Shaw v. Millsaps

Citations

• 50 Miss. 380

Syllabus

<p>1. Fraudulent Conveyances — Effect thereof. — A conveyance made to delay, hinder, or defraud, is only void as to creditors. As to them the title is still in the grantor for the purposes of paying debts. It is good as against the grantor and his heirs.</p> <p>3. Same — Bill to Cancel — Necessary Parties. — The authorities are not agreed as to whether the liens of a fraudulent grantor are necessary parties to a bill to cancel a fraudulent conveyance. Smith v. Grimm, 26 Penn. St., 95. Gaylord v. Kelsliaw, 1 Wallace, 81. Where an answer to a bill is made a cross bill, and asks for the cancellation of a deed, the complainants in the cross bill must confine it to the parties in the original bill. New parties cannot be introduced in a cross bill. '</p> <p>3. Same — Case in Judgment. — M., having a decree against S., was proceeding to sell her land levied upon, when she was enjoined by M. S., who claimed the land by virtue of a conveyance to her from W., trustee, etc., made before the decree was rendered against S. Pending the injunction, S. died. Upon the final hearing M. made her answer a cross bill, and in it prayed for the cancellation of the deed to M. S., as fraudulent. A decree was rendered accordingly. Held, that this decree was erroneous, as the proper parties were not before the court to warrant it in cancelling the deed; but the decree should have been, dissolving the injunction and allowing the land to be sold under the former decree.</p>