Connelly v. Carlin

13 Iowa 383
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedJune 18, 1862
StatusPublished

This text of 13 Iowa 383 (Connelly v. Carlin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Connelly v. Carlin, 13 Iowa 383 (iowa 1862).

Opinion

Baldwin, C. J.

The only question in this case is, whether a certain conveyance, made by one Kearns to the respondent Carlin, was fraudulent. The complainant alleges that it was, and prays that the same may be set aside. The respondents answer under oath, and deny the allegation of fraud. It is claimed by appellant that the answer thus sworn to cannot be overcome by the testimony of one witness. Under the ruling of this court, in the case of Shepherd v. Ford, 10 Iowa, 502, a sworn answer to a bill in chancery is not evidence, unless called for by the complainant

[384]*384The answer of respondents in the case, not being called for by tbe complainant, is not evidence, but only puts in issue the averments of tbe bill.

Tbe testimony introduced by tbe complainant clearly establishes a fraudulent intent upon tbe part of tbe grantor, Kearns, in making tbe deed, and that Carlin knew it was not made in good faith when be purchased.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Shepard v. Ford
10 Iowa 502 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1860)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 Iowa 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connelly-v-carlin-iowa-1862.