Fox v. Gardner
88 U.S. 475 (1874)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Fox v. Gardner, 88 U.S. 21 Wall. 475 475 (1874)

Fox v. Gardner

88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 475

Syllabus

Where a debtor, knowing that his creditor is insolvent, accepts a draft drawn on him by such creditor, the draft being drawn and accepted with the purpose of giving a preference, the transaction is a fraud on the Bankrupt Act, and the assignee in bankruptcy can recover from the acceptor the amount of the draft.

Fox & Howard had contracted with a railroad company to

Page 88 U. S. 476

make its railroad, and on the 4th of October, 1870, employed one N. Young as a contractor (excavator) under them. By the terms of the contract with Young, Fox & Howard were to pay him, on the 15th of December, 1870, a certain sum per cubic yard of earth excavated, payments to be made as follows:

"To the laborers employed in doing said work the amount ascertained to be due to them for their services and the balance to the said Young."

Young finished his work November 24, 1870, and being in debt to one Burrows, as also to three other persons severally, to the extent of $3,692, gave to him and them drafts on Fox & Howard for different amounts, in all making that sum, payable December 15, 1870. Fox & Howard accepted the drafts in this form:

"Accepted and promised to be paid out of any money due N. Young, in our hands, after payment of laborer's lien and orders previously accepted. Done this 1st day of December, at eight o'clock P.M."

"FOX & HOWARD"

About the same time various laborers under Young, and thus creditors of Young, also gave drafts (in all for $502), on him in favor of Burrows, who cashed or discounted them, and by Young's directions Fox & Howard charged him, Young, with the amount of the drafts as cash paid to him, they agreeing, at the same time, with Burrows, to pay to him the amount of the drafts, but not actually paying them.

When Young gave these different drafts, he was insolvent, and on the 7th of January, 1871, a petition in bankruptcy was filed against him, on which he was, upon the same day, decreed a bankrupt.

One Gardner being appointed his assignee brought this suit in the court below, September 12, 1872, against Fox & Howard to compel the payment to him of what they had owed Young, and had agreed to pay to Burrows and the others, in the manner already stated. The ground of the

Page 88 U. S. 477

suit was of course that the transactions were void under the thirty-fifth section of the Bankrupt Act, quoted supra,88 U. S. 365.

The court charged the jury that before the plaintiff could recover he was bound, under the thirty-fifth section of the act, to show:

1st. That Young was insolvent when the drafts were given.

2d. That Fox & Howard had reasonable cause to believe him insolvent.

3d. That the person or persons, in such case respectively, to whom the drafts were given, had reasonable cause to believe Young insolvent.

And further, that Fox & Howard had reasonable cause to believe that the person or persons to whom they were so given had, when they took the same, reasonable cause to believe Young insolvent. But that if he satisfied the jury, by the evidence, of all these things, the acceptances of Fox & Howard were void, and did not amount to payments in the action.

Under these instructions, the jury found for the assignee the amounts claimed, and Fox & Howard brought the case here on exceptions to the charge.

Page 88 U. S. 478

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.