99 Mich. 303 | Mich. | 1894
Reuben Allen died in 1863, leaving a widow (Demaris Allen) and three children (Joseph, Alzina Emerson, and claimant). His property consisted chiefly of real estate. By his will his wife had a life-estate in all his property, after giving claimant $50, and each of her three sons $25. The remainder of his estate was bequeathed to Joseph and Alzina. Joseph and Matthew Emerson, the husband of Alzina, were made executors. They converted the real estate into money, realizing between $4,000 and $5,000. From 1863 to 1882 the executors paid the widow $150 per year. Subsequently, they paid her only $20.75. She died
Joseph died in 1891, and Mr. Emerson in 1877. In December, 1880, Mrs. Morse took her mother to her own home, and Avrote to her brother, Joseph, about the situation. He came the following February, and it is claimed by claimant that an agreement was then made — which was assented to by all the parties interested in the estate, including the acting as well as the legal executor — that she and Mrs. Emerson should support and take care of their mother, each keeping an account of what they expended, and at her death bring in their bills against the estate of Reuben, and that they should be paid by that estate out of what the estate owed the mother. By the term “ acting executor ” is meant that Fred Emerson, the son of Matthew, assumed to act after his father’s death. It appears that after this alleged arrangement the
“¥e were to take care of her, and keep account of it; speak of it in the settlement, and we should have our pay. * * * If she could not keep house, we would have to take care of her, you know, and we should each • of us keep an account of the time she stayed with us; that I should keep an account of the time she stayed with me, and they would keep an account of the time she stayed with them, and we were to have our pay- — I was, and she was — from the estate of Eeuben Allen.”
Claimant's son testified that Joseph said to him:
“ Your mother and Mrs. Emerson will have to take care of her, and I want them to keep an account of it, to be settled for out of the estate, — what is due her from the estate.”
He also testified to a conversation with Ered Emerson to the like effect, but this was incompetent, since he was not an executor, and could in no way bind the estate.
Claimant paid upon her bond only $169. The claim presented amounts to $2,100.50, the principal items of which are: Eor board, $1,180; sei-vices taking care of her, $594; board of Mrs. Britton from March 11, 1887, to August 5, 1888, while helping Demaris, $216.
The contention of claimant is that the agreement amounted to an equitable assignment to Mrs. Morse, pro tanto, of the indebtedness due Mrs. Allen from her husband's estate, and that Mrs. Morse, to that extent, is subrogated to the rights of Mrs. Allen against the estate.
The doctrine of equitable assignment, which is well •established, is inapplicable to this case. That doctrine applies where the assignor and assignee alone are interested in the fund, or where the assignee has the first lien upon it, as where an attorney and his client agree that he
We think the circuit court properly directed the dis-allowance of the claim, and the judgment is affirmed.