Skip to main content
· 11/24/1891

Dilworth v. Curts

Citations

  • 139 Ill. 508
  • 29 N.E. 861

Syllabus

<p>1. Fraudulent conveyance—liability of grantee. Where an insolvent debtor fraudulently conveys his real estate and personal property, including his notes and accounts, to another, -who is empowered to dispose of the same and to pay such creditors as the grantee may be able to make terms with, the latter will have no cause of complaint if the court, on creditor’s bill, charges him with such amounts as he may have received from sales of the property and from collections, and gives him credit for all payments made by him to creditors of his grantor, and charges him with the value of such property as he may-have encumbered to pay his own debts or otherwise converted to his-own use, so as to put it beyond the reach of executions, at the time ho so encumbers or appropriates to his own use.</p> <p>2. Where the fraudulent grantee of property encumbers the same to secure his own debt to one entitled to protection as a bona fide creditor of such fraudulent grantee, the latter will have no right to insist that the creditors of the fraudulent grantor shall first seek satisfaction out of the property so encumbered, when the encumbrance, at the time of the hearing, exceeds its value. The court is not bound to require the creditors to perform a useless act as a condition precedent to obtaininga personal decree against the grantee for the value of the property at the time he encumbered the same.</p> <p>3. On a creditor’s bill the master charged the fraudulent assignee of the debtor with certain notes and accounts which he had received, which were not on hand when the bill was filed and were not accounted for, and also with certain other notes and accounts which went into his hands, which might have been collected by the use of ordinary diligence : Held, that there was no error in such charge.</p> <p>4. Where such holder accepts a large amount of notes and accounts, on a transfer of his assignor, to defraud creditors, the law will hold him to use due diligence to protect and prese

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a claim “could reasonably be known” when it “could have [been] learned”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Craig

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.