Scholle

Scholle v. Finnell

Good Law
166 Cal. 546·1913 Cal. LEXIS 364·137 P. 241
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 12, 1913Sac. No. 1915.California4,085 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

This action was brought in Tehama County by the plaintiff as a creditor of John Finnell, deceased, to have set aside several separate conveyances of real property made by him to the four appellants, his sons, all of which, it is claimed, were made by him when insolvent and in fraud of his creditors, particularly the plaintiff; that he be adjudged to have a lien on said property, and for an equitable execution to satisfy it. The plaintiff had judgment setting aside three of the conveyances as fraudulent and void and granting the relief prayed for, and each of the defendants appeals from that portion of the judgment which affects the conveyance to him. Separate motions for a new trial were made and denied, and each defendant appeals from the order denying his motion. These several appeals, while separately taken, are presented on the same transcript and argued in the same briefs. The same points for a reversal of the judgment and orders are urged, and all of these appeals are considered and disposed of in this opinion. The complaint, filed March 21, 1907, alleged that the plaintiff loaned to John Finnell at various times between July 5, 1893, and February 10, 1897, divers sums of…

Addendum

The petition for rehearing in this case is denied. The statement in the opinion that "it equally follows that the other defense of laches is governed by the same principle" is not to be taken as holding that laches is to be governed by the same rule as applies to limitations, but only that under the record in this case no laches is shown. *Page 557

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.