Findlay v. Chicago & G. T. R. Co.
Decision Date | 22 October 1895 |
Citation | 64 N.W. 732,106 Mich. 700 |
Parties | FINDLAY v. CHICAGO & G. T. RY. CO. |
Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Error to circuit court, Wayne county; Robert E. Frazer, Judge.
Action by Robert Findlay, administrator of the estate of Myrtle Findlay, deceased, against the Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Company, to recover damages for the death of plaintiff's intestate, alleged to have been caused by defendant's negligence. From a judgment for defendant, directed by the court, plaintiff brings error. Reversed.
Julian G. Dickinson, for appellant.
Geer & Williams, for appellee.
Plaintiff sues as administrator of the estate of Myrtle Findlay to recover damages for the death of intestate, claimed to have been caused by the negligence of defendant. The circuit judge directed a verdict for the defendant on the ground that the probate court of Wayne county, in which letters of administration were issued, had no jurisdiction. Plaintiff appeals.
1. The petition for administration averred: It is conceded that if any Michigan probate court had jurisdiction to grant letters of administration the probate court of Wayne county was a proper place to apply, but defendant's contention is that there was no estate of deceased to be administered within this state. Sections 8313 and 8314 of Howell's Annotated Statutes provide: Section 5848 of Howell's Annotated Statutes, relative to administration of estates of deceased persons, provides: "If such deceased person at the time of his death reside in another state or country, leaving estate to be administered in this state, administration thereof shall be granted by the probate court of any county in which there shall be estate to be administered." It is contended by defendant that the right of action for causing the death of the intestate does not constitute assets of the estate. We are of the opinion that the sections of the statute above quoted should be construed together. Section 8314 clearly contemplates that an administrator shall institute action, and distribute the funds received, if any. It could not have been contemplated by the legislature that the right to bring this action could be made to depend upon the question of whether the deceased left other property. We think it was clearly the purpose to treat this right of action as assets for distribution, and we hold, in accordance...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Breckon v. Franklin Fuel Co.
...left by persons dying intestate; * * *.' Recognizing that a change had been made by this amendment, in Findlay v. Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Co. (1895), 106 Mich. 700, 64 N.W. 732, this Court held that the right of action given to an administrator by the death act constituted an asset of......
-
Richards v. Ironworks
...§ 205; Hutchins v. St. Paul R. R., 44 Minn. 5, 46 N. W. 79; Brown v. L. & N. R. R., 97 Ky. 228, 232. 30 S. W. 639; Findlay v. Chicago R. R., 106 Mich. 700, 64 N. W. 732; Morris v. Chicago R. R., 65 Iowa, 727, 728, 23 N. W. 143, 54 Am. Rep. 39; Sargent v. Sargent 168 Mass. 420, 47 N. E. 121;......
-
Richards v. Riverside Iron Works
... ... Indianapolis, etc., R. Co. v. Keely's Adm'r, ... 23 Ind. 133; Lucus v. New York C. R. Co., 21 Barb ... [56 W.Va. 514] 245; Chicago, etc., R. Co. v ... Morris, 26 Ill. 400; State v. Gilmore, 24 N.H ... 461; Johnston v. Cleveland, etc., R. Co., 7 Ohio St ... 336, 70 ... § 205; ... Hutchins v. St. Paul R. R., 44 Minn. 5, 46 N.W. 79; ... Brown v. L. & N. R. R., 97 Ky. 228, 232. 30 S.W ... 639; Findlay v. Chicago R. R., 106 Mich. 700, 64 ... N.W. 732; Morris v. Chicago R. R., 65 Iowa 727, 728, ... 23 N.W. 143, 54 Am.Rep. 39; Sargent v ... ...
-
Nevada Paving, Inc. v. Callahan
...the Federal Employers' Liability Act; Hutchins v. St. Paul, M & M R. Co., 44 Minn. 5, 46 N.W. 79 (1890); Findlay v. Chicago, & G T R. Co., 106 Mich. 700, 64 N.W. 732 (1895); Bradley v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 51 Neb. 653, 71 N.W. 282 (1897); Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. Lewis, 24 Neb. 848, 40 N.W.......