other creditors. It is averred that the claim of plaintiffs is more than $1,000, and that of all the creditors is not less than $18,000. The assets sought to be reached are: First, a leasehold of real estate and certain fixtures and machinery, of the value of $7,000; second, certain choses in action conveyed to D. R. Francis, of the value of $1,500; and, third, a general assignment to F. A. Wind of assets worth $1,400. Defendants answered, asserting the validity of the transaction sought to be impeached, and a decree was rendered in their favor, from which this appeal was taken.

It appeared on the trial that $3,800 had been realized on a sale of the mortgaged leasehold, and $1,200 on the accounts transferred to D. R. Francis. Omitting other assets, these sums aggregate $5,000. It is not clear from an examination of this record whether this cause is within the pecuniary limit of the jurisdiction of this court. It will, therefore, be transferred for determination to the supreme court, with a copy of this order, in pursuance of Revised Statutes of 1889, section 3300. It is so ordered.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 Mo. App. 457, 1895 Mo. App. LEXIS 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bache-v-hammett-moctapp-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack