« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
Elwell v. Shaw, . . . . . . .
New England Marine Insurance Co. v. De Wolf,
Note, . . . . . . .
Clark v. Moody, . . . . .
Note, . . . . . . . . .
LEADING CASE S.
OF THE VALIDITY OF VOLUNTARY CONVEYANCES, AS AGAINST CREDITORS
AND SUBSEQUENT PURCHASERS, UNDER THE STATUTES 13 ELIZ. C 5, AND 27 ELIZ. C. 4.
SEXTON v. WHEATON AND WIFE.
In the Supreme Court of the United States.
FEBRUARY TERM, 1823.
[REPORTED, 8 WHEATON, 229-252.]
A post-nuptial voluntary settlement, made by a man, who is not indebted
at the time, upon his wife, is valid against subsequent creditors. The statute 13 Eliz. c. 5, avoids all conveyances not made on a conside
ration deemed valuable in law, as against previous creditors. But it does not apply to subsequent creditors, if the conveyance is not
made with a fraudulent intent. What circumstances will constitute evidence of such a fraudulent intent.
This was a bill brought by the appellant, Sexton, in the court below, to subject a house and lot in the city of Washington, the legal title of which was in the defendant, Sally Wheaton, to the payment of a debt for which the plaintiff had obtained a judg- • ment against her husband, Joseph Wheaton, the other defendant.
The lot was conveyed by John P. Van Ness, and Maria, his wife, and Clotworthy Stephenson, to the defendant, Sally