Taylor v. Taylor

9 Tenn. App. 70, 1928 Tenn. App. LEXIS 216
CourtCourt of Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedDecember 1, 1928
StatusPublished

This text of 9 Tenn. App. 70 (Taylor v. Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Taylor v. Taylor, 9 Tenn. App. 70, 1928 Tenn. App. LEXIS 216 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1928).

Opinion

CROWNOVER, J.

This bill was filed by Mrs. Taylor against her husband, J. Will Taylor, and his two brothers to have set aside as fraudulent, conveyances of a 57.25 acre tract of land, being a part of an 80-acre tract, made by her husband, J. Will Taylor, to his brother, L. P. Taylor, and later conveyed by him to his brother, A. B. Taylor, and to be subrogated to the rights of the Citizens Bánk and the Peoples Bank of Pulaski, the holders of a mortgage for $10,921.50 on the 57.25 acres, 180 acres and other tracts of land assigned to them by the Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company, which had been paid by complainant at the time she was fraudulently induced by her husband to raise a bid of $8514 on the 180-acre tract to $12,678.76 under representations that she was getting both the 180 and 57.25 acre tracts, whereas in fact he raised the bid for her on only the 180 acres, thereby releasing the lien of the mortgage on the 57.25 acres, and she thereby lost $4164.75, as said' 180-acre tract was not worth more than $8514. The complainant asked for writs of attachment and injunction, and for a sale of the 57.25-aere tract.

The defendants Taylor filed a plea in abatement and ■ answers denying that the conveyances were fraudulent and insisted that they were made for valuable considerations, and that A. B. Taylor was an innocent purchaser for value without notice. They further insisted that the 180-acre tract was worth $12,678.76, at the time the bid was raised, and that no fraud was committed.

The Chancellor held that J. Will Taylor had fraudulently induced complainant, his wife, to raise the bid to $12,678.76, under the representations that she was getting both the 180 acres and the 57.25 acres, when in fact he had raised the bid on only the 180-acre tract with the fraudulent purpose of releasing the lien of the mortgage on. the 57.25-acre tract so that his brothers would have the absolute title unincumbered. He further held that the 180-acre tract was worth only $8514 at the time, and complainant had therefore lost $4164.75, together with interest, totaling $5110.16, and was entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the banks, the holders of the Insurance Company mortgage, to this amount as against the defendants, who were not innocent purchasers, and that said conveyances were fraudulent, and as such should be set aside, and that *72 the 57.25 acres be sold in bar of the equity of redemption in satisfaction of the lien.

All the defendants Taylor appealed and have assigned fifteen errors, which are, in substance, that the court erred:

(1) In holding’ that a married woman could sue her husband for damages for a tort.

(2) In holding that J. Will Taylor, the husband had fraudulently induced his wife to raise the bid under representations that she was buying both the 180 and 57.25 acres, and that she should be subrogated to the rights of the mortgagee banks, and in ordering the 57.25 acres sold, as she knew that he had conveyed that tract to his brother long before the bids were raised when he was insolvent.

(3) In holding that the conveyances to his brothers were fraudulent and should be set aside, and that A. B. Taylor was not an innocent purchaser for value without notice, as he had paid out more than $3000 as surety for J. Will Taylor.

(4) In holding that the 180-acre tract was not worth more than $8514 as the proof showed that it was worth more than the $12,678.76 when the bid was raised. *

The facts necessary to be stated are that on January 27, 1916, C. B. Adkins and wife executed to the Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company a deed of trust on 277.75 acres in Giles county, to secure a loan of $'9000 to be paid within ten years.

This mortgage was not paid and Adkins became further Involved in debts to the Citizens Bank and the Peoples Bank of Pulaski for additional sums, and on February 15, 1916 he executed a second mortgage on a 180-acre tract which was a part of the aforesaid 277.75 acres, to E. E. Eslick, trustee, to secure various notes due the banks. This mortgage was subject to the Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company mortgage.

On January 24, 1921, C. B. Adkins executed another mortgage on said 180 acres to E. E. Eslick and W. L. Abernathy, trustees, to secure other indebtedness to said banks. This mortgage was likewise subject to the mortgage to the Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company.

On October 26, 1916, C. B. Adkins conveyed to his stepson, Carol ñh river, 80 acres, which was a part of the 277.75 acres, but not a part of the aforesaid 180-acre tract, for the consideration ot $4650, which was later paid, but this conveyance was made subject to the mortgage of the Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company. Carol Shriver and E. E. Eslick conveyed this tract to *73 defendant J. Will Taylor on September 24, 1919 for $8000 cash, but it way conveyed subject to the Insurance Company’s mortgage.

J. Will Taylor on December 24, 1919, conveyed to Gray Rags-dale 22.75 acres, being a part of the above 80-acre tract, and on September 28. 1922, J. Will Taylor executed a deed to his brother, L. P. Taylor, conveying the remainder of said 80-acre tract, being 57.25 acres and a right of way, for the recited consideration of $2750, evidenced by notes due in 1923; 1924, 1925, 1926 and 1927. This conveyance was made subject to the Northwestern- Mutual Life Insurance Company’s mortgage.

On December 15, 1922, the Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company sold and transferred its deéd of trust and notes against C. B. Adkins to the Citizens Bank and the Peoples Bank of Pulaski for $9223.36, and in the meantime Adkins had conveyed 20.27 acres of the 277.75 acres to S. A. R. Appleby, and the Northwestern Mutual Insurance Company and E. E. Eslick had released the lien of the mortgage on this tract. Adkins had also conveyed 5 acres of the 277.7'5 acres to Nod Coble, subject to the Insurance Company’s mortgage.

Shortly thereafter, W. L. Abernathy and E. E. Eslick as trustees for said banks filed a bill against G. B. Adkins and wife, J. Will Taylor, L. P. Taylor, Ned Coble and Gray Ragsdale, to foreclose the lien of their mortgages on said tract's of land, and on duly 8, 1923, the said banks obtained a decree for $10,921.50 against Adkins, which was decreed to be a lien on the different, tracts of land aggregating the 277.75 acres, except the 20.27 acres conveyed to Appleby on which the lien was released, and the court appointed Es-lick and Abernathy as trustees and special commissioners to sell said tracts of land, in the order named, that is, they were to sell first the 180 acres, second the 8 acres, the TTobbs tract, third the 57.25 acres, fourth the 22.75 acres, Gray Ragsdale’s tract and fifth the 5 acres, Ned Coble’s tract.

The commissioners advertised and sold said property on September 29, 1923 and reported the sale cn October 16, 1923, which in substance vyas as follows:

1. 180-acre, tract sold for .$7,740.00

2. 8-acre Hobbs tract sold for . 80.00

3. 57.25-acre Taylor tract sold for . 1,431.25

4. 22.75-acre Gray Ragsdale tract sold for. 568.75

5. 5-acre Ned Coble tract sold for . 125.00

Total, ...$9,945.00

*74

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

Related

Wilson v. Barton
283 S.W. 71 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1925)
Dixon v. Morgan
285 S.W. 558 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1926)
Bennett v. Winfield
51 Tenn. 440 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1871)
Oneal v. Smith
78 Tenn. 340 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1882)
Byrd v. Byrd
32 S.W. 198 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1895)
Lillienkamp v. Rippetoe
133 Tenn. 57 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 Tenn. App. 70, 1928 Tenn. App. LEXIS 216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-taylor-tennctapp-1928.