From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schmitt v. Morgan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 7, 1988
136 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

January 7, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Delaware County (Ingraham, J.).


Plaintiffs commenced this action in 1977 to set aside conveyances of a 369-acre farm from Charles Tellerday and plaintiff Mary Tellerday to defendant Nancy Adler and from Adler to defendant George B. Morgan. A detailed recitation of the facts can be found in our prior decision in this case ( 98 A.D.2d 934, appeal dismissed 62 N.Y.2d 914), wherein this court granted summary judgment to plaintiff William A. Schmitt against Nancy Adler and her husband Cyrus, finding that, as a matter of law, the Tellerday to Adler conveyance was fraudulent as to the Tellerdays' creditors under Debtor and Creditor Law § 273, since the transfer was made by an insolvent for less than fair consideration. Left to be resolved at trial was whether Morgan shielded himself from knowledge that a fraudulent conveyance had occurred, so that he was not a purchaser for fair consideration without knowledge of the fraud at the time of the purchase (Debtor and Creditor Law § 278). Also unresolved was the question of whether the Adlers had actual intent to defraud, warranting an award of counsel fees (Debtor and Creditor Law § 276-a). Following a nonjury trial, Supreme Court ruled in favor of defendants on these issues and on the fraud cause of action asserted by Mary Tellerday, resulting in this appeal. There should be an affirmance.

Upon a review of the evidence in the record, we agree with Supreme Court that Morgan and his attorney acted reasonably and made proper inquiry in light of the circumstances known to them (see, Anderson v Blood, 152 N.Y. 285). On the issue of actual intent to defraud, we again agree with Supreme Court; plaintiffs' proof is inadequate to establish the necessary fraudulent intent on the part of defendants (see, Farm Stores v School Feeding Corp., 102 A.D.2d 249, 256-257, affd 64 N.Y.2d 1065). We find no merit in plaintiffs' remaining arguments.

Order and judgment affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Schmitt v. Morgan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 7, 1988
136 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Schmitt v. Morgan

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM A. SCHMITT, as Trustee of CHARLES L. TELLERDAY, a Bankrupt, et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jan 7, 1988

Citations

136 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Hansel

Thus, she knew, or reasonably should have known, the value of Sheldon's assets and liabilities, including the…

U.S. v. Laronga

"[U]nder section 278, the focus is on the good faith of the transferee as opposed to the transferor." Malin,…