Robert v. Estate of Morrin
| Decision Date | 16 May 1873 |
| Citation | 27 Mich. 306 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | Dominique E. Robert v. The Estate of Emily Morrin, Deceased |
Heard May 13, 1873
Error to Monroe Circuit.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
E Baldwin, William A. Underwood and C. A. Stacy, for plaintiff in error.
Grosvenor & Rauch and S. T. Douglass, for defendant in error.
Plaintiff sues his mother's estate to recover an amount claimed to have been received by her from the assets of a former guardian and not paid over to him.
Mrs Morrin's second husband became plaintiff's guardian in 1838, and died in 1848 or 1849. In 1855 Mrs. Morrin, who was his administratrix, rendered her final account. It showed the sum of five hundred sixty-three dollars and forty-eight cents in her hands due to her son, the plaintiff, who was then a minor, but nearly of age. The amount was balanced by giving a note to Samuel Duval, as guardian of plaintiff, for that sum.
Plaintiff came of age in 1856. Duval lived four or five years after the settlement. Mrs. Morrin died in 1867. This note was found more than a year after her death, and plaintiff claims to have found it in the files of the probate court in the estate which she administered.
The defense rested on the ground of the presumption of payment in fact of the note found among her papers, and also on the ground that the claim even if not paid was outlawed. To this latter defense the answer suggested was, a fraudulent concealment of the cause of action. And it is only on this last question that any errors have been relied on in this Court.
As bearing on this, and on plaintiff's means of knowledge, the court charged the jury that, "The probate records and files are public records, and plaintiff must take notice of them after he is of age, and is presumed to know the contents."
It is very evident that the probate records of the estate of plaintiff's first guardian would have informed him of the amount acknowledged to have been in his mother's hands, and furnished him the means of obtaining a knowledge of all that belonged to him from either guardian out of that estate.
We think the charge on this point was proper. Every one must know, or must be presumed to know, that he is interested in fact, as he is a party in law, to the settlement of a guardian's estate, and bound, when he becomes of age, to prosecute his rights with legal diligence. Such proceedings are notice to all...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mesh v. Citrin
...Co., 285 Mich. 405, 280 N.W. 807;Achenbach v. Mears, 272 Mich. 74, 261 N.W. 251; Richard v. Detroit Trust Co., supra; Robert v. Morrin's Estate, 27 Mich. 306. Plaintiff testified defendants' representative, Biber, stated that the station sold 29,000 gallons of gasoline a month. ‘He just tol......
-
Rossman v. Hutchinson
...v. Lang, 187 Mich. 286, 153 N.W. 686;Raymond v. McKenna, 147 Mich. 35, 110 N.W. 121;Brown v. Dean, 52 Mich. 267, 17 N.W. 837;Robert v. Morrin's Estate, 27 Mich. 306. In the absence of proof, such ‘actual fraudulent intent,’ under the facts, must be taken as not existing. The deed in questio......
-
Swinford v. Teegarden
... ... 87; State ex rel. v. Bilby, 50 Mo.App. 168; ... Smith v. Denny, 34 Mo. 219; Robert v ... Morren, 27 Mich. 306. (2) These deeds were voluntary, ... without consideration, ... J. Dean, is the niece of defendant Sarah Teegarden. Dr ... Benedict left an estate valued at $ 8,979.22. The defendant ... Sarah Teegarden was appointed administratrix of his estate ... ...
-
Heath v. Waters
...proof is on the representative to show fraud if it is sought to set it aside on that ground, Perrett v. Yarsdorfer, 37 Mich. 596; Robert v. Morrin, 27 Mich. 306; fraud is not to be inferred from the mere relations of the parties, Chambers v. Howell, 11 Beav. 14; one who seeks to set aside a......