Terry v. Fontaine's Adm'r

Citations

• 83 Va. 451
• 2 S.E. 743
• 1887 Va. LEXIS 91

Syllabus

<p>1. Equitable jurisdiction and relief&emdash;Creditor's bill&emdash;Laches.&emdash;-On debt contracted by F. in 1865, T. got judgment in 1873. In 1870, F. bought lands which were conveyed to his sister. In 1883, after death of F. and sister, the lands were sold in suit to settle sister’s estate. Then T. brought his bill to apply proceeds to pay F.’s debts, on ground that the lands were conveyed to sister without consideration, to defraud F.’s creditors, and failed to explain delay to sue sooner.</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>The bill should be dismissed for laches.</p> <p>H. Idem &emdash; Fraud&emdash;Denial&emdash;Proof.&emdash;Answer to bill under oath denied fraud, and averred that the lands were conveyed to sister to satisfy judgment she had against F. No proof of fraudulency of judgment. Executions had been held up by order of sister. Plaintiff relied on loose declarations as to ownership of the lands. F. had acted for years as sister’s agent, and she had income from other property.</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>The fraud was not proved.</p> <p>3. Idem&emdash;Decree pro confesso.&emdash;Administrator being called on to answer, answered the bill under oath, denying the fraud, which was not proved. The heirs did not answer.</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>Complainant is not entitled to a decree pro confesso against the heirs&emdash;the defense made by administrator, not being purely personal to him, enuring to the benefit of all the defendants. Ashby v. Bell's Adm’r, 80 Va. 811.</p>