Chaffee v. Runkel, Rowley & Co.

Citations

• 11 S.D. 333
• 77 N.W. 583
• 1898 S.D. LEXIS 126

Syllabus

<p>3. On an issue as to whether a debtor was about to dispose of its property with intent to defraud its creditors, affidavits showed that the debtor was largely indebted for work and labor, and had tried to induce plaintiff, a laborer, to enter into a sham purchase, to prevent his co-laborers from obtaining a lien on the property to be sold; that afterwards the debtor repeatedly informed plaintiff and his co-laborers that, unless they resumed work, it would use all means to place its property so that they could get nothing for the money due them. One not a party to the action made affidavit that after the laborers quit work the debtor sold part of its property to a son-in-law of one of its officers, who had no capital, and that he believed such sale a sham: that said officer said in the presence of affiant 1 hat, if the, laborers who quit work did not go back to work, the debtor would arrange its affairs so that the laborers would never g-et the pay for their past work. Such statements were corroborated in every particular, though controverted by the, debtor. Held, to sustain the burden of showing- that the attachment, on its merits, was warranted.</p> <p>2. Allowing the sheriff to file ah amended return of the attached property, which added the estimated value of the articles attached, is within the sound judicial discretion of the trial court, both under general practice, and under Comp. Lawn. <¡4938, providing that, in the furtherance of justice, process may be amended before and after judgment.</p>