Holliday v. Holliday
This text of 10 Iowa 200 (Holliday v. Holliday) 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.
Opinion
The testimony sufficiently shows that the lots were purchased by the husband, that he paid the purchase money, and had them conveyed to his wife. It is further shown, however, that the conveyance was thus made at the instance and request of complainant to place them beyond legal process, if he should be prosecuted upon a certain demand, which he regarded as unjust.
The maxim, in pari delicto melior est conditio possidentis et dependentes, is to be resjiected, and when applied is fatal to complainant’s case. A conveyance made, or procured to be made, to defraud creditors, will not be set aside at the instance of the parties to it, or the one procuring it, but equity leaves the parties to their remedy at law, and will not interfere in favor of either. Equity will not enforce a reconveyance, nor enforce a secret trust in favor of the grantor or his heirs. The rule is well settled. 1 Story Eq. Jur. 61; 1 Am. Lead. C. 76, and cases cited.
Decree reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 Iowa 200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holliday-v-holliday-iowa-1859.