Durham Fer. Co. v. Hemphill

Citations

• 45 S.C. 621
• 24 S.E. 85
• 1896 S.C. LEXIS 27

Syllabus

<p>1. Assignment — Statute oe Frauds — Mortgage.—The facts, that a member of a firm executes a mortgage on individual property to the firm, which is assigned by it to a bank, and by the bank kept oS the record for two years, and that such member executes a second mortgage on individual property to said bank to secure firm debts within ninety days of assignment by firm, do not render the assignment void under the assignment acts or Statutes of Elizabeth.</p> <p>2. Ibid. — Ibid.—Ibid.—Rev. StaT., 2147, Considered. — A mortgage executed by-an individual member of a firm to a bank to secure firm indebtedness within ninety days before assignment of the firm for the benefit of creditors is not in violation of sec. 2147 of Rev. Stat. or Stat. of Elizabeth.</p> <p>3. Ibid. — Mortgage.—An assignment by a firm for the benefit of its creditors is not invalidated by the execution of a mortgage on individual property by an individual of the firm to a firm creditor, to secure firm debt, even though such mortgage may be set aside on the ground of collusion and fraud.</p> <p>4. Action — Assignment—Mortgage — Rev. Stat., 2147, Considered. — The assignee may bring an action to set aside a mortgage executed by the assignors within ninety days of a general assignment for benefit of creditors, but such mortgage would not affect the assignment. Rev. Stat., 2147, considered.</p> <p>5. Assignment — Homestead.—The reservation of the homestead of</p> <p>the partners ia a firm assignment, conveying only partnership assets, does not affect such assignment.</p> <p>6. The ASSIGNEES of Guy & Sandifer found not to be derelict in their duty.</p>