Frankel
Frankel v. Deidesheimer
Opinion
Lead Opinion
We are of opinion that the evidence is insufficient to justify the findings of fact in the court below in the following particulars, viz.: That the location of the Willow quartz lode was made at the request or for the use or benefit of the defendant, Philipp Deidesheimer; that Deides *769 heimer conveyed an undivided half of the American quartz lode to Busch on the 21st of April, 1884, or at any other time than within a day or two of October 15, 1883; that the deed from Deidesheimer was antedated; that the deed was executed or accepted with the intent or for the purpose of hindering, delaying, or defrauding any creditor of said Deidesheimer; that at the time the deed was executed an undivided half of the American quartz lode was of the apparent or market value of four thousand dollars, or of any sum exceeding one dollar; that Deidesheimer transferred any interest in the American quartz lode, or in the Young America Consolidated Mining Company, for the purpose of, or with the intent of, hindering, delaying, or defrauding any creditor; that the consideration for the issuance and delivery of stock to Matilda Deidesheimer and Philipp Deidesheimer was that Busch should convey to any…