Grunsky

Grunsky v. Parlin

Good Law
110 Cal. 179·1895 Cal. LEXIS 1037·42 P. 575
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 26, 1895Sac. No. 8California528 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Britt, J.

Hull was a dealer in stationery and musical instruments. His voluntary petition in insolvency was filed June 16, 1893, and in due course plaintiff was chosen his assignee. At sundry times within three days next before said June 16th, Hull sold to defendant certain pianos and organs, and notes and other contracts previously taken by him in the course of business with his customers; the amount of the sales to defendant was thirteen hundred and eighty-five dollars, of which six hundred and fifty-six dollars was paid in cash, and by agreement the sum of seven hundred and twenty-nine dollars was to be subsequently paid in installments. Plaintiff brought this action to set aside such sales, alleging that the same were made to prevent the coming cf the property to the possession of the assignee, and its ratable distribution among Hull’s creditors, and to defeat the objects of the Insolvent Act of 1880. The trial was by the court, which found that the defendant made his purchases in good faith, without the intent charged and for sufficient consideration; defendant had judgment accordingly. Appellant urges that the findings are unsupported by the evidence.

The transfers in question were…

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.