74 Mich. 290 | Mich. | 1889
Lead Opinion
The defendant, is a domestic corporation in Detroit. It made a general assignment for the benefit of its creditors, February 9, 1888.
The plaintiff, an assignee, of Margaret Donaldson, who had loaned to the defendant $3,000, which was secured by an interest-bearing note, and which he held, filed proof of the same, and asked to have it allowed against the insolvent estate, under chapter 303, How. Stat. The assignee contested the claim under sections 8746, 8747, How. Stat. The case was placed on the law side of the circuit court for the county of Wayne, and when it was tried the defendant claimed that the indebtedness to the claimant should be set off and held to be paid by certain moneys, which it is. alleged had been withdrawn from the business of the company, previous to the transfer of plaintiff's claim to him, by Mrs. Donaldson. The circuit court held such moneys were a proper set-off, and so charged the jury, and a verdict was taken for the plaintiff under the charge of the court for $1,000, and allowed the set-off for the balance of the note. The proceedings are complained of by the plaintiff, who has brought them before us for review.
From the record it appears Mrs. Donaldson's husband,
It further appears that on or about December 31, 1886, an inventory of the assets and indebtedness was taken, which then showed the estate worth $2G,500 over its liabilities; and for some reason, which does not very clearly appear in the record, Mrs. Donaldson was induced to place the assets of the estate in' a corporation which was then organized for conducting the business. This seems to have been under the advice of some one. The company was organized under the name of the “ J. P. Donaldson Company,” with a capital stock of $75,000, and all the stock which was issued was issued to the widow and her eight children; she being made president - of the
On February 28, 1887, William wanted $3,000 to pay a debt owing to the Plymouth Cordage Company, and Mrs. Donaldson let him have it from the balance of her insurance money, and he gave to her the corporation’s note for the same, payabie in one year from that date, with pnterest at 7 per cent. This note Mrs. Donaldson indorsed and transferred to the plaintiff, and is'the one offered for allowance in this case, and it is admitted no part of the same has been paid.
It further appears from the record that Mrs. Donaldson received from the business carried on before the general assignment was made money to pay the usual expenses in •caring for the family at the homestead; that some of the money -she received personally and some from William; and that some of the household expenses were paid by William, and some by Anna; and that none that Mrs. Donaldson ever received did she ever agree to pay back; and that no one expected that she would do so, or be called upon to do so; and that all the family shared in the proceeds thereof. Mrs. Donaldson testified that she supposed she had a right, and that the family had a right, to live
It also appeared from the testimony that the appraisement of the assets of the corporation, which was made when the assignment was executed, on the basis of d0 per cent. of the cost of the goods, amounted to $38,000, and the amount of' the indebtedness to $52,000. It also-appeared that, after taking account of stock in the usual manner, on December 31, 1887, the company declared a. dividend of $1,200, and that the money used by the widow from the business for her own personal needs did not exceed $300, and that the entire family consented to-the use of all the money she received for family expenses.
Under the charge of the court, $2,000 and the interest-thereon of the money thus received and disbursed by Mrs. Donaldson was allowed as set-ofli against the plaintiff’s-note, against his objection and exception.
Counsel for plaintiff present two questions for our consideration:
1. Could the moneys so used by Mrs. Donaldson be set off against plaintiff’s claim?
2. If so, should not the amount be limited to what she received after the company became insolvent?
The set-off claimed cannot be sustained either at law or
The judgment at the circuit must be reversed, and, as there is no question raised except the right to set off against plaintiff’s claim, which cannot be done, the note-of plaintiff should be allowed in full, and the circuit court enter a judgment accordingly, with costs of both courts.
Concurrence Opinion
I concur in holding that the set-off is not allowable. No claim can be set off which is not a personal and sole debt of the sole owner or assignor of the claim in suit, where such claim is held by an individual or by an assignee held to the equities binding such individual. Mrs. Donaldson never owed the corporation, and the money which was drawn frqm it was not com
As this suit is a common-law action in form merely, and for the purpose of settling the creditor’s claim against the corporate estate, it should be ordered that the set-off be not allowed, and that plaintiff’s claim should be allowed in full.