Skip to main content
· 9/6/1899

Casey v. Leggett

Citations

  • 125 Cal. 664
  • 58 P. 264
  • 1899 Cal. LEXIS 923

Syllabus

<p>Fbaudulent Conveyance—Findings—Considebation— Sufficiency of Evidence—Review upon Appeal.—Where a conveyance by an insolvent debtor to his brother, antedating an attachment and execution sale of the interest of the debtor, was assailed as fraudulent by the execution purchaser, a finding that the conveyance was executed for a valuable consideration in payment of large indebtedness of the debtor to his brother, is sufficiently supported by their testimony to such consideration, if not contradicted or impeached otherwise than by its own weakness, though it may seem in some respects inherently improbable to the appellate court, which cannot substitute its opinion upon the weight of testimony for that of the trial court sitting as a jury to try the case.</p> <p>Id.—Deliveby of Deed to Attobney of Geantbe.—A finding that ■the deed was delivered to the brother as grantee is sufficiently supported by testimony that it was drafted by his attorney at his request, and forwarded to the grantor for execution, and was returned to the attorney and held by him for the grantee after its execution.</p> <p>Id.—Pbesumption of Title—Bubden of Pboof as to Fbaud.—The deed having been executed for a valuable consideration and delivered to the grantee, the law presumes that the title was rightfully acquired by him; and the burden of proof is upon the execution purchaser to show that it was conveyed with fraudulent intent on the part of the grantor, and that the grantee purchased with knowledge of such fraudulent intent, or under such circumstances as to put him upon inquiry as to the fraud of the grantor, and was not taken by him in good faith.</p> <p>Id.—Goon Faith op Grantee—Support op Finding—Absence op Proop.—A finding in favor of the good faith of the grantee as a purchaser for value without notice of fraud on the part of the grantor, is supported by the absence, of proof of facts and circumstances putting him on inquiry as to such fraud.</p> <p>Id.—Circumstantial Proop op Fraud—Sus

Judges: Cooper

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.