8

this does not affect the validity of the other deed. A transfer of property made to defraud creditors is valid as between the parties and their heirs, or personal representatives. A gift in fraud of a pursuing creditor is good against the administrator of a deceased donor, except to the extent necessary to pay the debts of the decedent.10 Neither the grantor nor his heirs can set aside a convey

Ill.-Mehan v. Mehan, 203 Ill. 180, 67 N. E. 770; McElroy v. Hiner, 133 Ill. 156, 24 N. E. 435; Finley v. McConnell, 60 Ill. 259; Horner v. Zimmermann, 45 Ill. 14; Getzler v. Saroni, 18 Ill. 511.

Ind.-Edwards v. Haverstick, 53 Ind. 348; Laney v. Laney, 2 Ind. 196. Iowa.-Stephens v. Harrow, 26 Iowa, 458.

V. Southwood

Ky.-Southwood (1906), 98 S. W. 304; Gillespie v. Gillespie, 2 Bibb. 89.

Mass.-Drinkwater v. Drinkwater, 4 Mass. 354.

Miss.-Shaw v. Millsaps, 50 Miss. 380; Ellis v. McBride, 27 Miss. 155; Foules v. Foules (1903), 33 So. 972. Mo.-George v. Williamson, 26 Mo. 190, 72 Am. Dec. 203; McLaughlin v. McLaughlin, 16 Mo. 242.

N. H.-Jewell v. Porter, 31 N. H. 34. N. J.-Hildebrand v. Willig, 64 N. J. Eq. 249, 53 Atl. 1035; Lokerson v. Stillwell, 13 N. J. Eq. 357.

N. C.-Coltraine v. Causey, 38 N. C. 246, 42 Am. Dec. 168.

Ohio.-White v. Brocaw, 14 Ohio St. 339; Tremper v. Barton, 18 Ohio, 418; Barton v. Morris, 15 Ohio, 408.

Pa.-Buehler V. Gloninger, 2 Watts, 226; Reichart v. Castator, 5 Bin. 109, 6 Am. Dec. 402.

Tenn.-Battle v. Street, 85 Tenn. 282, 2 S. W. 384; Dunbar v. McFall, 28 Tenn. 505; Lassiter v. Cole, 27 Tenn. 621; Neely v. Wood, 18 Tenn. 486.

Tex.-Davis v. Davis (Civ. App. (1906), 98 S. W. 198; Fowler v. Stoneum, 11 Tex. 478, 62 Am. Dec. 490; Epperson v. Young, 8 Tex. 135; Danzey v. Smith, 4 Tex. 411.

Wis.-Dietrich v. Koch, 35 Wis. 618; Fargo v. Ladd, 6 Wis. 109; La Crosse, etc., R. Co. v. Seeger, 4 Wis. 268.

9. Kinnemon v. Miller, 2 Md. Ch. 407; Gilbert v. Stockman, 81 Wis. 602, 51 N. W. 1076, 52 N. W. 1045, 29 Am. St. Rep. 922. See also cases cited in preceding notes to this section.

10. Schwalber v. Ehman, 62 N. J. Eq. 314, 49 Atl. 1085.

But where plaintiff's intestato bailed certain funds with defendant for the purpose of fraudulently preventing a creditor from enforcing his claim, but intestate never actually divested himself of title to the funds, his fraudulent intent was no defence to an action by his adminis

12

ance on the ground that it was executed with intent to defraud creditors.11 A voluntary conveyance, though fraudulent as to existing creditors, is valid as between the parties and their privies.' A conveyance of personal property, though fraudulent as to creditors because of the want of change of possession, is valid as between the parties.13 The rule that a fraudulent conveyance is valid as between the parties, though void as to creditors, is not affected by statutes making it a penal or criminal offense for any person to be a party to such a transaction," or by statutes providing for the

trator to recover the fund from the bailee. Knapp v. Knapp (Mo. App. 1906), 96 S. W. 295.

11. Helton v. Cunnagim (Ky.), 54 S. W. 851.

12. N. Y.-Jackson v. Garnsey, 16 Johns. 189; Bunn v. Winthrop, 1 Johns. Ch. 329, although the deed be retained by the grantor until his death.

Ala.-Means v. Hicks, 65 Ala. 241; Strange v. Graham, 56 Ala. 614; Greenwood v. Coleman, 34 Ala. 150. Ark.-Anderson v. Dunn, 19 Ark.

650.

Ill.-Moore v. Horsley, 156 Ill. 36, 40 N. E. 323; Fitzgerald v. Forristal, 48 Ill. 228; Choteau v. Jones, 11 Ill. 300, 50 Am. Dec. 460.

Ind.-Anderson v. Etter, 102 Ind. 115, 26 N. E. 218; Sharpe v. Davis, 76 Ind. 17.

Ky.-Stewart v. Dailey, 16 Ky.

212.

Mich.-Jackson v. Cleveland, 15 Mich. 94, 90 Am. Dec. 266.

Miss.-Newall v. Newell, 34 Miss.

385.

