Stores v. Snow
1 Root 181
Opinion
[182]*182The defendant offered evidence to prove that both the note, and the mortgage given to secure it, were fraudulent, and done to avoid creditors. But by the court not admitted, for a fraudulent conveyance is good between the parties; although it is void as to creditors.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Stores v. Snow, 1 Root 181 (Colo. Ct. App. 1790).
1 Root 181 (Stores v. Snow) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bouton v. Beers
62 A. 619 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1905)