Campau v. Detroit Driving Club
Decision Date | 02 February 1904 |
Citation | 98 N.W. 267,135 Mich. 575 |
Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Parties | CAMPAU et al. v. DETROIT DRIVING CLUB (MORAN et al. Interveners.) Two Cases. MORAN et al. v. CAMPAU et al. |
Appeals from Circuit Court, Wayne County, in Chancery; William L Carpenter and Joseph W. Donovan, Judges.
Two suits, one by Daniel J. Campau and others against the Detroit Driving Club, in which Fred T. Moran and another intervened and filed various petitions; the other by Fred T. Moran and another against Daniel J. Campau and others. From a decree dismissing the bill of complaint in the second suit complainants and defendant the People's Savings Bank appeal. From a decree in the first suit complainants and intervening petitioners appeal, and because of certain other action therein the intervening petitioners take another appeal. Decree ordered.
Fred A. Baker, for appellants Moran and Churchill Keena & Lightner, for appellant People's Savings Bank.
Moore & Moore (Otto Kirchner, of counsel), for appellees Campau and others.
The three cases relate to the same litigation, and were heard as one case, though a question is raised, which will be referred to later, whether the last-named case is properly here. Some phases of this litigation have been before this court before in People's Savings Bank v. Campau, 124 Mich. 106, 82 N.W. 803, Moran v. Circuit Judge, 125 Mich. 6, 83 N.W. 1004, and Campau et al. v. Detroit Driving Club, 90 N.W. 49. A reference to the opinions filed therein will aid in understanding the issues before us, and will make it unnecessary to make so full a statement of facts as would otherwise be required. The bond referred to in People's Savings Bank v. Campau, supra, was signed by Messrs. Campau, Palms, Vail, Moran, and Churchill as sureties. The $18,366 Judgment mentioned in Campau et al. v. Detroit Driving Club, supra, represents the proportions of said bond paid by the first three of the above-named sureties for which demand notes were given to them by the driving club, which notes were sued upon and put into judgment. The $14,170 judgment obtained by the bank was for the balance of the debt to secure the payment of which said bond was given, and was assigned by the bank to the other two sureties. In January, 1901, Messrs. Moran and Churchill filed a bill in chancery against Messrs. Campau, Palms, and Vail and the driving club, in which was recited a history of the transaction from the point of view of the complainants, and charging Mr. Campau, both before and after his appointment as receiver, with mismanagement, and with a purpose to obtain an unjust advantage over the complainants, and praying that the judgment in favor of Campau, Palms, and Vail and the execution levy and sale thereunder might be set aside, and that the judgment creditors' proceeding be held void, and the appointment of Campau as receiver be set aside, and also praying for other relief. The case was put at issue, and a hearing had before Judge Carpenter, who dismissed the bill of complaint, 'but without prejudice to the rights of the complainants in the original bill to file a new bill of complaint, if they shall be so advised, asking for their pro rata share of the purchase price of the property sold under the execution, or, if the sale is set aside, to the pro rata share of the rights acquired by the execution levy as mentioned and referred to in the bill of complaint filed herein.' From that decree an appeal is taken.
In the case of Campau et al. v. Detroit Driving Club, 90 N.W. 49, Justice Long, speaking for the court, wrote, among other things, as follows: An order reading in part as follows was entered in the case:
After the case was remanded, it was referred to a circuit court commissioner, who made the following findings. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gillen v. Wakefield State Bank
...34 Cyc. 16. His custody is that of the court which appointed him. People v. Brooks, 40 Mich. 333, 29 Am. Rep. 534;Campau v. Detroit Driving Club, 135 Mich. 575, 98 N. W. 267. A receiver may be appointed only in proceedings ancillary to a suit pending. Merchants' & Manufacturers' Nat. Bank o......
-
People ex rel. Kent County Sup'rs v. Loomis
... ... 385; Fish v. Stockdale, 111 ... Mich. 46, 69 N.W. 92; Detroit v. Ct. J., 112 Mich ... 319, 70 N.W. 894; People v. Huntley, 112 Mich ... ...
-
Ninde v. Union Trust Co.
... ... Bank of Detroit. From an order of the circuit court, the ... receiver appeals. Affirmed ... Ninde purchased lot 7 of block 12 of ... C. F. Campau's Subdivision; that this lot was subject to ... a mortgage of $1,200, ... ...