Edmonson v. Meacham

Citations

• 50 Miss. 34

Syllabus

<p>1. Conveyances — Statute oe Frauds.— Purchases with the debtors money in the name of a third person, are not embraced in terms by the statute of frauds. Gowing v. Rich, 1 Ired., 553. The statute only operates upon conveyances made by the fraudulent debtor. Lamplugh v. Lamplugh, 1 Pr. Will, 111.</p> <p>2.. Same — Rule at Common Law.— It is a maxim in the common law that fraud vitiates every transaction that it taints. Essentially the same principles exist at common law as are declared by the statutes. The fundamental principle is, that the insolvent debtor cannot purchase property for his wife and children so that they may hold it in defiance of his creditors. Such purchases of land, though not within the letter and terms of the statute of frauds, are nevertheless condemned by the common law, and the creditor may pursue the debtor’s fund into the property and subject that.</p> <p>3. Same — Advances by I-Iusband — When Yalid. — A debtor may innocently subtract from his resources such means as may he reasonably necessary for the support of his family and the education of his children, which his creditor could not pursue.</p> <p>4. Same — Homestead Exemption. — A fraudulent conveyance does not defeat the homestead. Wood v. Chambers, 20 Texas, 247, The title of the exemptionist is dependent on the facts “ of his being the head of a family and residing upon the premises.” When the occupancy ceases, the right to exemption is lost, and the property is liable to seizure and sale by-judgment creditors or by attachment. Lessly v. Phipps, 49 Miss., 790.</p>