Chisolm v. Moore

Citations

• 49 Pa. Super. 132
• 1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 296

Syllabus

<p>Deeds — Consideration—Fraudulent conveyances — Rights of creditor— Deed from parent to child — Evidence—Burden of proof.</p> <p>1. A person in debt cannot convey to his child or children all of his property without an adequate consideration, nor so dispose of it as to hinder and delay creditors, inasmuch as the statute of 13 Eliz. is aimed not only at conveyances made with an actual intention to cheat, but against such as hinder and delay creditors in the collection of their debts.</p> <p>2. If a conveyance is made without any consideration, the transaction is fraudulent on its face, and no evidence is necessary to show a fraudulent intent, or to avoid the deed as to existing creditors. Where a valuable consideration exists not expressed in the conveyance the burden is on the grantee to show that it is of such character as to save the transaction from the prohibition of the statute.</p> <p>3. Where a mother makes a deed of all her real estate and gives all her personal property to her two sons shortly before her death, such deed will be set aside, at the instance of a creditor of the mother, where there is no evidence of a consideration passing from the sons to the mother, and a claim that they had agreed to pay their mother’s debts is not supported by any testimony. A finding of fact that there had been such an agreement, filed two months after the final decree in the equity suit setting aside the decree, is too late. Even if there had been such an agreement to pay debts it would have been immaterial, inasmuch as the conveyance hindered and delayed the creditor in the collection of his claim.</p>