Section 67. If an attachment on mesne process is made of land, or of a right or interest therein, which has been fraudulently conveyed by the debtor to a third person, or which has been purchased by the debtor, or the purchase money of which has been directly or indirectly paid by him, and the title thereto has been retained in the vendor or conveyed to another person, with the intent and for the purpose of fraudulently securing the land from attachment by a creditor of such debtor, or with the intent and for the purpose of delaying, defeating or defrauding creditors, or which is held on a trust for the debtor, express or implied, whereby he is entitled to a present conveyance, or which was acquired by the debtor by a deed describing him as trustee, regardless of the validity of the trust or the legal effect of the designation as trustee, it shall not be valid against a subsequent attaching creditor, or against a subsequent purchaser in good faith and for value, unless the officer in addition to the return required by sections sixty-two and sixty-three also returns a brief description of the land which has been attached, by its locality, situation, boundaries or otherwise as known to him, and the names of the persons in whom the record or legal title stands.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1929–2022 · leading case:
In re Varrichione, 354 B.R. 563 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2006).
In re Varrichione, 354 B.R. 563 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2006).
· cites it 8× “The issue presented is whether Attorney Af-rame established that the IRS’s claim should be recharacterized as unsecured by virtue of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223, § 67 and Mass. Gen.”
Liddell v. Peckham (In re Peckham), 442 B.R. 62 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2010).
“Citing Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223, § 67 with respect to pre-judgment attachments, Liddell reasons as follows: The Peckhams .”
Gardiner v. Rogers, 166 N.E. 763 (Mass. 1929).
“There is nothing to show that the trustee in the present case has or ever will exercise his power to take over any part of the principal. As he does not have an absolute right to a present conveyance of the entire trust estate, it follows that the levies and executions were not…”
Solans v. McMenimen, 951 N.E.2d 999 (Mass. App. Ct. 2011).
· cites it 2× “Similarly, G. L. c. 223, § 67 (governing so-called “special” attachments), 9 , 10 does not invalidate an attachment as a general *183 matter, but only as against subsequent good faith purchasers.”
Safeguard Props. Mgmt., LLC v. Zoll, No. 1:22-cv-11004, 2022 WL 16838781 (D. Mass. Nov. 8, 2022).
· cites it 4× “Counts IX–X In their motion to dismiss, Defendants also seek dismissal of Counts IX–X, seeking declaratory judgements, pursuant to Mass. Gen L. c. 223, § 67, stating that the Milford and Quincy properties held by 76 Haven Street LLC and the Framingham property held by Zoll…”
Friend Lumber Co. v. Olson, 59 Mass. App. Dec. 93 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1976).
· cites it 3× “"The Bay State Case specifically exempted 'special attachments’ (G.L.c. 223, §67) from notice requirements (the plaintiff would suggest, because the interest of the defendant is being attached in property standing in another’s name, not the interest of the true owner of record);…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.