President of Virginia v. Brooke
Grason, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This cause was submitted to the Court below, without the intervention of a jury, and two exceptions were taken by the plaintiffs, one to the rejection of. its four prayers and the other to the overruling its motion to have a separate suit docketed against Jeremiah P. Bartholow, one of the garnishees. At the argument of the case in this Court it was conceded by the appellants’ counsel that the fourth prayer was properly rejected; so that it is only necessary to consider whether there was error in refusing to grant the instructions asked by the first, second and third. It appears from the record that the notes, given by Bartholow to John B. Brooke, trustee of Mrs. Martha G-.
Brooke, were transferred to W. B. Bowie. At what time this transfer took place the record does not disclose ; but the proof shows that they were delivered , by John B. Brooke, trustee, to either Mrs. Martha G-. Brooke or Baker, within a very short time after they came into his possession, and there is no evidence to show that they had not been transferred to W. B. Bowie before the attachment in 257 this case was issued. As these notes were given for a debt due by Barth olow to William Pinkney Brooke, who was then insolvent, the transfer of the indebtedness to his wife was in prejudice of the rights of his then subsisting creditors, and was void as against them so far as she and her trustee were concerned.
But the notes were transferred to W. B. Bowie, and lie would be entitled to tbem and to the mortgage given to secure their payment, unless he received them without consideration, or had knowledge that they were given to the trustee of Mrs. Brooke for an indebtedness due to Wm. Pinkney Brooke, and that the transfer of this indebtedness by him to his wife was in prejudice of the rights of his creditors. There is nothing on the face of the notes or mortgage to indicate the real facts of the transaction, nor was any proof whatever offered tending to show that Bowie did not pay value for the notes, or that he had any notice that they were given for a debt due to Wm. Pinkney Brooke, or that the transaction was in prejudice of the rights of Wm.
Pinkney Brooke's creditors. It was incumbent upon the plaintiff to
This is a preview of President of Virginia v. Brooke. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.