Home › Law for Everybody › Void Assignments,

Void Assignments,

An assignment that bears indications of fraudulent intent on the part of the assignor is deemed void, though such assignment may be valid on its face. The fraudulent intent vitiates it. An assignment may be binding on the assignor, however, though void as against the creditors; and all conveyances, transfers, or assignments made in trust for the use of the person making the same shall be void as against the creditors existing or subsequent.

All conveyances or assignments made with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors or other persons of their lawful suits, damages, forfeitures, debts or demands, as against the persons so hindered, delayed, or defrauded are void.

In the matter of fraudulent intent a jury decides upon the extraneous facts, and it may be so plain that fraud may be inferred from the facts. Should the assignor allege that he assigned to gain time, it will not prove fraudulent intent, unless such intent be otherwise corroborated. An assignor may testify in his own behalf as to his reasons for the assignment -such as to his intent to gain time, or to save his property from unnecessary sacrifice.

The declarations of an assignor after the assignment, do not prove fraudulent intent on his part, though such declarations are accepted if he still is in possession of the property.

If fraud is shown on the part of the assignor, the assignment is void, although the assignee may have acted in good faith.

An assignee may recover property for the benefit of the creditors, that had been already fraudulently disposed of.

An assignment is not invalidated, unless it be shown that the assignor's fraudulent intent existed at the time of the execution. An assignment cannot be invalidated by any act or omission of the assignor, once the assignee has taken possession of it.

An assignor cannot render valid by a subsequent act an assignment that was fraudulent when made and delivered. A second assignment is void if the first assignment, being valid, has been accepted by the assignee and not discharged; but it will be valid, if the first be void.

If an assignment be dubious, the presumption is that the assignor did not intend anything illegal, unless, the illegal act was expressly authorized. An assignee may be authorized to dispose of property as his discretion may direct, without rendering the assignment void, if he, the assignee acts within the law in the case. Ile may, for instance, convert the property into cash as soon as the same may be conveniently and properly done, or he may sell without delay at the best price that can be secured. The assignee may not, however, sell on credit or at detail, where the sale is left to his discretion.

An assignment that authorizes an assignee to mortgage or lease assigned property is rendered void, but delay incidental to the execution of the trust will not make it void. Neither can assigned property be sold on credit. The assignee cannot defend suits brought against the assignor by the creditors, or others. Or if the assigned property exceed in value the debts provided for, while the assignor contemplated a surplus, it shall be deemed void. If an assignee authorizes the order of preferences, or gives future preferences, or reserves to the assignor the power to give future preferences even by implication, the assignment is void.

An assignment is not void for giving to assignees a just and reasonable compensation for labor, time, services and attention in the business. Neither is it void for not expressing the whole trust, apart from the statute. The withdrawal of money or property by the assignor for his own benefit immediately before making the assignment is deemed fraudulent and renders the act void, as does also the holding back from the assignee of a considerable portion of the property.

An assignor cannot reserve to himself any use or interest in the property until the debts are paid.

An assignor may aid the assignee in closing up the estate, or even be employed by the assignee without implying fraud. void.

Preferences for fictitious debts or fictitious creditors render the assignment An assignor may prefer his wife for a debt due to her, or for any part of her income that he may have used.

A large excess of assets at the time of assignment raises a presumption of the intent of the assignor to delay the creditors.

An assignor who is able to pay his debts cannot make an assignment with preferences.

An assignment is invalid if it be fraudulent as to a part of the property assigned, or if any of the preferred debts be not due at the time of assignment.