Ecklor v. Wolcott

90 N.W. 1081, 115 Wis. 19, 1902 Wisc. LEXIS 191
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedJune 19, 1902
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 90 N.W. 1081 (Ecklor v. Wolcott) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ecklor v. Wolcott, 90 N.W. 1081, 115 Wis. 19, 1902 Wisc. LEXIS 191 (Wis. 1902).

Opinion

WiNslow, J.

This is an action in equity, brought by the plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of Josiah B. Loomis, deceased, intestate, for the purpose of setting aside a certain deed of real estate and certain transfers of personal property made by the deceased to his daughter, the defendant Phoebe Wolcott, shortly prior to his death, on the ground that the deceased was1 then mentally incompetent, and that said deed and transfers were made without consideration and under undue influence. The defendants answered, admitting the deed and transfers, and denying the remaining allegations [20]*20of tbe complaint. Tbe case was tried, and tbe court made findings negativing’ tbe allegations of tbe complaint, and tbe court dismissed tbe action. No evidence was offered or received showing that there were’ any creditors of tbe estate, or that there was or would be. any deficiency of assets in tbe estate to meet all proper claims against it qf any nature. There is no right on the part óf tbe administrator to attack alleged fraudulent transfers of property made by bis intestate except under tbe provisions of sec. 3832, Stats. 1898. Under this section it must appear, in order to entitle the administrator to maintain it, that there i's or will be a deficiency of assets to pay’creditors existing at tbe time of tbe transfer. Andrew v. Hinderman, 11 Wis. 148, 36 N. W. 624; O'Malley v. O'Malley, 102 Wis. 639, 18 N. W. 753. This consideration necessarily results in affirmance of tbe judgment, regardless of any question as1 to tbe correctness of tbe judgment upon tbe merits.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Neelen v. Holzhauer
214 N.W. 497 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1927)
Holzhauer v. Zartner
198 N.W. 363 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1924)
Sawyer v. Metters
113 N.W. 682 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1907)
Borchert v. Borchert
113 N.W. 35 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
90 N.W. 1081, 115 Wis. 19, 1902 Wisc. LEXIS 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ecklor-v-wolcott-wis-1902.