N. H.-Jewell v. Porter, 31 N. H. 34; Abbott v. Tenney, 18 N. H. 109.

N. J.-Gardner v. Short, 19 N. J. Eq. 341; Tantum v. Miller, 11 N. J. Eq. 551.

Va.-Chamberlayne v. Temple, 2 Rand. 384, 14 Am. Dec. 786.

A voluntary bond, though fraudulent as to creditors, is, as between the parties, both in law and equity, a gift of the money secured by it. Handy v. Philadelphia, etc., R. Co., 1 Phila. (Pa.) 31.

13. Conn.-Meade v. Smith, 16 Conn. 346.

Ill. Tuttle v. Robinson, 78 Ill. 332; Cruikshank v. Cogswell, 26 Ill. 366.

Md. Gough v. Edelen, 5 Gill, 101. Mass.-Shumway V. Rutter, 24 Mass. 56.

Pa.-Ditman v. Raule, 124 Pa. St. 225, 16 Atl. 819; Yocum v. Kehler, 1 Walk. 84, 28 Leg. Int. 68. See McCullough v. Willey, 192 Pa. St. 176, 4 Atl. 999.

Tex.-Robinson v. Martell, 11 Tex. 149; Danzey v. Smith, 4 Tex. 411. See Hoeser v. Kraeke, 29 Tex. 450.

Va.-Thomas v. Soper, 5 Munf. 28. 14. Anderson v. Etter, 102 Ind. 115, 26 N. E. 218; Galpin v. Galpin, 75 Iowa, 454, 38 N. W. 156; Andrews v. Marshall, 48 Me. 46; Ellis

equitable distribution of insolvents' estates among their creditors.15 Though a conveyance may be fraudulent as against creditors, it is good as against the grantor and tort feasors not claiming as creditors.16 Thus, one to whom a debtor transfers all his stock, store fixtures and accounts by bill of sale, in consideration whereof the transferee agrees to pay the debts due specified creditors, and orally agrees with the debtor and certain of such creditors to accept and take possession of the property, to sell it and apply the proceeds to the debts specified in the agreement, thereby becomes a trustee for the benefit of the creditors, and the trust thereby created, which relates solely to personal property, is good as between the parties to it, although partly in writing and partly oral, and cannot, in an action by the creditors to enforce it, be questioned by the trustee on the ground that it is illegal as made for the purpose of defrauding creditors." A deed or other transfer of property from parent to child, though fraudulent as to creditors, is good between the parties. 18 A transfer from husband to wife is valid, as between the parties, though made in fraud of the husband's creditors.19 So, a conveyance to a wife from a third person, though

v. Higgins, 32 Me. 34; Davy v. Kelley, 66 Wis. 452, 29 N. W. 232.

15. Lassiter v. Cole, 27 Tenn. 621. 16. Worth v. Northam, 26 N. C. 102.

17. Neresheimer v. Smyth, 167 N. Y. 202, 60 N. E. 449, aff'g 35 App. Div. (N. Y.) 632, 55 N. Y. Supp. 1144.

18. Robinson v. Stewart, 10 N. Y. 189; Thweatt v. McCollough, 84 Ala. 517, 4 So. 399, 5 Am. St. Rep. 391; Dearman v. Radcliffe, 5 Ala. 192; Burtch v. Elliott, 3 Ind. 99; Murphy v. Hubert, 16 Pa. St. 50; Eyrick v. Hetrick, 13 Pa. St. 488; Geiger v. Welsh, 1 Rawle (Pa.), 349; Smith v. Gibson, 1 Yeates (Pa.), 291; and other cases cited in preceding notes to this section.

19. Ill.-Grosse v. Sweet, 188 Ill.

555, 59 N. E. 432, aff'g 89 Ill. App. 418, fraudulent assignment by an employee of claims against his employer to his wife; Moore v. Horsley, 156 Ill. 36, 40 N. E. 323.

Iowa.-Hays v. Marsh, 123 Iowa, 81, 98 N. W. 604; King v. Tharp, 26 Iowa, 283.

Mass.-Pierce V. LeMonier, 172 Mass. 508, 53 N. E. 125.

Miss.-Wyatt v. Wyatt, 81 Miss. 219, 32 So. 317; Dulion v. Harkness, 80 Miss. 8, 31 So. 416, 92 Am. St. Rep. 563.

N. J.-Stillwell v. Stillwell, 47 N. J. Eq. 275, 20 Atl. 960, 24 Am. St. Rep. 408.

Tex.-Herndon v. Reed, 82 Tex. 647, 18 S. W. 665; Wilson v. Trawick, 10 Tex. 428; B. C. Evans & Co. v. Guipel (Civ. App. 1896), 35 S. W.

21

fraudulent as to the creditors of the husband, who furnished the purchase money, is nevertheless valid and binding on the grantor and the husband.20 Not only deeds generally, but also all instruments of transfer or conveyance made for the purpose of cheating and defrauding creditors, as, for example, an executed contract,2 a promissory note," an instrument creating a lien in favor of one creditor, an agreement to hold property in secret trust," bonds, mortgages and deeds of trust,26 and bills of sale," are valid and obligatory upon the parties and only voidable at the instance of creditors. A confession of judgment, though void as to creditors,

23

22. Van Wy v. Clark, 50 Ind. 259. 23. Steele v. Moore, 54 Ind. 52. 24. Gillum v. Kirksey, 29 Ky. L. Rep. 422, 93 S. W. 591; Everett v. Winn, 1 Sm. & M. Ch. (Miss.) 67.

