fraudulent conveyance has become a judgment creditor in the Martz v. Pfeifer, 80 Ky. 600; Napper v. Yager, 79 Ky. 241. La.-Zimmerman v. Fitch, 28 La. Ann. 454. Me.-Baxter v. Moses, 77 Me. 465, 1 Atl. 350, 52 Am. Rep. 783; Griffin v. Nitcher, 57 Me. 270; Fletcher v. Holmes, 40 Me. 364; Skeele v. Stanwood, 33 Me. 307; Caswell v. Caswell, 28 Me. 232; Webster v. Clerk, 25 Me. 313. Md. Rich v. Levy, 16 Md. 74; Uhl v. Dillon, 10 Md. 500, 69 Am. Dec. 172. Mich.-Trowbridge v. Bullard, 81 Mich. 451, 45 N. W. 1012; Nugent v. Nugent, 70 Mich. 52, 37 N. W. 706; First Nat. Bank v. Hosmer, 48 Mich. 200, 12 N. E. 212; Tyler v. Peatt, 30 Mich. 63. Minn.-Overmire v. Haworth, 48 Minn. 372, 51 N. W. 121, 31 Am. St. Rep. 660; Tolbert v. Horton, 31 Minn. 518, 18 N. W. 647; Jones v. Rahilly, 16 Minn. 320; Massey v. Gorton, 12 Minn. 145, 90 Am. Dec. 287. Miss. Ferguson v. Bobo, 54 Miss. 121; Fleming v. Grafton, 54 Miss. 79; Vasser v. Henderson, 40 Miss. 519, 90 Am. Dec. 351; Parish v. Lewis, Freem. 299. Mo.-Davidson v. Dockery, 179 Mo. 687, 78 S. W. 624; Mullen v. Hewitt, 103 Mo. 639, 15 S. W. 924; Alnutt v. Leper, 48 Mo. 319; Turner v. Adams, 46 Mo. 95; Merry v. Fremon, 44 Mo. 518; Martin v. Michael, 23 Mo. 50, 66 Am. Dec. 656; Clarke v. Laird, 60 Mo. App. 289; Dodd v. Levy, 10 Mo. App. 121; Kent v. Curtis, 4 Mo. App. 121. Neb.-Missouri, etc., Trust Co. v. Richardson, 57 Neb. 617, 78 N. W. 273; Fairbanks v. Welshans, 55 Neb. 362, 75 N. W. 865; Crowell V. Horacek, 12 Neb. 622, 12 N. W. 99; Weinland v. Cochran, 9 Neb. 480, 4 N. W. 67; Weil v. Lankins, 3 Neb. 384. N. J.-Francis v. Lawrence, 48 N. J. Eq. 508, 22 Atl. 259; Haggerty v. Nixon, 26 N. J. Eq. 42; Hunt v. Field, 9 N. J. Eq. 36, 57 Am. Dec. 365 N. M.-Wolcott v. Ashenfelter, 5 N. M. 442, 23 Pac. 780, 8 L. R. A. 691; Talbott v. Randall, 3 N. M. 226, 5 Pac. 533. N. C.-Hafner v. Irwin, 26 N. C. 529. N. D.-Amundson v. Wilson, 11 N. D. 193, 91 N. W. 37. Or.-Dawson v. Coffey, 12 Or. 513, 8 Pac. 838. R. I.-Smith v. Millett, 12 R. I. 59. Tenn.-McKeldin v. Gouldy, 91 Tenn. 680, 20 S. W. 231; Hopkins v. Webb, 28 Tenn. 519; Williams v. Tipton, 24 Tenn. 66, 42 Am. Dec. 420; Chester v. Greer, 24 Tenn. 26. Tex.-Arbuckle Bros. Coffee Co. v. Werner, 77 Tex. 43, 13 S. W. 963; Overstreet v. Manning, 67 Tex. 657, 4 S. W. 248. Vt.-Bassett v. St. Albans Hotel Co., 47 Vt. 313. Va.-Tate v. Liggat, 2 Leigh, 84; Chamberlayne v. Temple, 2 Rand. 384, 14 Am. Dec. 786. Wash.-Rothchild v. Trewella, 36 Wash. 679, 79 Pac. 480, 104 Am. St. Rep. 973, 68 L. R. A. 281, under a statute declaring fraudulent and void a sale of a stock of goods in bulk unless the purchaser obtains a list of the seller's creditors, and sees that the purchase money is applied on their claims, a simple contract creditor of the seller, without judgment 25 time intermediate between the bill and the answer. The fact that the debtor is entirely without assets and a suit would be of no avail does not relieve a creditor from the necessity of reducing his claim to judgment.26 The fact that the general creditor has obtained possession of the property alleged to have been fraudulently conveyed does not take him out of the rule," and a landlord who has levied a distress warrant is no more than a simple contract creditor of the tenant.28 A surety who has discharged a judgment rendered against him and his principal is a simple contract creditor of his principal," and the United States is merely a simple contract creditor of the sureties on an official bond, within the rule stated.30 For the purpose of enforcing their rights against fraudulent or void acts of an insolvent, however, the allowance and approval of creditors' claims in an insolvency court are equivalent to a judgment.31 A trustee who has entered a judgment against a debtor upon an order for or lien, cannot maintain a direct action at law against a purchaser not complying with the act to recover on the seller's debt to him; Klosterman v. Mason County Cent. R. Co., 8 Wash. 281, 36 Pac. 136; Thompson v. Caton, 3 Wash. Ter. 31, 13 Pac. 185. W. Va. Frye v. Miley, 54 W. Va. 324, 46 S. E. 135; Kennewig Co. v. Moore, 49 W. Va. 323, 38 S. E. 558. Wis.-Miller v. Drane, 122 Wis. 315, 99 N. W. 1017; Weber v. Weber, 90 Wis. 467, 63 N. W. 757; Gregory v. Rosenkrans, 78 Wis. 451, 47 N. W. 832; Ullman v. Duncan, 78 Wis. 213, 47 N. W. 266, 9 L. R. A. 683; Manson v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 64 Wis. 26, 24 N. W. 407, 54 Am. Rep. 573. 24. Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 451, 13 Sup. Ct. 883, 37 L. Ed. 804. 25. Brinkerhoff v. Brown, 4 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 671; Post v. Roach, 26 Fla. 442, 7 So. 854, mere buying of the action is not sufficient; St. Michael's College v. Merrick, 26 26. Austin v. Bruner, 169 Ill. 178, 48 N. E. 449, aff'g 65 Ill. App. 301; Kankakee Woolen Mill Co. v. Kampe, 38 Mo. App. 229. 27. Andrews v. Durant, 18 N. Y. 496. 29. Sanders v. Watson, 14 Ala. 198; Mugge v. Ewing, 54 Ill. 236; Peoples v. Tatum, 36 N. C. 414. But where a judgment creditor has filed his bill to set aside a conveyance made by his debtor, a surety of the debtor may also join in the suit without obtaining a judgment at law. Waller v. Todd, 33 Ky. 503, 28 Am. Dec. 94. 30. United States v. Ingate, 48 Fed. 251. 31. Ruggles V. Cannedy (Cal. 1898), 53 Pac. 911. 33 the payment of money to his predecessors in office, in their names, is a judgment creditor of the debtor. Judgment need not be docketed in the county where the land conveyed is located, where it was recovered in the county of the debtor's residence and execution thereon has been returned unsatisfied. One reason for the general rule stated above is that a court of equity can only interfere with the right of the debtor to dispose of his property at the instance of bona fide creditors and that it cannot be known with certainty that any one is an actual and subsisting creditor until the judgment has been obtained upon his claim.3 The principle of equitable intervention to annul or set aside transfers of a debtor's property, for being fraudulent as to his creditors, demands for its application an adjudication of the fact of the debt, and that it shall appear that an execution upon the judgment is incapable of levy because of the fraudulent transfer by the judgment debtor. It is based upon the assumption that a judgment which is a lien on the debtor's real estate and chattels real is a necessity in order to effectively exhaust all remedies at law, since it is the settled rule that unless the creditor has 36 35 32. Stokes v. Amerman, 121 N. Y. 337, 24 N. E. 819, aff'g 7 N. Y. Supp. 733. 33. Lanahan v. Caffrey, 47 App. Div. (N. Y.). 124, 57 N. Y. Supp. 724. 34. Kankakee Woolen Mill Co. v. Kampe, 38 Mo. App. 229. 35. Whitney v. Davis, 148 N. Y. 256, 42 N. E. 661; Prentice v. Bowden, 145 N. Y. 342, 40 N. E. 13; Decker v. Decker, 108 N. Y. 128, 15 N. E. 307; Candee v. Lord, 2 N. Y. 269, 51 Am. Dec. 294; Rogers v. Rogers, 3 Paige (N. Y.) 379; Virginia Bd. of Public Works v. Columbia College, 17 Wall. (U. S.) 521, 21 L. Ed. 687; Powell v. Howell, 63 N. C. 283; Colman v. Croker, 1 Ves. Jr. 161, 27 Eng. Reprint, 280. 36. N. Y.-Importers', etc., Nat. Bank v. Quackenbush, 143 N. Y. 567, 38 N. E. 728. U. S.-Hollins v. Brierfield Coal, etc., Co., 150 U. S. 371, 14 Sup. Ct. 127, 37 L. Ed. 1113; Viquesney v. Allen, 131 Fed. 21, 65 C. C. A. 259. Ill.-Austin v. Bruner, 65 Ill. App. 301. Minn.-Brasie V. Minneapolis Brewing Co., 87 Minn. 456, 92 N. W. 340, 94 Am. St. Rep. 709, 67 L. R. A. 865; Jackson v. Holbrook, 36 Minn. 494, 32 N. W. 852, 1 Am. St. Rep. 683. Mo.-Davidson V. Dockery, 179 Mo. 687, 78 S. W. 624; Crim v. Walker, 79 Mo. 335; Fisher v. Tallman, 74 Mo. 39; Merry v. Fremon, 44 Mo. 518. R. I.-Stone v. Wescott, 18 R. I. 517, 28 Atl. 662, 37 exhausted all his remedies at law, or in case he is not in a position to avail himself of all the remedies which courts of law give for the enforcement of judgments, a bill in equity cannot be maintained. Courts of equity are not tribunals for the collection of debts. It is also held that the creditor should have a specific lien upon the property involved to entitle him to equitable relief and that without a judgment he is not in a position to sustain legal injury from any disposition which the debtor may make of his property.39 In same states the general rule above stated has been recognized by legislative enactment. However, in some states, it has been modified in important respects by statute," and in other states by judicial decision.12 § 33. Statutory modification of rule as to necessity for judgment. By statute in a number of states creditors are permitted to sue to set aside a fraudulent conveyance without hav 37. N. Y.-Importers', etc., Nat. Bank v. Quackenbush, 143 N. Y. 567, 38 N. E. 728. Neb.-Brumbaugh v. Jones (1904), 98 N. W. 54. N. J. Bayley v. Bayley, 66 N. J. Eq. 84, 57 Atl. 271. N. C.-Brown v. Long, 36 N. C. 190, 36 Am. Dec. 43. Wis.-French Lumbering Co. V. Theriault, 107 Wis. 627, 83 N. W. 927, 81 Am. St. Rep. 856, 51 L. R. A. 910. 38. Taylor v. Bowker, 111 U. S. 110, 4 Sup. Ct. 397, 28 L. Ed. 368; Howe v. Whitney, 66 Me. 17; Webster v. Clark, 25 Me. 313; Fleming v. Grafton, 54 Miss. 79. 39. Ready v. Smith, 170 Mo. 163, 70 S. W. 484. 40. Bach v. Leopold, 8 La. Ann. 386. 41. DeLacy v. Hurst, 83 Ga. 223, 9 S. E. 1052; Mebane v. Layton, 86 N. C. 572; Gasget v. Scott, 17 Tenn. 244; Cassaday v. Anderson, 53 Tex. 527. See also next section. 42. Chadbourne v. Coe, 51 Fed. 479, 2 C. C. A. 327; Sandorn v. Maxwell, 18 App. Cas. (D. C.) 245; Frank v. Kissler, 30 Ind. 8; Meinhard v. Youngblood, 37 S. C. 231, 15 S. E. 950, 16 S. E. 771, a distinction is made between legal and actual fraud and it is held that the rule, being an arbitrary one, should not be applied in the latter case. The English and Canadian rule makes a distinction between actions in which the relief asked is the setting aside of the conveyance and those in which the creditor seeks to subject the property and holds that a simple contract creditor may maintain suit in the former case. Longeway v. Mitchell, 17 Grant Ch. (U. C.) 190; Reese River Silver Min. Co. v. Atwell, L. R. 7 Eq. 347, 20 L. T. Rep. N. S. 163, 16 Wkly. Rep. 601. ing previously obtained judgment against the debtor for the debt. But under a statute making a chattel mortgage void as to creditors unless filed as required by statute, although a simple contract creditor is as much within the protection of the statute as a creditor whose debt has been merged into a judgment, the mortgage cannot legally be questioned until the creditor clothes himself with a judgment and execution or with some legal process against the property, since the creditors cannot interfere with the property of the debtor without process." Under a statute providing that a creditor of a deceased insolvent debtor may, without obtaining a judgment on his claim, for the benefit of himself and other creditors, maintain an action to set aside any transfer made in fraud of creditors, that a creditor has ob 43. U. S.-In re Anrae Co., 117 Fed. 561. Ala. Freeman v. Pullen, 119 Ala. 235, 24 So. 57; Alabama Iron, etc., Co. v. McKeever, 112 Ala. 134, 20 So. 84; Carter v. Coleman, 82 Ala. 177, 2 So. 354; Bromberg v. Heyer, 69 Ala. 22; Lide v. Parker, 60 Ala. 165, the statute applies only to property situate within the State. Ind.-Phelps v. Smith, 116 Ind. 387, 17 N. E. 602, 19 N. E. 156; Carr v. Huette, 73 Ind. 378. Ky. Smith v. Curd, 24 Ky. L. Rep. 1960, 72 S. W. 744. Md.-Christopher v. Christopher, 64 Md. 583, 3 Atl. 296; Schaferman v. O'Brien, 28 Md. 565, 92 Am. Dec. 708; Sanderson v. Stockdale, 11 Md. 563. Miss.-McBride v. State Revenue Agent, 70 Miss. 716, 12 So. 699. See Jones v. Jones, 79 Miss. 261, 30 So. 551, as to suit for a tort. N. C.-Dawson Bank v. Harris, 84 N. C. 206. Ohio.-Bloomingdale v. Stein, 42 Ohio St. 168; Combs v. Watson, 32 S. C.-Miller v. Hughes, 33 S. C. Tenn.-Nailer v. Young, 75 Tenn. 735; August v. Seeskind, 42 Tenn. 166; Croone v. Bivens, 39 Tenn. 339. Va. Russell V. Randolph, 26 Gratt. (Va.) 705, the fact that a creditor obtains judgment does not make it necessary for him to issue execution. W. Va. Frye v. Miley, 54 W. Va. 324, 46 S. E. 135, but such a statute does not enable the creditor to sue before the maturity of his claim; Witz v. Lockridge, 39 W. Va. 463, 19 S. E. 876; Guggenheimer v. Lockridge, 39 W. Va. 457, 19 S. E. 874; State v. Bowen, 38 W. Va. 91, 18 S. E. 375. 44. Karst v. Gane, 136 N. Y. 316, 32 N. E. 1073; Kitchen v. Lowery, 127 N. Y. 59; Southard v. Benner, 72 N. Y. 424; Thompson v. Van Vechten, 27 N. Y. 568. 7 |