Miller v. McAlister

Citations

• 178 Pa. 140
• 35 A. 594
• 1896 Pa. LEXIS 1144

Syllabus

<p>Judgment — Fraudulent confession — Evidence.</p> <p>On an issue as to whether a judgment confessed by a debtor in failing circumstances for more than the sum due the creditor was confessed with intent to defraud other creditors, or to secure future advances, evidence that soon after the confession of the judgment another judgment was confessed to a third person for such fraudulent purpose is inadmissible against the judgment creditor, he having had no knowledge of such fact.</p> <p>Judgment for more than is due — Fraud—Issue to determine the validity of judgment.</p> <p>S. owed M. $700 on a promissory note, which ran for ten years without the payment of interest on it. At the end of the ten years it was agreed that the amount due M. was $1,025. M. then requested S. to give him a judgment. S. stated that lie would soon be called upon to pay over moneys which he held as a guardian, and at his request M. agreed that the judgment note should be drawn for$3,000, and that S. could draw upon him when the money was wanted. About two years afterwards M. advanced $800 to S. upon the security of the judgment. A short time afterwards S. died. There was no evidence that the note had been given for $3,000 with any fraudulent intent. In 1895, the amount actually due, including interest, was about $2,400. At the instance of another judgment creditor of S. an issue was framed to determine the validity of the judgment and, if valid, the amount due on it. Held, that a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff in the judgment should be sustained.</p>