
    William H. Lyon et al., App’lts, v. James M. Davis et al., Resp’ts.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department
    
    
      Filed May 12, 1890.)
    
    Assignment fob creditors — Preference to wife of assignor.
    An indebtedness of a husband to his wife for a loan of money earned by her under an agreement with him that she might keep boarders and have the profits arising therefrom, may properly be preferred in a general assignment made by him.
    Appeal from judgment dismissing the complaint.
    Action by judgment creditors to set aside a general assignment. The principal objection to the assignment was that it contained preferences to the wife and sister of the assignor for alleged loans.
    The following decision was rendered by the trial justice:
    I find that the debt to the sister-in-law of the assignor is not fictitious, but was a good and valid debt for money lent by her to him.
    I find that the $1,500 secured to the wife of the assignor was a, good and valid debt; that she earned the money in her separate business; that she kept boarders, under an agreement with her husband that she should have the profits of the business and that he would pay the rent for his board. The wife was to, and did, pay all the bills; that the money was deposited in the name of the husband for convenience, and that it was drawn out and the wife took possession of it and lent it to a stranger, and when it was paid back to her she loaned it to her husband, and he received it from her individual hands and possession.
    X find that the complaint be dismissed, with costs.
    J. F. Barnard,
    
      Justice of Supreme Court.
    
    
      Johu B. Green, for app’lts; H. JB. Bustis, for resp’ts.
   Dykman, J.

The plaintiffs are judgment creditors of James M. Davis, and they commenced this action as such creditors to set aside an assignment for the benefit of creditors made by Davis to the defendants.

The cause was tried before a judge without a jury, and he decided in favor of the validity of the assignment. He found all the facts against the plaintiffs upon sufficient evidence, and his conclusions of law resulted from the facts so found.

The decision of the case depended upon facts alone, and as they were found and determined so went the judgment.

We concur with the trial judge respecting the indebtedness of ;he assignor to his wife, and in his conclusion that the debt was croperly preferred in the assignment.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Pratt, J., concurs.  