Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

168 Ala. 363

Stephenson v. Bird

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 2, 1910

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1910-06-02

Morgan Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. W. H. Simpson. Bill by Richard L. Stephenson, as trustee in bankruptcy of C. H. Bird, against Jennie M. Bird and others. Prom a judgment sustaining the plea, complainant appeals. The plea is as follows, and is filed on behalf of all the defendants separately and severally: “This bill is being maintained by one Richard L. Stephenson, as trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of C. H. Bird.

Relies on Moyer v. Dewey

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and rendered · Decided 1910-06-02

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently February 2017

2 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

9019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

ANDERSON, J.

¶1The only question presented by this appeal involves the sufficiency of respondents’ special plea of discharge in bankruptcy as res judicata. The discharge of a debtor in bankruptcy in no way precludes the trustee from recovering property of the bankrupt’s estate which has been fraudulently transferred. In re Pierce (D. C.) 103 Fed. 64. The discharge is personal to the bankrupt, and does not release his fraudulent grantees from liability for the fraud committed by them.—Moyer v. Dewey, 103 U. S. 301, 26 L. Ed. 394. The plea, however, goes beyond the mere discharge, and attempts to invoke an estoppel or res judicata, upon the theory that the validity of the conveyance now assailed was litigated in the bankruptcy proceeding by objections interposed to a discharge be*366cause the defendant bad fraudulently transferred bis property.

¶2In order for a judgment between tbe same parties to be res judicata, it must, among.other things, have been rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction, and must involve a question that could have been litigated in tbe former cause or proceeding. — 4 Mayfield’s Dig. p. 728, and authorities cited in section 124. Under and by virtue of paragraph 4 of section 14 of tbe bankruptcy act of 1898 (Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 30 Stat. 550 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3427]), as amended by Act Feb. 5, 1903, c. 487, § 4, 32 Stat. 797 (U. S. Comp. St. Sapp. 1909, p. 1310), tbe right given to oppose tbe discharge of tbe bankrupt as to fraudulent conveyances of bis property is only in tbe event tbe conveyance was made within four months'immediately preceding tbe filing of tbe petition in bankruptcy. It makes no provision for a contest of conveyances anterior to said four months, and tbe plea does not aver that said conveyances or transfers urged upon tbe objection to tbe bankrupt’s discharge were made, within four months immediately preceding tbe petition in bankruptcy. Neither does tbe bill show that tbe conveyances there assailed come within tbe influence of section 14, so as to be urged against tbe bankrupt’s discharge.

¶3Tbe chancellor erred in bolding tbe respondents’ plea sufficient, and tbe decree of the chancery court is reversed, and one is here rendered declaring said plea insufficient.

¶4Reversed and rendered.

Simpson, Mayfield, and Sayre, JJ., concur.
/168/ala/363 · .json · Public domain