Md. Cas. Co. v. John (In re Bienenstok's Estate)

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
Writing for the CourtFOWLER
Citation208 Wis. 676,242 N.W. 572
Decision Date10 May 1932
PartiesIN RE BIENENSTOK'S ESTATE. MARYLAND CASUALTY CO. v. JOHN ET AL.

208 Wis. 676
242 N.W. 572

IN RE BIENENSTOK'S ESTATE.
MARYLAND CASUALTY CO.
v.
JOHN ET AL.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

May 10, 1932.


Appeal from an order of the County Court of Milwaukee County; Michael S. Sheridan, County Judge.

In the matter of the estate of Edgar Allen Bienenstok, deceased. From an order dismissing the petition of the Maryland Casualty Company to be subrogated to the rights of the Milwaukee Tank Works upon a contingent claim filed by latter against the estate, petitioner appeals.--[By Editorial Staff.]

Affirmed.

[242 N.W. 573]

Petition of the Maryland Casualty Company to be subrogated to the rights of the Milwaukee Tank Works upon a contingent claim filed by the tank works against the estate, filed September 12, 1931. From an order dismissing the petition entered October 29, 1931, the petitioner appeals.

The deceased was president of the tank works, a corporation. As such he executed and delivered $25,000 of promissory notes of the corporation. The tank works, claiming the notes were fraudulently procured, brought suit for their return and to restrain their collection. A preliminary injunction was granted, and a $12,500 bond required as condition of granting it, which bond the casualty company issued, and which was conditioned on the tank works' payment of any notes on which it should be held liable. Some of the notes got into the hands of innocent third persons. Pending the litigation, the tank works made an assignment to trustees for the benefit of its creditors. After the assignment, the casualty company was notified to take over the litigation, and negotiated a settlement of the case to relieve itself of liability under the bond, and paid an aggregate of $9,625 to innocent holders, which payments were made with the knowledge of the trustees and attorneys of the tank works.

Bienenstok, who executed the notes, died prior to the commencement of the tank works' suit and the tank works filed against his estate a contingent claim for such amount, if any, as it might be obliged to pay to innocent holders of said notes, claiming that he signed and delivered the notes negligently and without authority. The attorney for the tank works negotiated a settlement of this claim against the estate for $1,500, and an order of court was made allowing the claim at that amount. Eight months after the order of court was entered, and nine months after the petitioner made its first, and six months after it made its last payment, the petitioner filed its petition asking that it be adjudged...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Anderson v. Wyoming Development Company, 2267
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • December 13, 1944
    ...given to the court is not a discretion to entertain the action, but to enter or decline to enter the judgment or decree. Miller v. Currie, 242 N.W. 572. Sufficient facts to show that an actual controversy relating to the legal rights and duties of the respective parties exist between the pa......
  • Bissell v. Wis. Tax Comm'n
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • April 9, 1940
    ...and realized therefrom the sum of $20,127.44. Hamill v. Kuchler, 203 Wis. 414, 232 N.W. 877, 234 N.W. 879;In re Estate of Bienenstok, 208 Wis. 676, 242 N.W. 572. Upon payment of the company liabilities of $134,283.31 a loss to the taxpayer of $114,155.87 resulted. There can be no serious di......
  • Miller v. Currie
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • May 10, 1932
    ...a judicial investigation of disputed facts, especially where the disputed questions of fact will be the subject of judicial investigation [242 N.W. 572]in a regular action. * * * In addition to the foregoing, the British courts have another rule which does not seem to have been passed upon ......
  • Wisconsin Educ. Assoc. Ins. Trust v. Freber
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • June 19, 1986
    ...settlement and the proceedings leading up to the order confirming it and refrained from objecting thereto . . ..' Estate of Bienenstok, 208 Wis. 676, 679, 242 N.W. 572, 573 (1932). We conclude that the Trust did not consent to the trial court's order dismissing its THE TRUST'S SUBROGATION C......
4 cases
  • Anderson v. Wyoming Development Company, 2267
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • December 13, 1944
    ...given to the court is not a discretion to entertain the action, but to enter or decline to enter the judgment or decree. Miller v. Currie, 242 N.W. 572. Sufficient facts to show that an actual controversy relating to the legal rights and duties of the respective parties exist between the pa......
  • Bissell v. Wis. Tax Comm'n
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • April 9, 1940
    ...and realized therefrom the sum of $20,127.44. Hamill v. Kuchler, 203 Wis. 414, 232 N.W. 877, 234 N.W. 879;In re Estate of Bienenstok, 208 Wis. 676, 242 N.W. 572. Upon payment of the company liabilities of $134,283.31 a loss to the taxpayer of $114,155.87 resulted. There can be no serious di......
  • Miller v. Currie
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • May 10, 1932
    ...a judicial investigation of disputed facts, especially where the disputed questions of fact will be the subject of judicial investigation [242 N.W. 572]in a regular action. * * * In addition to the foregoing, the British courts have another rule which does not seem to have been passed upon ......
  • Wisconsin Educ. Assoc. Ins. Trust v. Freber
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • June 19, 1986
    ...settlement and the proceedings leading up to the order confirming it and refrained from objecting thereto . . ..' Estate of Bienenstok, 208 Wis. 676, 679, 242 N.W. 572, 573 (1932). We conclude that the Trust did not consent to the trial court's order dismissing its THE TRUST'S SUBROGATION C......

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