Watkins v. Arms

6 A. 92, 64 N.H. 99
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 5, 1886·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Carpenter, J.

The plaintiff’s rights are not affected by the insolvency proceedings in Vermont. Perley v. Mason, 64 N. H. 6 ; Carbee v. Mason, 64 N. H. 10, and cases cited.

The conveyance of the land and bank stock to the defendant was absolute in terms, but was in fact a mere security. Watkins, upon payment of the mortgage debt was entitled to a reconveyance. This is a secret trust, and fraudulent in law, though no fraud was in fact intended. Stratton v. Putney, 63 N. H. 577, and cases cited.

Decree for the plaintiff.

Allen, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Watkins v. Arms, 6 A. 92, 64 N.H. 99 (N.H. 1886).

6 A. 92 (Watkins v. Arms) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Belis v. Belis
152 A. 917 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1931)
Corning v. Records
46 A. 462 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1898)
Quimby v. Williams
41 A. 862 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1893)