Bowman v. Sherrill
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Me. Justice McBride
delivered the opinion of the court.
1. Where a party, fraudulently conveying land, is insolvent or has been adjudged a bankrupt, the issuance of an execution is not necessary.
2, 3. We are satisfied from the testimony that both the conveyances were made or procured with intent to defraud creditors, and that Mrs. Sherrill did not contribute anything toward the purchase of either tract. Either of the defendants had a right to claim a homestead in the property on the Moore claim, and this right is not defeated by a conveyance from one to the other. A decree, such as is sought in this case, would operate practically as an execution, and we see no reason why this exemption should not be claimed and urged in this proceeding. The decree should be so modified as to provide that plaintiff should have a lien upon the tract in the Moore claim for the amount of the proved debts, subject to the right of *605 defendants or either of them to occupy it as a homestead, with leave to apply to the court for an order of sale whenever it shall cease to be so occupied.
In all other respects the decree will be affirmed. Neither ■party will recover costs in this court. Modified.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.