
    Ammon S. Keeler and another v. Charles Ullrich.
    
      Fraudulent transfers': Judgment creditor: Execution: Title. A judgment creditor has no authority to levy an execution upon property transferred by his debtor prior to the existence of his.claim against such debtor, ■where such transfer was not made in contemplation of any future indebtedness, and such claim was not incurred on any faith that the property in question belonged to the debtor, and where the creditor docs not show himself in any position to attack the rectitude of the transfer.
    
      Heard April 27.
    
    
      Decided April 30.
    
    Error to Macomb Circuit.
    
      Edgar Weeks, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      Hubbard & Crocker, for defendant in error.
   Pbb Cubiam:

Ullrich replevied certain animals and a hay rake from Keeler and Taft. Their defense .consisted of a justification of the taking, upon the claim that as against his creditors the property belonged to one John Cawker, and that it was taken by Taft as constable, on an execution upon a justice’s judgment in favor of Keeler and against Cawker. To make out the justification, they gave evidence of the judgment, which was rendered in December, 1873, and also submitted evidence tending to show that Cawker sold to one Smith in October, 1871, and that Smith sold to Ullrich in July, 1873. These sales, it was insisted by Keeler and Taft, were fraudulent. There was no evidence, however, to show that Keeler was a creditor of Cawker at the time of either of these transactions, or that they were had in contemplation of any future indebtedness of ' Cawker, or that Keeler became Oawker’s creditor upon any faith that the property hi question belonged to Cawker. In short, there was no proof to place Keeler in a position to question the rectitude of these bargains, and the circuit judge very properly so charged. A claim is made that the judgment set up by Keeler was bad, but it is not necessary to inquire about that.

The defense wholly failed upon the ground mentioned, and the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.  