25. Hummel's Estate, 161 Pa. St. 215, 28 Atl. 1113. But see Powell v. Inman, 53 N. C. 436, 82 Am. Dec. 436, bonds to convey are absolutely void. 26. U. 8.-Lefmann v. Brill, 142 Fed. 44, 77 C. C. A. 230.

Ill.-Upton v. Craig, 57 Ill. 257; Fitzgerald v. Forristal, 48 Ill. 228. Ind.-Van Wy v. Clark, 50 Ind.

259.

Mass.-Pierce V. LeMonier, 172 Mass. 508, 53 N. E. 125.

Mich.-Hess v. Final, 32 Mich. 515. Miss.-Barwick v. Moyse, 74 Miss. 415, 21 So. 238, 60 Am. St. Rep. 512; Parkhurst v. McGraw, 24 Miss. 134. N. H.-Blake v. Williams, 36 N. H. 39.

N. J.-Risley v. Parker, 50 N. J. Eq. 284, 23 Atl. 424; Campbell v. Tompkins, 32 N. J. Eq. 170.

Or.-U. S. Mortgage Co. v. Marquam, 41 Or. 391, 69 Pac. 37, 41.

Pa.-Bonesteel v. Sullivan, 104 Pa. St. 9; Gill v. Henry, 95 Pa. St. 388; Murphy v. Hubert, 16 Pa. St. 50.

27. Fla.-Kahn v. Wilkins, 36 Fla. 428, 18 So. 584.

Ky.-Mason v. Baker, 8 Ky. 208, 10 Am. Dec. 724.

N. J.-Evans v. Herring, 27 N. J. L. 243.

Pa.-Jones v. Shaw, 8 Pa. Super. Ct. 487, 43 Wkly. Notes Cas. 168. Tex.-McClenny v. Floyd, 10 Tex.

159.

Vt.-Boutwell v. McClure, 30 Vt.

674.

is valid between the parties.28 A conveyance of a debtor's property by assignment, although void as against creditors in general, is nevertheless valid between the parties and binding upon the assignor, upon his representatives after his death, and upon any of his creditors who have given assent to it.29 A chattel mortgage may be good as between the parties, although void as to creditors by reason of its not complying with certain requirements of the statute.

30

§ 2. Right to impeach or rescind transaction as fraudulent.The law will not lend its aid to a party seeking to set aside his own fraudulent conveyance. Neither law nor equity will relieve either of the parties to a fraudulent transfer from the consequences of their own acts, as against the other, nor aid them against their own wrong, nor will the courts allow such a transfer to be attacked and impeached, or rescinded, at the instance of either of the parties, his privies, or assigns, whether the relief is sought as a direct cause of action or by way of defense, when none of the creditors seek the

28. Seaving V. Brinkerhoff, 5 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 329; Franklin v. Stagg, 22 Mo. 193; Shallcross V. Deats, 43 N. J. L. 177; Harbaugh v. Butner, 148 Pa. St. 273, 23 Atl. 983; Blystone v. Blystone, 51 Pa. St. 273; Clarkson v. Thom, 2 Pennyp. (Pa.) 491; Garrett v. Longnecker, 2 Leg. Rec. (Pa.) 174; Becker v. Hammes, 2 Kulp (Pa.), 404.

29. N. Y.-Averill v. Loucks, 6 Barb. 470; Brownell v. Curtis, 10 Paige, 210; Mills v. Argell, 6 Paige, 577; Osborne v. Moss, 7 Johns. 161.

Ill.-Grosse v. Sweet, 188 Ill. 555, 59 N. E. 432, aff'g 89 Ill. App. 418.

App. 619, 81 S. W. 481, assignment of certificate of deposit.

N. J.-Pillsbury v. Kingon, 31 N. J. Eq. 609.

Pa.-Ahl's Appeal, 129 Pa. St. 49, 18 Atl. 471.

R. 1.-Gardner v. Commercial Nat. Bank, 13 R. I. 155.

Eng.-Bessey v. Windham, 6 Q. B. 166, 14 L. J. Q. B. 7, 51 E. C. L. 166; Robinson v. McDonnell, 2 B. & Ald. 134; Steel v. Brown, 1 Taunt. 381, 9 Rev. Rep. 795.

30. Lane v. Lutz, 23 Wend. (N. Y.) 653; Stewart v. Platt, 101 U. S. 731, 25 L. Ed. 816; Lloyd v. Foley, 11 Fed. 410, 6 Sawy. (U. S.) 424; Adlard v. Rodgers, 105 Cal. 327, 38 Pac. 889; Harms v. Silva, 91 Cal. 636, 27 Pac. 1088; Hackett v. Manlove, 14 Cal. 85; Davis v. Ransom, 26 Ill. 100.