Brown v. John V. Farwell Co.

No. 550
Decided Circuit Court, D. Kansas, Second Division
Disposition
sustained
full scope · unanimous
Scan to open on mobileScan to open on another device
Court
Circuit Court, D. Kansas, Second Division
Decided
Judge
FOSTER, District Judge
Posture
Demurrer to complainant's bill pending before the court
Complainant (1)
BROWN
J. W. Blee, Beekman & Swartz (Stanley & Vermilion, on brief)
v.
Defendants (1)
JOHN V. FARWELL CO. et al.
Rossington, Smith & Dallas

Overview

The demurrer is sustained. The complainant may have 20 days in which to file an amended bill.

Case summary

In BROWN v. JOHN V. FARWELL CO. et al., complainant Brown filed a bill in equity in the Circuit Court for the District of Kansas to set aside fraudulent transfers of property by Matlack Dry-Goods Company. The defendant demurred on three grounds: (1) the Kansas two-year statute of limitations for fraud actions barred the suit since the fraud occurred more than four years before filing and the bill contained no allegation that the fraud was not discovered within two years before suit; (2) the complainant failed to exhaust legal remedies by not obtaining judgment and issuing execution before seeking equity relief; and (3) the bill failed to adequately describe the real estate sought to be reached. The court sustained the demurrer on all grounds, citing Kansas statutory law and federal equity precedent, but gave the complainant 20 days to file an amended bill.

Abstract

Complainant filed a bill in equity to set aside fraudulent transfers of property, but defendant demurred on grounds including the statute of limitations for fraud (lacking allegation of recent discovery), failure to exhaust legal remedies by obtaining judgment and execution first, and inadequate description of the real estate. The court sustained the demurrer on all grounds but granted leave to file an amended bill within 20 days.

Opinion of the court

Majority
opinion
FOSTER, District Judge
  • Kansas statute of limitations for fraud requires suit within two years unless fraud not discovered within that period
  • Federal equity practice requires exhaustion of legal remedies before equitable relief
  • Equity bill must specifically describe real estate sought to be reached

Jurisdiction

not challenged
Subject matter
Federal circuit court diversity jurisdiction or federal question jurisdiction implied from federal practice references
Jurisdictional facts
  • Case filed in United States circuit court for the district of Kansas

Procedural posture

Posture at trial
Demurrer to complainant's bill pending before the court
Posture on appeal
Not an appeal; trial court ruling on demurrer
Preserved issues
  • Demurrer based on statute of limitations
  • Demurrer based on failure to exhaust legal remedies
  • Demurrer based on insufficient description of real estate

Legal categories

Business

Case record

Full case name
BROWN v. JOHN V. FARWELL CO. et al.
Docket number
No. 550
Court
Circuit Court, D. Kansas, Second Division
Trial court
Circuit Court, D. Kansas, Second Division
Trial court judge
FOSTER, District Judge
Decided
Opinion author
FOSTER, District Judge
Opinion type
published
Precedential status
precedential
Judges on panel
FOSTER, District Judge

Issues & holdings

3
Issues raised
3
affirmed
3
Holdings
Standard of review

de novo

Disposition rationale

Bill alleged fraud committed more than four years before filing, with no allegation that fraud was not discovered until within two years before suit as required by statute

Preservation

Issue preserved for review

Standard of review

de novo

Disposition rationale

General rule requires judgment at law and execution returned unsatisfied before equity bill to reach debtor's assets

Preservation

Issue preserved for review

Standard of review

de novo

Disposition rationale

Bill lacks definite description or identification of real estate

Preservation

Issue preserved for review

Holdings of the court

Statute of limitations under Kansas law
Bill is demurrable because it fails to allege fraud was not discovered within two years before suit as required by Gen. St. Kan. par. 4095
Statute requires action for fraud relief within two years unless fraud not discovered within that period; bill shows fraud committed more than four years before filing with no discovery allegation
unanimousbinding precedent
Exhaustion of legal remedies
Complainant must obtain judgment at law and issue execution returned unsatisfied before filing equity bill to reach debtor's assets
Great weight of federal authority requires exhaustion of legal remedies; exceptional case cited by complainant does not undermine general rule
unanimousbinding precedent
Description of real estate in equity bill
Bill deficient for failing to definitely describe or identify real estate sought to be reached
While judgment creates lien on real estate, equity proceeding requires specific description of property
unanimousbinding precedent

Error analysis

  • Complainant's bill fails to allege fraud was not discovered within two years before suit as required by Kansas statute — procedural · error foundNot applicable as error goes to sufficiency of pleading · not applicable
  • Complainant failed to exhaust legal remedies by not issuing execution on judgments before equity suit — procedural · error foundNot applicable as error goes to jurisdictional prerequisite for equity relief · not applicable
  • Bill fails to describe real estate sought to be reached — procedural · error foundNot applicable as error makes bill insufficient to proceed · not applicable

