Eames v. Manley

• Decision Date: 19 September 1899
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: EAMES v. MANLEY.

80 N.W. 15

121 Mich. 300

EAMES v. MANLEY.

Supreme Court of Michigan

September 19, 1899

Appeal from circuit court, Kalamazoo county, in chancery; George M Buck, Judge.

Bill by Lucy C. Eames, individually and as administratrix of the estate of Lovett Eames, deceased, against Charles H. Manley administrator of the estate of Elijah W. Morgan, deceased. Demurrer to bill overruled, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

Boudeman & Adams (Lawrence & Butterfield, of counsel), for appellant.

N. H Stewart, for appellee.

MOORE J.

To the bill in chancery, filed by the complainant in May, 1896, the defendant interposed a demurrer, which was overruled. From the order overruling the demurrer he has appealed. The bill avers that complainant is the widow and administratrix of Lovett Eames, who died intestate in September, 1863 possessed of a large amount of real estate in Kalamazoo, consisting of a machine shop and water power valued at $12,000, certain real estate in Van Buren county, and certain patents and personal property, which, added to the real estate, was valued at nearly $50,000, and personal and real property in Jefferson county, N. Y., worth $50,000, and that none of it, except a small amount of household furniture and a horse, ever came into her possession, either as an individual or as administrator. It avers that, soon after the death of her husband, her brother, then a resident at Ann Arbor, a lawyer, Elijah W. Morgan, came to her home, and advised with her in relation to her husband's estate; that she had the utmost confidence in his ability and honesty; that, at his request and that he might advise her intelligently, she delivered to the said Morgan all the books, papers, and accounts relating to her husband's business and estate, including his correspondence, and has never been able to possess herself or see any of them from then until now, except a very little that was used in litigation in 1887; that her husband left her with a family of seven children, the olderst of whom was 27 years of age, and the youngest 9 years of age, at the time of the death of her husband, all of whom lived with complainant, except the oldest one, Elisha D. Eames, who was in charge of the manufacturing business of her husband in Jefferson county, N. Y.; that by the advice of said Morgan, upon the petition of her oldest son, complainant was appointed administratrix of her husband's estate; that she then and there constituted said Morgan her trusted and confidential adviser, and placed herself under his direction and dominancy, and, while she was nominally administratrix, she only acted as directed to do by said Morgan, having the most implicit confidence in his intelligence and honesty; that the only attorney employed in relation to the estate was J. Davidson Burnes, who was entirely under the direction and command of said Morgan, and that all probate court proceedings in said estate, both in this state and in New York, were managed and carried forward by said Morgan without the advice, or even knowledge, of complainant, who gave herself no concern about the management of the estate. Complainant avers that frequently after 1865, and before said Morgan became non compos, in 1882, she requested said Morgan to account to her for the proceeds of the estate; that he promised to do so, but did not; that he became non compos in 1882, and remained so until his death, in 1892; that he died without accounting with the complainant in relation to his dealings with said estate, and it was not until her family had grown to manhood and womanhood that she knew Morgan had mismanaged the estate, and appropriate every dollar of it to his own use. She avers that when her husband died he owed said Morgan $12,000, and to other persons in the neighborhood of $5,000; that said Morgan caused commissioners on claims to be appointed, who allowed certain claims within the life of their commission; that said Morgan caused claims to be allowed in his favor of $40,000, about $12,000 of which was bona fide indebtedness, and the balance was fraudulent, which was allowed after June 12, 1864, and after the right of said commissioners to allow claims had expired. Complainant avers that, without her knowledge, said Morgan, in 1863, caused hereself and his brother to be appointed administratrix and administrator of said estate by the surrogate court of Jefferson county, N. Y., and caused nearly $12,000 of the claims which had been allowed in Kalamazoo county to be presented for allowance in the surrogate court of Jefferson county, N. Y., which were not allowed, but claims amounting to $3,000 were allowed, which were not bona fide claims; that said Morgan then procured an order for the sale of the real estate in Jefferson county to satisfy said claims, and half of which was