Hitz v. National Metropolitan Bank,
111 U.S. 722 (1884)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Hitz v. National Metropolitan Bank, 111 U.S. 722 (1884)

Hitz v. National Metropolitan Bank

Argued March 14 and 17, 1884

Decided May 5, 1884

111 U.S. 722


In the absence of a fraud, a husband who is embarrassed may convey his curtesy in the real estate of his wife to trustees for her benefit and for the benefit of their children when a consideration is received for it which a Court of Equity may fairly take to be a valuable one.

Page 111 U. S. 723

When a deed in trust recites a nominal consideration as the sum paid by the trustee, it is no contradiction to show that a valuable consideration passed to the grantor from the cestui que trust.

A statute enacting that the property of a married woman shall not be liable for the debts of her husband exempts his estate in the curtesy in her real estate from being taken for his debts contracted after the passage of the act.

Under the recording act which took effect in the District of Columbia. April 9, 1878, an unrecorded conveyance is subject to the lien of a judgment recovered subsequent to it, although execution was not issued and levied till after the record, unless it appears that the judgment debtor had notice of its existence before issue and levy of execution.

This was a suit in equity brought by a judgment creditor to set aside a conveyance of real estate in Washington belonging to his wife to trustees for the benefit of the wife and their children. The facts which made the issues appear in the opinion of the Court. On the 31st of March, 1884, the Court announced a decision in appellant's favor. Appellee's counsel then filed a petition for a rehearing as to the effect of the recording law of April 29, 1878, upon the judgment and the deed. This act is set out in the opinion. The deed in question was executed and delivered before recovery of the judgment. It was recorded after the recovery, but before issue and levy of execution. The judgment creditor had no knowledge of the deed so far as shown by the record.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.