In re Radford

CourtSupreme Court of Michigan
Writing for the CourtSTONE
Citation134 N.W. 472,168 Mich. 474
Decision Date10 February 1912
PartiesIn re RADFORD.

168 Mich. 474
134 N.W. 472

In re RADFORD.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Feb. 10, 1912.


Certiorari to Circuit Court, Wayne County; Morse Rohnert, Henry A. Mandell, and James O. Murfin, Judges.

Certiorari by George W. Radford to review a judgment of disbarment. Affirmed.

See, also, 159 Mich. 91, 123 N. W. 546.

Argued before MOORE, C. J., and STEERE, BROOKE, BLAIR, and STONE, JJ.

[134 N.W. 473]

Thomas A. E. Weadock, for appellant.

C. A. Kent and Wm. G. Fitzpatrick, amici curiae.


STONE, J.

This is a proceeding for the disbarment of George W. Radford, who for many years has been a member of the bar in the courts of this state. The proceeding was taken at the instance and on the recommendation of the Detroit Bar Association, and has been conducted under the direction of the circuit court for the county of Wayne. That court appointed two members of the bar, as friends of the court, to make, prefer, present, and prosecute charges against Mr. Radford, hereinafter called the respondent.

The petition of the friends of the court is very lengthy, and, together with the exhibits attached thereto, covers more than 100 pages of the printed record. Its great length renders it inexpedient that it be set forth in full here. It is very explicit and full in its charges and specifications, and was duly verified upon information and belief. We have set forth the specifications which we deem material, as follows:

‘(A) He willfully and knowingly and unlawfully failed and neglected to file in the probate court for the county of Wayne, within the time required by law and by the conditions of his bond as such executor, and by an order duly and lawfully made by said probate court, any account, or inventory, so called, of the estate, real or personal, belonging to the estate of the said John E. Oxnard, deceased, which, of great value, had within that time come into his (said George W. Radford's) possession as such executor; and he willfully and knowingly and unlawfully so continued in his said failure and neglect for eight years after he had been appointed and qualified as such executor, as is hereinabove, in paragraph numbered third hereof, also set forth.

‘(B) He willfully and knowingly and unlawfully failed and neglected to render to said probate court, within the time required by law and by the conditions of his bond as such executor, and by an order duly and lawfully made by said probate court, any account of his administration of the estate of the said John E. Oxnard, deceased, although during that time he had, as such executor, come into the possession of large amounts of property, both real and personal, belonging to said estate, and had made large disbursements thereof, and he willfully, knowingly, and unlawfully so continued in his said failure and neglect for eight years after he had been appointed and had qualified as such executor, as is hereinabove, in paragraph numbered third hereof, also set forth.

‘(C) He willfully and knowingly and unlawfully and contemptuously, and without any good or lawful excuse, violated and disobeyed the lawful orders of the probate court of the county of Wayne, duly made and entered by and in said probate court the 10th day of March, A. D. 1908, and the 26th day of May, A. D. 1908, hereinabove referred to, and of which orders he had due notice, ordering and requiring him, within the times in such orders stated, to file in said court an account, or inventory, of said estate, and to render to said probate court his account as such executor, and an account of his receipts and disbursements as such executor, although, when such orders were made, he had, as such executor, come into possession and was then in possession of large amounts of property, both real and personal, belonging to said estate, and had made large disbursements therefrom; and, although a warrant was, on the 22d day of July, A. D. 1908, issued by and out of said probate court for his arrest and imprisonment for failure to obey, perform, and comply with the said order of the 26th day of May, A. D. 1908, he

[134 N.W. 474]

knowingly and willfully and unlawfully and contemptuously, and without any good or lawful excuse, filed no inventory or account of such estate, and rendered no account of his receipts or disbursements as such executor until the 2d day of September, A. D. 1908, and after he had been removed from his office as such executor, as is hereinabove, in paragraph numbered third hereof, also set forth, and he, by his said actions, was and is guilty of willful contempt of said probate court.’

‘(E) He has willfully and knowingly and unlawfully and contemptuously disobeyed and violated a lawful order of the probate court of the county of Wayne, duly and legally made and entered by and in said probate court the 15th day of May, A. D. 1909, and hereinabove referred to, and another lawful order of said probate court, duly made and entered by and in said probate court the 14th day of July, A. D. 1909, and also hereinabove referred to, and from neither of which orders has any appeal been taken, or claimed, or noticed, and has willfully and knowingly and unlawfully failed, neglected, and refused, and so continues to so neglect and refuse, to pay to Elizabeth R. Oxnard, and to the Security Trust Company, of Detroit, Mich., and to the county treasurer of Wayne county, the persons in such orders named, or to any of such persons, or to any one on behalf of such persons, or on behalf of any of them, the sums of money, or any part of the sums of money, by said probate court, and in and by such orders, then found due to such persons, respectively, from said George W. Radford as such executor, as aforesaid, and which said George W. Radford was by said probate court, and in and by such orders, then and there ordered to pay to such persons; and he (the said George W. Radford) has willfully and knowingly and unlawfully neglected and refused, and so continues to so neglect and refuse, to turn over to said Emmett A. Perry, administrator de bonis non with the will annexed of said estate, and in such order of the 15th day of May, A. D. 1909, mentioned, the uncollected assets stated in said George W. Radford's said account, in Exhibit C thereof, or any part thereof, which uncollected assets the said George W. Radford was by said probate court, and in and by said last-mentioned order, ordered to so turn over to said Emmett A. Perry, as is hereinabove, in paragraph numbered fourth hereof, also set forth.’