the estate of said Eames; that there was a large amount of personal property in Jefferson county and debts due the estate; that said Morgan so manipulated the property as to become the owner of all of it, and cheated the estate out of all of it. The bill avers that, immediately after purchasing said property, Morgan rented it for a large amount of rental, and that other property at Watertown belonging to said estate was rented for large sums, and the rental appropriated to his own use by said Morgan; that he never accounted for this property, and has never returned the books and memorandum, and that it became known in 1887 that Morgan had cheated said estate out of every dollar's worth of property it possessed; that he and his representatives have refused to return any of said books, or to allow any person interested adversely to him to inspect them. The complainant avers that the title to the Jefferson county property is to-day in the estate of Lovett Eames and his heirs at law, as well as the proceeds of the business, and that no account has been made by said Morgan in the surrogate court in Jefferson county, N. Y.; that in April, 1864, your oratrix signed a petition in the probate court of Kalamazoo county to sell the real and personal property in Kalamazoo, which sale was to take place on May 12th; that the property was advertised for August 16th, and the sale adjourned to September 17th, when it was struck off to said Morgan, and that the proceedings in relation thereto were fraudulent on the part of said Morgan, the bill describing in detail in what the fraud consisted. Complainant avers that in signing the petition, and in all she did thereto, she relied upon said Morgan, and was in ignorance of his methods and what he did, and that the lands in Van Buren county were also fraudulently sold to said Morgan for much less than their value, under the license of sale made in 1864, and that said Morgan so manipulated things as to acquire all the property belonging to said estate; that, while an allowance of dower was made to the complainant, she never got anything except some household and personal property, appraised in the inventory at $359, and that none of the bona fide claims against said estate, except those belonging to said Morgan, have ever been paid; that prior to 1885 said Morgan became financially involved, and, in order to cheat and defraud his creditors as well as said estate, conveyed to his wife his personal and real estate, amounting to $300,000, and that one of the pieces so conveyed was the machine shop and water power in Kalamazoo, which property was first deeded by Lovett Eames to said Morgan in 1859, but that deed was in fact a mortgage given to secure a debt due or to become due to said Morgan; that in 1872 said Morgan gave to his wife a mortgage on said property, which was recorded in December, 1872, and in 1874 gave a deed of said property to his wife, which was recorded in 1874; that said Lucy Morgan afterwards died, and the executors and trustees of her estate, in 1894, brought ejectment against your oratrix and the heirs at law of Lovett Eames to recover the real estate first mentioned, which case was tried, and resulted in a verdict in favor of defendants, but that said executors still persist in claiming title to said property. The bill avers that, after said Morgan became non compos, he made the transfers of real and personal property to Franklin L. Parker, Lucy D. S. Parker, and Lucy W. S. Morgan, each of them knowing that he was of unsound mind; that Mrs. Morgan died in 1887,

leaving a will appointing executors, who came into possession of all the books and papers belonging to the Lovett Eames estate, which Mr. Morgan in his lifetime had, and still have them, and refuse to deliver them to the complainant; that in 1892 said Elijah W. Morgan died intestate, and Charles H. Manley was appointed his administrator, and has demanded from the executors of Mrs. Morgan the papers belonging to the estate of Lovett Eames, who refuse to deliver them to him. The bill avers that in December, 1894, the complainant was cited to render a final account in the probate court for Kalamazoo county of her doings as administratrix; that she filed her report, and the probate court confirmed the same, and that the cannot make a correct report without the books and papers already described; that the property belonging to the estate of Lucy Morgan, deceased, amounts to $200,000; that the executors have given a bond of only $50,000, and the bonds are not good, and the trustees of said estate are not acting prudently, and there may not be property sufficient to pay the claim due the estate of Lovett Eames upon an accounting between the two estates; and asked for an injunction and for a new bond. The bill avers that the probate court has refused to require the executor of Mrs. Morgan's estate to give any other bond. The bill prays, among other things: 'And your...