Chevalier

Chevalier v. Commins

Good Law
106 Cal. 580·1895 Cal. LEXIS 644·39 P. 929
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 24, 1895No. 15704California844 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Fleet, J.

Plaintiff brings this action as assignee in insolvency of one Healy, to recover certain personal property, or its value, which it is alleged was transferred by said Healy to defendants within one month before the filing of the petition in insolvency, with a view to give a preference to the defendants, and with reasonable cause by the latter to believe that said Healy was insolvent, in violation of section 55 of the Insolvent Act of 1880.

Verdict and judgment were for plaintiff, and from the judgment and an order denying a new trial the defendants appeal.

1. It is contended that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict; that it establishes, without conflict, that defendants in taking the transfer acted in the utmost good faith, upon a valuable consideration, and without cause to believe that Healy was insolvent, or that he was making said transfer in contemplation of insolvency. And further, that it appears, without controversy, that the transfer was made and accepted in pursuance of a verbal understanding made between defendants and Healy in 1890, whereby the latter agreed that, in consideration of defendants, who were wholesale liquor dealers, selling Healy goods on…

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.