Siffermann v. Hill

Decided January 21, 1907

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1907-01-21

<p>1. Resulting trust—when not established. Held, from the evidence in this case, that it did not appear that a resulting trust existed with respect to the property in question as against the claims of creditors.</p> <p>2. Consideration—when not sufficient. Held, that the consideration of the conveyance in question in this case, which was a conveyance from husband to wife, was not sufficient as against the complaining creditors, and that such conveyance should be subject to the claims of such creditors.</p>

Reversed and remanded with instructions · Decided 1907-01-21

Mr. Presiding Justice Brown,

¶1dissenting:

¶2It fell to my lot to formulate the opinion of the court in this case, and I concur in that opinion that no express or resulting trust was proved in favor of the appellee in this case. But I cannot see why the facts found by the master do not justify his conclusion that while, after the sale of the O’Brien street property, the $9,000 of net proceeds was the money' of Mr. Hill, yet that he at the same time was indebted to his wife in the sum of $3,000.

¶3If this be so, I see no reason why his attempted preference of her by deeding the Hermitage avenue property to her should not be upheld. It seems to me she has a superior equity to the appellant to the extent of the indebtedness to her. As appellant’s bill did hot offer or contemplate the prior satisfaction or security of appellant’s debt, but asked that the conveyance be canceled to secure a preference for appellant. I think it was properly dismissed.