delivered the opinion of the court.
Sachs v. Friedman Bros. & Lipsky Co., 199 Ill. App. 550 (1916)
June 1, 1916
·
Illinois Appellate Court
·
Gen. No. 21,331
199 Ill. App. 550
Mendel Sachs, Appellant, v. Friedman Brothers & Lipsky Company, Appellee.
Gen. No. 21,331.
(Not to he reported in full.)
Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John Stblk, Judge, presiding. . Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1915.
Reversed and remanded.
Opinion filed June 1, 1916.
Statement of the Case.
Action by Mendel Sachs, plaintiff, against Friedman Brothers & Lipsky Company, a corporation, defendant, to recover balance due for goods sold and delivered. *551From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
Abstract of the Decision.
Fbabduient conveyances, § 276 * —when evidence sufficient to show existence of relationship of creditor and debtor. In an action to recover the balance due for goods sold and delivered, held that *552the evidence was sufficient to-establish the relation of debtor and creditor between the defendant and plaintiff on or before the date in which the defendant, without notice to the plaintiff, sold at public aution nearly all its stock of merchandise in contravention of the Bulk Sales Act [Cal. Ill. St. Supp. 1916, H 10,021 (D-10,021 (3) ], and that a writ of attachment .was improperly quashed.
*551An attachment in aid issued in connection with said action January 14, 1915, on which date defendant disposed by public auction of most of its property. Michael Tauber and Michael Levy, trading as Michael Tauber & Company, conducted said auction sale, were summoned as garnishees and filed their answer to plaintiff’s interrogatories, admitting an existing indebtedness to defendant in excess of $1,218.84 at the time of service of said writ. Defendant filed an affidavit of merits denying that plaintiff at any time sold and delivered to defendant the merchandise set forth in plaintiff’s statement of claim and traversed plaintiff’s affidavit of atttachment, which affidavit alleged that defendant, within two years last past, fraudulently (a) conveyed or assigned its effect; (b) concealed or disposed of its property; (c) that it was about to fraudulently conceal or dispose of its property, so as to hinder and delay its creditors. Trial by jury having been waived, the cause was submitted to the court who found the attachment issues and the issues on the merits in favor of defendant, dismissing the attachment writ and entering judgment against plaintiff for costs.
Jacob Levy, for appellant; Josiah Burnham, of counsel.
Benjamin E. Cohen, for appellee.