From Robeson. Trover for a colt, and on the trial, the Plaintiff proved a sale and delivery of the property to her by one Barnes, and a subsequent conversion by. the Defendant. ¶1}^ Defendant produced a judgment and execution therc-on against Barnes and himself in favor of one Ward, the date of which was prior to the sale to the Plaintiff, and w}jeil (¡,ftt was made, the execution was in force and might have been levied on the property.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 1876
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
¶1
The charge of the Judge in this case was certainly correct. The statutes against fraudulent conveyances in favor of creditors, can only he carried into effect by due process of law. If the sale of the colt in this case, was fraudulent as to creditors,
Ward’s
execution should have been levied upon it, in the hands of the Plaintiff. But the Defendant had no right to be a judge in his own cause, and seize upon it on that account. The sale between the parties was good and valid, and the Defendant in taking the property, acted as a wrongdoer.