‘(J) He willfully and knowingly and unlawfully, in and by his testimony given in said probate court on the examination of his said account as such executor as aforesaid, sought to deceive and mislead said probate court, and to deceive and mislead and cheat and defraud the persons interested in said estate, and in the insurance moneys, so called, hereinabove mentioned, by knowingly and intentionally charging to the said estate and claiming credits to himself, as such executor and trustee aforesaid, for certain practically worthless investments which he claimed to have made from and out of the funds of said estate and from and out of said insurance moneys, and for and on behalf of said estate and for and on behalf of the persons interested in said insurance moneys, so called, which said investments, as he (the said George W. Radford) then and there well knew, he did not lawfully make from or out of said funds or said insurance moneys, and did not make for or on behalf of said estate, or for or on behalf of the persons interested in said insurance moneys, and for which investments he was entitled to no credit as such executor or trustee, all as he (the said George W. Radford) then and there, when he gave his testimony aforesaid, well knew, as is hereinabove, in paragraph numbered eleventh hereof, also set forth.

‘(K) If he, as such executor and trustee of and under the said last will and testimony of John E. Oxnard, deceased, made from and out of the funds of said estate, or from and out of the said insurance moneys, so called, and for and on behalf of said estate, or for and on behalf of the persons interested in said insurance moneys, so called, any of the investments hereinabove, in paragraph numbered eleventh hereof, montioned, and which he claimed in his said testimony given in said probate court, on the examination of said account as such executor, that he did so make, as is hereinabove, in paragraph numbered eleventh hereof, set forth, then he (the said George W. Radford) willfully and knowingly and fraudulently and unlawfully sought to deceive and mislead said probate court, and to deceive and mislead and cheat and defraud the said estate of John E. Oxnard, deceased, and the persons interested therein, and the persons interested in said insurance moneys, so called, when he failed and neglected to state in his said account as such executor the investments so made, and when he failed and neglected to credit said estate in such account, or otherwise, with said investments and with the moneys that he received on account thereof, and when he failed and neglected to credit the persons interested in said insurance moneys with such investments and with the moneys received on account thereof, as hereinabove, in paragraph numbered eleventh hereof, set forth.

‘(L) He has willfully and knowingly and unlawfully and fraudulently, and with intent to defraud the said estate and to cheat and defraud the persons interested in the funds and assets thereof, misappropriated and converted and applied to his own use a large sum of money, to wit, the sum of twenty-one thousand six hundred and eleven dollars and thirty-four cents ($21,611.34), which was received by him, and which came into the hands and possession and control of him (the said George W. Radford), as the executor of the last will and testament of the said John E. Oxnard, deceased, and which was a part

[134 N.W. 475]

of the funds and assets of said estate, as is also hereinabove set forth.

‘(M) He, as...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • Bartos v. United States District Court, No. 7561.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • May 17, 1927
    ...rel. Little Rock Bar Ass'n, 101 Ark. 210, 142 S. W. 194, Ann. Cas. 1913D, 1156; Ex parte Ditchburn, 32 Or. 538, 52 P. 694; In re Radford, 168 Mich. 474, 134 N. W. 472; Weeks on Attorneys, §§ 80 and 81. The Circuit Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit quite recently called the Bar's atten......
  • Veach, In re, No. 44453
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 12, 1956
    ...jurisdiction for a revocation of license. The court further held that the effect of the judgment of the Michigan court, In re Radford, 168 Mich. 474, 134 N.W. 472 should be recognized unless: (1) there was a lack of due process; (2) there was such an infirmity of proof as to create a clear ......
  • State Bar of Mich. v. Block, Docket No. 2622
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • March 21, 1968
    ...and continued over a long course of years. The disciplinary order is not without precedent in this jurisdiction. See In re Radford, 168 Mich. 474, 134 N.W. 472, and In re Hartford, 282 Mich. 124, 275 N.W. 791, 792. As was said of the defendant in the Hartford Case so it might well be said o......
  • Partch v. Baird, No. 10
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • April 24, 1925
    ...inference from the facts proved, whether that inference would or would not have been drawn by the appellate tribunal.' In re Radford, 168 Mich. 474, 134 N. W. 472, it was said: ‘The writ of certiorari to review proceedings for the disbarment of an attorney at law (3 Comp. Laws, § 10497), br......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • Bartos v. United States District Court, No. 7561.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • May 17, 1927
    ...rel. Little Rock Bar Ass'n, 101 Ark. 210, 142 S. W. 194, Ann. Cas. 1913D, 1156; Ex parte Ditchburn, 32 Or. 538, 52 P. 694; In re Radford, 168 Mich. 474, 134 N. W. 472; Weeks on Attorneys, §§ 80 and 81. The Circuit Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit quite recently called the Bar's atten......
  • Veach, In re, No. 44453
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 12, 1956
    ...jurisdiction for a revocation of license. The court further held that the effect of the judgment of the Michigan court, In re Radford, 168 Mich. 474, 134 N.W. 472 should be recognized unless: (1) there was a lack of due process; (2) there was such an infirmity of proof as to create a clear ......
  • State Bar of Mich. v. Block, Docket No. 2622
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • March 21, 1968
    ...and continued over a long course of years. The disciplinary order is not without precedent in this jurisdiction. See In re Radford, 168 Mich. 474, 134 N.W. 472, and In re Hartford, 282 Mich. 124, 275 N.W. 791, 792. As was said of the defendant in the Hartford Case so it might well be said o......
  • Partch v. Baird, No. 10
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • April 24, 1925
    ...inference from the facts proved, whether that inference would or would not have been drawn by the appellate tribunal.' In re Radford, 168 Mich. 474, 134 N. W. 472, it was said: ‘The writ of certiorari to review proceedings for the disbarment of an attorney at law (3 Comp. Laws, § 10497), br......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT