MacKenzie v. MacKenzie
Decision Date | 24 June 1940 |
Citation | 28 N.E.2d 236,306 Mass. 291 |
Parties | ELMER R. MACKENZIE v. ELIZABETH R. MACKENZIE. |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
March 6, 1940.
Present: FIELD, C.
J., DONAHUE LUMMUS, QUA, & DOLAN, JJ.
Husband and Wife. Personal Property, Ownership.
Findings by a master in a suit of equitable replevin of an automobile by a husband against his wife, that the husband furnished practically all of the purchase price of the automobile, that with the wife's acquiescence he received a bill of sale thereof in his name, and that the automobile was used by both of them, warranted a finding of title in him although the wife procured registration in her name and, in accordance with an understanding between them, made substantial weekly payments from her earnings to him which he applied on a loan which he had obtained from a third party for use in the purchase, there being no finding that she was to receive any equitable interest in return for such payments.
BILL IN EQUITY filed in the Superior Court on April 7, 1939. A decree for the plaintiff was entered by order of Morton, J. The defendant appealed.
J. F. Francis, for the defendant, submitted a brief. No argument nor brief for the plaintiff.
In this suit in equity the plaintiff seeks to compel the defendant to surrender to him possession of an automobile of which, he alleges, he is the owner. The defendant in her answer asserts that she is the owner of the vehicle. The suit was begun on April 7, 1939. The plaintiff and defendant were married in March, 1936, and lived together until November, 1938. On March 15, 1939, the defendant obtained a decree nisi of divorce. Jurisdiction in equity exists of conflicting rights of husband and wife concerning property. Patterson v. Patterson, 197 Mass. 112 117. Druker v. Druker, 268 Mass. 334 , 338. Weidman v. Weidman, 274 Mass. 118 , 122.
The case was referred to a master whose findings in addition to facts already stated are as follows: In May, 1938, the plaintiff arranged to purchase the automobile in question from one Suddard, of Wareham, for $700 "cash." The vehicle was delivered in June with dealer's plates upon it. The plaintiff obtained a loan of $400 from a telephone workers' credit union on "his telephone stock" at that time he had on deposit the sum of $294.10, of which he withdrew $250, making a total of $650 derived from these sources; and the defendant withdrew a bank deposit of $50 (a wedding present to the plaintiff and the defendant). Thus the purchase price of the automobile was made up. In June the defendant drove the vehicle to Hyannis where the plaintiff was employed, taking with her a "box in which the plaintiff kept his valuables." The plaintiff took the sum of $700 "in cash and check from the box and handed it to the defendant." The latter went to the seller, Suddard, and he "delivered to the plaintiff [sic] a bill of sale of the automobile" in the plaintiff's name. The defendant registered and insured the automobile in her own name.
The master further found that it was the intention of the parties that the defendant should continue to pay the sum of $8 a week to the plaintiff, during such time as she worked, and that these payments were to be used by him toward the repayment of the loan of $400 secured by him, and that there was no actual gift of the automobile by the plaintiff to the defendant.
An interlocutory decree was entered...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
MacKenzie v. MacKenzie
...306 Mass. 29128 N.E.2d 236MacKENZIEv.MacKENZIE.Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Bristol.June 27, Action by Elmer R. MacKenzie against Elizabeth R. MacKenzie, to compel defendant to surrender to the plaintiff possession of an automobile allegedly owned by the plaintiff. From an inter......
- Aromando v. Leach