140 ' FEDERAL EBPOBTBB. �tion, by a deed valid as between him and hia grantee, it could not hare that effect by operation of law." �In Rappleye v. International Bank, N. W. Eep. (1 111. Sup.) 68, a trust deed made to defraud oreditors was avoided at the Btiit of the defendant, whioh thereupon claimed and obtained a priority in the payment of its judgment from the proceeda of the land thus oonveyed by the debtor. The court held, in the language of the syllabus, that "a conveyance, fraudulent as to creditors, is binding on the grantor, so that there is no estate, legal or equitable, remaining in him on whioh a judg- ment lien oould attach. The lien only attaches on the avoiding of the deed by the creditor, so that he -who thus avoids the deed has the prior lien." �In Smith t. Ingles, 2 Or. 43-44, it was held that the lien of a judgment does not extend to an equity or an equitable title. The case was this : Ingles purchase^. real property, and for the purpose of defrauding his oreditors took the conveyance to his minor children. Burns, a judgment creditor of Ingles, sold the property upon an execution, as the property of th« latter, and became the purchaser thereof . Subsequent to the entry and docketing of this judgment Ingles mortgaged the premises to Smith, and after the sale Smith brought suit to enforce the lien of his mortgage, making Burns a party. Tha court held that the lien of Burns' judgment did not affect tha property. As the law of the state is the law of this case, it is claimed that the ruling in Smith v. Ingles is the decision of this question in favor of the assignee. The case is not clear in some points, but upon authority the transaction was not a conveyance by the debtor in fraud of his creditors within the etatute, and therefore void, but a purchase by Ingles in tha name of others with a fraudulent intent. This being so, as to the creditors, equity would hold the grantees in the con- veyance to be the trustees of a resulting trust in favor of Ingles, and subject the trust estate to the payment of his debts. Bump on Fraud. Con. 237 ; Guthrie v. Gardner, 19 Wend. 414- 415. In this view of the matter the e&de is scaroely in point. The legal estate was never in Ingles, and the case only de- cides that the lien of the judgment against him did not affect ����
