Etchebarne

Etchebarne v. Roeding

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 847·89 Cal. 517·26 P. 1079
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 22, 1891No. 13102California1,411 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

On February 8,1877, one Estanislao Hernandez, a defendant herein, being insolvent, made an assignment of his property—consisting of several tracts of land, and a large amount of live-stock and other personal property—to Frederick Roeding, also a defendant, in trust, for the payment of his debts and the benefit of his creditors. At the time of the assignment, Hernandez made an inventory and statement which purported to set forth his property, his debts, and his creditors.

The present action was brought by a large number of creditors of said Hernandez. It is averred in the complaint, “ that the assignment was fraudulent; that by collusion between said Hernandez and said Roeding, property of the former of great value was fraudulently omitted from said inventory, and pretended, but not real, debts were set forth in said statement as owing to certain persons, who are also made parties defendant; that after the assignment, Roeding allowed Hernandez to remain in possession and receive the profits of a large part of the property; that Roeding for a long time failed to render any account as assignee, and when pressed to do so by plaintiffs, rendered a simulated and fraudulent account; and…

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.