Questel v. Questel
Questel v. Questel
Opinion of the Court
We are satisfied upon the evidence that the convey•anees and assignments 'were made without consideration, in order to deprive the complainant, the wife of one of the defendants, and the stepmother of the other, of her subsistence; and not made in good faith or by way of advancement to the son, as claimed by him. These parties were married in 1823; within two years it became matter of notoriety that they quarrelled, though they still lived together. John had been advanced a quarter-section of land — the •transfer of these securities was in 1826, and the deeds at a later •date, and the two embrace the entire estate of the father. The son, in 1832, conveyed back the land, having been told that he could not hold it, but declared that he would contrive some other way to get her property ! He afterwards induced his father to say that he
We therefore enjoin the defendants from proceeding in any way to change the said estate and sureties; and appoint Francis LeClerq, Esq., receiver, to collect the interest of the money and the rents of the real estate, to secure the complainant the alimony which was decreed to her upon her petition for divorce, the surplus to be for the use of the defendants. But if the said defendants shall secure the alimony as is provided in the decree for that purpose, from thenceforth the injunction shall be dissolved — and order1 that defendants pay the costs.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- ANTONIA QUESTEL v. NICHOLAS AND JOHN QUESTEL
- Status
- Published