Statutory interpretation

1
Statute
Gen. St. Kan. par. 4095
Question
Whether fraud action must be commenced within two years unless fraud not discovered within that period
Court's reading
Statute requires suit within two years from fraud or from discovery if within two years before suit; no discovery allegation makes bill demurrable
Canons applied
plain meaning

Standards of review

  • Demurrer to bill in equity — de novo Court reviews legal sufficiency of pleadings de novo

Timeline

5
Events
— Approximately 1892-1893
Span
factual eventcited in opinion

Alleged fraudulent transfer of real and personal property by Matlack Dry-Goods Company to defraud creditors

Underlying fraud alleged as basis for equity action

Matlack Dry-Goods Company
1895-1896filingcited in opinion

Complainant filed bill in equity in Circuit Court, D. Kansas to set aside fraudulent transfers

Initiation of equity proceeding

Brown · J. W. Blee · Beekman & Swartz Circuit Court, D. Kansas, Second Division trial court
motioncited in opinion

Defendant filed demurrer to complainant's bill on grounds of statute of limitations and failure to exhaust legal remedies

Challenged sufficiency of equity bill

JOHN V. FARWELL CO. et al. · Rossington, Smith & Dallas Circuit Court, D. Kansas, Second Division trial court
rulingcited in opinion

Court sustained demurrer, giving complainant 20 days to file amended bill

Outcome: Demurrer sustained

Court found bill deficient on multiple grounds

FOSTER, District Judge Circuit Court, D. Kansas, Second Division trial court
Approximately 1892-1893procedural eventcited in opinion

Complainant Brown recovered judgments against debtor

Judgments obtained but no execution issued prior to equity suit

Brown

Facts & evidence

Incident

Date
February 1891

Key facts

7 facts
  1. Complainant Brown filed a bill in equity to set aside transfer of real and personal property by Matlack Dry-Goods Company, alleged to be fraudulent against creditors
  2. Fraud alleged to have been committed in February 1891
  3. Complainant recovered judgments against debtor more than three years before filing bill
  4. Bill filed more than four years after alleged fraud
  5. No allegation that fraud was not discovered until within two years before suit
  6. No execution issued on judgments before filing equity bill
  7. Real estate not described or identified in bill

Procedural history

3 steps
  1. Complainant filed bill in equity
  2. Defendant demurred to the bill
  3. Court heard demurrer on grounds of statute of limitations and failure to exhaust legal remedies

Evidence in the record

Documentary
  • Complainant's bill in equity
  • Judgments recovered by complainant
Challenged
  • Evidence type: Allegations in equity bill · Challenge basis: Statute of limitations and failure to state claim · Trial court ruling: excluded · Reasoning: Bill deficient for not alleging fraud discovery within limitations period and not exhausting legal remedies · Challenged on appeal: false · Appellate outcome: not applicable

Objects of relevance

Real and personal property transferred fraudulently

Authorities

Cited authorities (5)

Jones v. Green, 1 Wall. 330
followedprecedent
Cited as authority that creditor must issue execution and have it returned nulla bona before equity bill to reach debtor's assets
Morrow Shoe Manuf’g Co. v. New England Shoe Co., 6 C. C. A. 508, 57 Fed. 698
followedprecedent
Cited as authority supporting requirement to exhaust legal remedies before equity relief
Scott v. Neely, 140 U. S. 106, 11 Sup. Ct. 712
followedprecedent
Cited as authority for general rule requiring exhaustion of legal remedies in federal equity practice
Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 451, 13 Sup. Ct. 883, 977
followedprecedent
Cited as authority supporting requirement to obtain judgment and issue execution before equity bill
Case v. Beauregard, 101 U. S. 690
distinguisheddistinguished
Cited by complainant as exceptional case where equity bill proceeded without prior judgment, but distinguished as involving res judicata after trial on merits
Exceptional case involving res judicata after trial on merits without objection, not undermining general rule

Statutes

  • Gen. St. Kan. par. 4095 (Kansas fraud statute of limitations)

Standards & doctrines

  • Federal equity practice requiring exhaustion of legal remedies

Legal principles applied

  • General rule requires judgment at law and execution returned unsatisfied before equity bill to reach debtor's assets
Index terms48
Summary terms
Legal mechanisms
Various actions
Various actors
Legal concepts
Legal outcomes
Legal issues
Legal procedures
Legal remedies
Legal arguments
Legal defenses
Legal penalties
Legal procedural steps
Geo locations
Judges
Attorneys
Procedural terms
Substantive offenses
Entities and documentation
Legal actions
Action type
sustained
Target
Demurrer to complainant's bill
Appealed from
Defendant's demurrer
Context
Court sustained demurrer on grounds of statute of limitations, failure to exhaust legal remedies, and insufficient description of real estate
Scope
full
Further instructions
Complainant may have 20 days to file amended bill
Disposition vote
unanimous
Search facets
Parties
Judges
Foster
Courts