MURRAY v. ATWOOD

No. C7-86-1918.

404 N.W.2d 898 (1987)

F. James MURRAY, et al., Appellants, v. Charles G. ATWOOD, et al., Respondents.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

Review Denied June 30, 1987.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jerome S. Rice, Kari E. Nelson, Jerome S. Rice Law Offices, P.A., Minneapolis, for appellants.

Kelton Gage, Blethen, Gage & Krause, Mankato, for respondents.

Considered and decided by LESLIE, P.J., and SEDGWICK and HUSPENI, JJ., with oral argument waived.


OPINION

HUSPENI, Judge.

The trial court found that appellants, James Murray and Frank Gazzola, did not prove that respondents, Charles Atwood and George Smith, fraudulently or preferentially conveyed corporate assets to themselves. Appellants now claim that: the trial court erred when it found Atwood-Smith Realty (ASR) was solvent at the time its assets were transferred to respondents; the trial court erred in determining appellants were not creditors at...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases