Rathbun v. Dooley
Rathbun v. Dooley
Opinion of the Court
The appellee on March 20,1889, filed his petition in the district court of Dodge county, Nebraska, wherein he alleged that on May 9, 1888, he had obtained a judgment in the county court of said county against Thomas Dooley for the sum of $748.21 and costs; that thereafter execution had been issued for the collection of said judgment, but that the same had been returned wholly unsatisfied; that the recovery of judgment in the said county court was upon a judgment rendered in the supreme court of the state of New York in and for Washington county, October 30, 1885; that while the suit was pending which resulted in the above judgment in the aforesaid supreme court, Thomas Dooley resided in said Washington county, and was there possessed of real and personal property of the value of $4,500; that said Thomas Dooley and his wife, Ellen Dooley, conspired together to defeat the collection of the judgment last mentioned, and to accomplish that purpose disposed of and converted into money the property held in
The answers of Thomas Dooley and Ellen Dooley were filed separately, but were alike in their terms, for each of said defendants admitted the recovery of the alleged judgment in the county court of Dodge county and the issue of execution thereon. All other averments of the petition were met by a general denial. It is unnecessary to summarize the answers of the other defendants, for neither presented any averment or denial pertinent to the main issue in the case; that is, whether or not the certificate of deposit above referred to was taken in the name of, and held by, Ellen Dooley for the purpose of preventing the application of the amount thereby evidenced as due to the payment of the judgment against Thomas Dooley, as of right it should be applied.
There was evidence amply sufficient to sustain the findings in favor of plaintiff upon the several questions in controversy. They must therefore be accepted as established
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.