Baldwin v. Little

64 Miss. 126
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1886
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 64 Miss. 126 (Baldwin v. Little) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Baldwin v. Little, 64 Miss. 126 (Mich. 1886).

Opinion

Campbell, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The deed of trust does not in express terms provide for the continuance in business of the grantors selling and replenishing stock in the usual course of dealing, and therefore is not void on its face. It is true that the evidence shows such a course of dealing under the instrument as to make it fraudulent in fact as to creditors, but the right of the appellee is to be determined by the deed of trust. He stands on that as the foundation of his title, and is not implicated in the fraudulent conduct of the grantors in the deed after it was executed. As he is unaffected by their subsequent fraud, and the deed of trust is not per se fraudulent, his claim must prevail over that of the appellants.

. Affirmed.

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

Related

Coffeeville Bank v. Stone
118 So. 413 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1928)
Newton Oil & Manufacturing Co. v. Carr
52 So. 353 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1910)
Dugan v. Beckett
129 F. 56 (Fifth Circuit, 1904)
In re Burrows
4 F. Cas. 840 (D. Indiana, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
64 Miss. 126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baldwin-v-little-miss-1886.