Morrison v. Durr

Supreme Court

Morrison v. Durr

122 U.S. 518, 7 S. Ct. 1215, 30 L. Ed. 1225, 1887 U.S. LEXIS 2131

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMay 27, 1887

Docket270

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 122 U.S. 518 (Morrison v. Durr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Morrison v. Durr, 122 U.S. 518, 7 S. Ct. 1215, 30 L. Ed. 1225, 1887 U.S. LEXIS 2131 (1887).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a suit in equity brought by several judgment creditors of the mercantile firm of Kennedy & Durr, to set aside a sale of the goods of the firm of Charles McDermot, under executions on judgments in his favor, on the ground of fraud, and to have the property and its proceeds in the hands of McDermot subjected to the payment of the amounts due them respectively. The .bill called for answers under oath, and McDermot answered accordingly, denying each and all of the allegations of fraud which were made against him. This being responsive to the bill, his denials must be overcome by the satisfactory evidence of two witnesses, or of one witness corroborated by circumstances which are equivalent in iveight to another, before the- complainants can be granted the relief they ask. No such proof has been made. We have looked carefully through the whole evidence, and, while it is full of circumstances calculated to excite suspicion, there is not enough to justify us in reversing the decree of the court below dismiss *519 ing the bill. The questions involved are principally of fact, which it would serve no useful purpose to consider at length in an opinion.

The decree is affirmed.

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

Mr. Chief Justice Waite

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a suit in equity brought by several judgment creditors of the mercantile firm of Kennedy & Durr, to set aside a sale of the goods of the firm of Charles McDermot, under executions on judgments in his favor, on the ground of fraud, and to have the property and its proceeds in the hands of McDermot subjected to the payment of the amounts due them respectively. The .bill called for answers under oath, and McDermot answered accordingly, denying each and all of the allegations of fraud which were made against him. This being responsive to the bill, his denials must be overcome by the satisfactory evidence of two witnesses, or of one witness corroborated by circumstances which are equivalent in iveight to another, before the- complainants can be granted the relief they ask. No such proof has been made. We have looked carefully through the whole evidence, and, while it is full of circumstances calculated to excite suspicion, there is not enough to justify us in reversing the decree of the court below dismiss *519 ing the bill. The questions involved are principally of fact, which it would serve no useful purpose to consider at length in an opinion.

The decree is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 U.S. 518, 7 S. Ct. 1215, 30 L. Ed. 1225, 1887 U.S. LEXIS 2131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morrison-v-durr-scotus-1887.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack