Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/74

This page needs to be proofread.

62 FEDERAL REPORTER. �their lawful demanda, * * * as against the person so hindered, delayed, or defrauded, shall be void." The convey- ance in such case, notwithstanding tins strong language, ia only voidable on the election of the creditor, and is only made void by proceedings to set it aside, or to defeat its operation. It is good as between the parties and passes the estate. If a third party acquire the property from the fraudaient grantee for value without notice, he will hold the property even as against the defrauded creditor, AU of which shows that the property after the conveyance cannot, in strictness, be said to belong tô the grantor, and as such to fall at once under the lien of judgment recovered against him, �The fraudulent conveyance may be defeated by a direct proceeding to set it aside, or in some states by the judgment creditor proceeding by levy upon and sale of the property, he thus asserting the invalidity of the conveyance as against him under the statute. When this latter proceeding is author- ized, it is only from the date of the levy that the creditor's right to the property, as against the fraudulent grantee, can be deemed to attach. �But how far and under what circumstances judgments shall be a lien upon property of the debtor fraudulently conveyed to others is a matter of local law. When that is ascertained efficacy will be given to it in the courts of the United States, In some states it is said that a judgment is a lien upon the property of a debtor fraudulently transferred, When that is the case, the position for which the judgment creditera here contend will be maintained; but in Oregon the rule we have, Btated is the one which prevails, and that is that until the conveyance is set aside a mere equitable right remains in the creditor, which he may or may not enforce, and until he doea enforce it the estate is in the grantee, and upon it a judgment creditor acquires no lien by bis judgment. �The decree of the district pourt is therefore aiSrmed. �NoTB, See In re Ester di Oarter, 3 Fed. Rbp. 134. ����