Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/142

 proved against Estes. The judgments were ail given and docketed after the conveyance to Cole. There are no assets of the partnership, but the assets of Estes' estate amount to 16,668.91— $6,000 of which will probably be applicable to the payment of debts. �The assignee, on behalf of certain individual creditors of Estes, filed a petition setting forth the fact of the conflicting claims upon this fund, and asked for an order directing it to be applied exclusively upon the individual debts of Estes, •ffithout regard to the sapposed lien of any judgment. �The petition ■was referred to the register, when the judg- ment creditors of the partnership, George Ham, Smith Bros. & Co., H. L. Darr, A. Watts and John H. Moore, demurred to the same, upon the ground that on the facts stated the peti- tioners were not entitled to the relief asked, because the judgments of said creditors were a lien upon the individual property of Estes, which the fund in the hands of the as- signee represents. By consent the register made a pro forma ruling upon the demurrers, and the matter was certified into court and here argued by counsel. �Counsel for the judgment creditors insist that the judg- ments given against Estes, whether jointly with Carter or alone, were a lien upon the property conveyed by the former to Cole, notwithstanding such conveyance, and the lien now exists against the proceeds thereof in the hands of the as- signee. �The argument in support of this proposition assumes that, notwithstanding the previous conveyance to Cole, the prop- erty as to these judgment creditors at the date of the entry and docket of their judgments still helonged to Estes, and therefore it became and was subjeet to the lien of said judg- ments; and upon the correctness of this assumption tha casa turns. �On the other hand, counsel for the assignee contend that at the date of the judgments in question Estes, having al- ready conveyed the promises to Cole by a deed valid and operative as between the parties thereto, had no interest in the premises; that they in no sense belonged to him, and ����