Voluntary Conveyance

The transfer of an estate made without any adequate consideration of value.

A conveyance without any valuable consideration. Voluntary conveyances are discussed most frequently with reference to the statutes 13 Eliz. c. 5 (for the protection of creditors) and 27 Eliz. c. 4 (for the protection of subsequent purchasers). A voluntary conveyance, however, is not within these statutes unless it is fraudulent; Cowp. 434. And, as between the parties, a voluntary conveyance is generally good. In determining whether a voluntary conveyance is fraudulent and within the stat. 13 Eliz. c. 5, a distinction is made between existing (or previous) and subsequent creditors. An existing creditor, so called, is one who is a creditor at the time of the conveyance; and it was at one time held that, as against him, every voluntary conveyance by the debtor is fraudulent; Sexton v. Wheaton, 8 Wheat (U. S.) 229, 5 L. Ed. 003; without regard to the amount of the debts, the extent of the property in settlement, or the circumstances of the debtor; Reade v. Livingston, 3 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 500, 8 Am. Dec. 520; but this rule is now subject to great modifications both in England and in the United States; see 1 Am. L. Cas. 37-40; and the conclusion to be drawn from the more recent cases is that the whole question depends in great measure on the ratio of the debts, not so much to the property the debtor parts with, as to that which he retains; Brei Ps Appeal, 24 Pa. 511; 2 Beav. 344; 4 Drew. 632. A subsequent creditor is one who becomes a creditor after the* conveyance, and, as against him, a voluntary conveyance is not void unless actually fraudulent; 1 Am. L. Cas. 40; but there is great diversity in the definition of the fraud of which he may avail himself; see 3 De G. J. & S. 293; L. K. 5 Ch. Ap. 518; Reade v. Livingston, 3 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 501, 8 Am. Dec. 520; Snyder v. Christ, 39 Pa. 499. the statute of 27 Eliz. c. 4, which presumption may be repelled by showing that the transaction on which the conveyance was founded virtually contained some conventional stipulations, some compromise of interests, or reciprocity of benefits, that point out an object and motive beyond the indulgence of affection or claims of kindred, and not reconcilable with the supposition of intent to deceive a purchaser. But, unless so repelled, such a conveyance, coupled with a subsequent negotiation for sale, is conclusive evidence of statutory fraud. The principles of these statutes, though they may not have been substantially reenacted, prevail throughout the United States. See May, Stats, of Eliz.; Bump, Fraud. Conv.; Note to Twyne’s Case, 1 Sm. L. Cas. (cases to 1879 discussed in 18 Am. L. Reg. n. s. 137); Note to Sexton v. Wheaton, 1 Am. L. Cas.; Story, Eq. Jurisp. §§ 350-436; Fraudulent Conveyance.

A conveyance without valuable consideration; such as a deed or settlement in. favor of a wife or children. See Gentry v. Field, 148 Mo. 399, 45 S. W. 286; Trumbull v. Hewitt, 62 Conn 451, 26 Atl. 350; Martin v. White, 115 Ga. 866, 42 S. E. 279. As to fraudulent conveyances, see Fraudulent.

Defined under Conveyance in Black's Law Dictionary.