Renninger v. Spatz

Citations

• 128 Pa. 524
• 18 A. 405
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 811

Syllabus

<p>(a) Spatz, the claimant of personalty in a sheriff’s interpleader, had bought the farm of Snader at sheriff’s sale, took possession thereof, and after-wards bought from Snader the property on the farm, and then leased the dwelling and the personalty to Snader’s wife, who was his sister, and employed Snader as a hired man on the farm.</p> <p>1. It was for the jury to find from the evidence whether the sale of the personalty to the claimant was in good faith or colorable, and whether the “ change of possession was all that could reasonably be expected of the vendor, taking into view the character and situation of the property, and the relation of the parties: ” Evans v. Scott, 89 Pa. 136.</p> <p>2. But it was'error to refuse a point for instruction by the execution creditor, the defendant in the issue, that if the claimant paid full value for the property, and the object of the sale was to defraud the defendant, or the intention of the parties was to hinder and delay him in collecting his claim against Snader, the sale as to the defendant was void: Covanhovan v. Hart, 21 Pa. 495.</p>