Corey v. Cadwell
| Decision Date | 28 July 1891 |
| Citation | 49 N.W. 611,86 Mich. 570 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | COREY v. CADWELL. |
Error to circuit court, Montcalm county; VERNON H. SMITH, Judge.
Action by Lorenzo Corey against Charles T. Cadwell for the recovery of money loaned. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.
N O. Griswold and Griffin, Warren & Hunt, for appellant.
L C. Moore and George I. Steere, for appellee.
The parties to this suit were in partnership in 1886, in the business of buying, manufacturing, and selling shingles. In January, 1887, they dissolved this partnership, and the business was continued by the defendant. In July, 1887, the defendant told the plaintiff that he knew of a piece of pine in Newaygo county that could be bought at a bargain, and asked the plaintiff if the money could be had of him. Plaintiff said, "Yes," if the trade was a good one and advised the defendant to go and examine the timber. Defendant did so, and on his return told plaintiff that it was a very nice tract of timber. The plaintiff then agreed to furnish the money to pay for the timber, and defendant agreed to pay it back, with interest at the rate of 8 per cent., as fast as the timber was removed. The plaintiff then gave his note to defendant for $6,000, due in 20 days, with which, or the proceeds of which, defendant bought the first tract of timber, known in the record as the "Danahan Land." Plaintiff paid the note when it became due. The deed was then made in plaintiff's name, and bears date August 26, 1887. The testimony introduced in the case tended to show that afterwards, in October, 1887, Cadwell desired to purchase some standing pine timber from one Wise for $550, and applied to Corey for a loan of the capital to enable him to do so. Corey agreed to loan it to him at the rate of 8 per cent. Corey then suggested to the defendant that, as he was furnishing a good deal of money, why should he not have an interest in the profits of it, and proposed that he should have, and that Cadwell should give him one-half of the profits above 8 per cent., after paying for the timber, and Cadwell acceded to the proposition. The parties then entered into an agreement, which agreement was entered upon the books of the defendant, Cadwell, in the following form:
This is the first, and for more than a year afterwards the only writing the parties had in relation to the investment. Some time during the year 1889 plaintiff asked defendant to give him a certificate containing the substance of this agreement on the books, so that, in case the book should be destroyed in any way, he would have something to show his interest there; and thereupon Cadwell made, signed, and delivered to the plaintiff a certificate, as follows: This latter paper the plaintiff accepted and held, while the former one was on the defendant's books, and in his possession. The plaintiff testified that in December, 1890, he asked the defendant if he had cut the timber from the land, and he stated that he had; that it was all manufactured and sold, and the returns received, except from one car-load of shingles, which they arrived at from guess-work, comparing with other shipments. He was not permitted to testify to the whole of this conversation, nor whether they looked over and had a settlement at that time. He did testify that Cadwell had never paid any of the money...
To continue reading
Request your trial