INSOLVENTS 2025

Upon the death of the trustee, the insolvent court must appoint another. Jamison
v. Chestnut, 8 Md. 39.

Where one of the permanent trustees dies and the other removes from the juris-
diction, insolvent court may appoint a trustee in their place, and thereupon pro-
visional trustee must convey accordingly. Glenn v. Karthaus, 4 G. & J. 392.

The filing of the schedule of an insolvent is not a filing of the claim of an alleged
creditor. Strike v. McDonald, 2 H. & G. 192.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 14. 1912, sec. 14. 1904, sec. 14. 1888, sec. 14. 1854, ch. 193. sec. 13.
1880, ch. 172. 1884, ch. 295. 1886, ch. 298. 1890, ch. 364. 1896, ch. 184. 1896, ch. 446.

14. No deed or conveyance executed, or lien created by any person
being insolvent or in contemplation of insolvency, save as hereinafter pro-
vided, shall be lawful or valid if the same shall contain any preference,
save such as result from operation of law, and save those for the wages or
salaries to clerks, servants, salesmen and employes contracted not more
than three months anterior to the execution thereof; and all preferences,
with the exceptions aforesaid, shall be void, howsoever the same may be
made; provided, the grantor or party creating said lien or preference shall
be proceeded against under section 25 of this article, or shall apply for the
benefit of this article under section 1 within four months after the record-
ing of the deed or conveyance or the creation of said lien or preference,
and shall be declared or shall become, under the provisions of this article,
an insolvent; provided, that nothing in this section shall apply so as to
set aside or render invalid the lien of any such judgments, mortgage or
other conveyance executed by the debtor for money bona fide loaned or
paid at the time of the creation of such judgments, mortgage or conveyance,
but such shall remain a valid and subsisting lien, although the debtor may
be proceeded against under or may apply for the benefit of this article.

When conveyances, etc., are fraudulent and void.

If the conveyances are in other respects valid and there are no proceedings in
insolvency within prescribed time, conveyances are good. The term "insolvency"
as used in this section means an inability to pay debts as they become due in ordinary
course of business. Intention of this section; when a party subjects himself to its
provisions. Castleberg v. Wheeler, 68 Md. 275.

An attempt to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent and made in contemplation of
insolvency, denied. What must be established to avoid such a conveyance? Lapse of
time between the conveyance and the application in insolvency. Powles v. Dilley,
9 Gill, 231; Beatty v. Davis, 9 Gill, 218; Malcolm v. Hall, 9 Gill, 180; Powles v.
Dilley, 2 Md. Ch. 123; Glenn v. Baker, 1 Md. Ch. 76. And see Brooks v. Thomas, 8
Md. 371; Dulaney v. Hoffman, 7 G. & J. 175; Hickley v. Farmers' Bank, 5 G. & J. 380.

It is immaterial whether the preferences appear Upon face of a written instrument,
or are created by payments, transfers or otherwise, they are all void. When they are
made the basis of an adjudication, the latter ipso facto strikes them down. Vogler v.
Rosenthal, 85 Md. 45. See also Applegarth v. Wagner, 86 Md. 475.

A judgment to the effect that a party is not entitled to a discharge because of having
made a deed to B. which was a preference, is not an adjudication in rem and conclusive
upon rights of B. The status of property is not involved in such verdict and it is not
evidence against B. After the lapse of twenty years an insolvent estate is presumed
to be closed, and equity will not entertain a bill to set aside conveyances made by
insolvent before his application unless it is satisfied that there are subsisting debts due
by the insolvent. Both intent to take the benefit of insolvency and to give an unlawful
preference, must appear to bring an act under this section. Proximity of time as an
element in determining such intent. Syester v. Brewer, 27 Md. 313. See also Maennel v.
Murdock, 13 Md. 177; Powles v. Dilley, 9 Gill, 222.

Whatever is the necessary consequence of an act deliberately done, the law pre-
sumes every man to intend. When the quo animo becomes an inference of law. Gardner
v. Lewis, 7 Gill, 404.

Fact that a debtor at time he executed a conveyance could not apply for benefit
of insolvent laws, is a strong circumstance to prove that it was not executed in con-
templation of insolvency. Glenn v. Baker, 1 Md. Ch. 76.

The reservation in a deed for the benefit of creditors of a fee for the draftsman of
the deed is a preference. Wolfsheimer v. Rivinus, 64 Md. 235.

For conveyances, etc., held to be preferences and void, see Clark Co. v. Colton,
91 Md. 207; Applegarth v. Wagner, 86 Md. 475; Whedbee v. Stewart, 40 Md. 421.