Leon v. J. Goldman & Son

Citations

• 66 Tex. 621
• 1 S.W. 899
• 1886 Tex. LEXIS 582

Syllabus

<p>1. Pleading—Misjoinder of parties—Fraudulent transfer—Creditors—Remedy —Four creditors by simple contract, in one action, sued their common debtor, and, charging that other parties had conspired with him to defraud plaintiffs, and were in possession of the proceeds of his property, sought against them a personal judgment for the amount of plaintiffs’ claims against the debtor. Held, it being the law that the proceeds of property fraudulently conveyed and in the hands of a transferee who was a party to the fraud, can not be reached by personal judgment against the transferee, there was a misjoinder of parties plaintiff. (Following, Le Gierse & Co. v. Helium & Rotan, 66 Tex.)</p> <p>2. Practice—See opinion for circumstances under which a judgment of dismissal was proper, upon the ground that there was no request that the case proceed to trial.</p> <p><3. Same—An objection in this court to a judgment of the district court, because rendered when the record disclosed the fact that one of the partners of the defendant firm was dead, comes too late. The death of the party defendant should have been called to the attention of the district court by suggestion, and service had upon the legal representatives of the deceased party.</p>