Williamson ex rel. Cox v. Wilkinson

Mississippi Supreme Court October 15, 1902

Williamson ex rel. Cox v. Wilkinson, 81 Miss. 503 (Miss. 1902)

Terral

Opinion of the Court

Terral, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The sale of the stock of goods by Cox to Stewart passed title to Stewart, which Cox cannot impugn. It was Stewart’s right to claim as against Wilkinson Brothers a good title to the exempt property sold to him by Cox, however defective his title might be as to his nonexempt property by reason of the *507alleged fraud in respect to Cox’s creditors. The law adjudged the title to tbe stock of goods fraudulently sold by Cox to Stewart to be in Cox, so far as his creditors are concerned. In no event, and for no purpose, was the title beneficially restored to Cox. . Between Stewart and Cox and all others except creditors of Cox the title to the property was in Stewart. It was Stewart’s right to set up and claim the exemption if any existed, and, if he lost or waived the right, it is a matter of which Cox cannot complain. His sale of the property to Stewart, whether hona fide or fraudulently done, passed all his title to Stewart. Creditors may intervene, and subject the nonexempt property to the payment of their debts, but the title to whatever part of it is not subjected to the claims of creditors abides in Stewart.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Louis W. Williamson, Sheriff, for use of George W. Cox v. Edward T. Wilkinson
Cited By: 1 case
Status: Published
Syllabus: 1. Sale. Fraud/ulent as to creditors. Good between parties. Exemption. A seller who conveys personal property to' defraud his creditors parts with title and cannot thereafter claim any part therof as exempt to him from execution and attachment. The right to assert the exemption, if one existed at the time of the sale, passed to the purchaser. 3. Same. Indemnifying bond. Code 1893, 1967, 1968. Under code 1893, $$ 1967, 1968, providing that when an officer shall have levied, or shall be about to levy, an execution or attachment on personal property, and doubt shall arise as to whether it be exempt from levy and sale, he may demand of the person in whose favor the process issued an indemnifying bond, and authorizing suit thereon by the obligee, as plaintiff, for the use of the defendant in execution or attachment, etc., title to the property in the plaintiff’s usee is essential to the maintenance of a suit upon such indemnifying bond and a plaintiff’s usee who has conveyed the property to another is without title, although the conveyance has been adjudged fraudulent as to his creditors.