Morley Bros. v. Stringer

Decision Date08 July 1903
Citation95 N.W. 978,133 Mich. 690
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
PartiesMORLEY BROS. v. STRINGER et al.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Genesee County, in Chancery; Charles H Wisner, Judge.

Action by Morley Bros. agianst Marshall L. Stringer and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant Marshall L. Stringer appeals. Affirmed.

This is a bill filed in aid of an execution. The facts are found in the decree of the court, and are as follows:

'(1) The firm of Parker & Dunstan, composed of Grant Parker and John W. Dunstan, while conducting business at Otisville Michigan, contracted a considerable amount of indebtedness to the complainant and other creditors. The firm of Parker & Dunstan was dissolved by the parties in the latter part of the year 1889; the said Dunstan being succeeded by the said Marshall L. Stringer; the firm name being changed to Parker & Stringer.
'(2) In the early part of the year 1890, the debt due said complainant remaining unpaid, as well as the claim of other creditors of Parker & Dunstan, and it becoming apparent to the said Grant Parker and Marshall L. Stringer that their said business might become embarrassed by suits against the said Parker, and for the purpose of protecting the said Parker and the said business, Grant Parker and wife made executed, and delivered to Zachariah Stringer and Edgar J. Osband, of Otisville, Michigan, a deed of the building occupied by Parker & Stringer, described as lots 1 and 2, Freeman & Cowles' addition to the village of Otisville (Grant Parker owning an undivided half interest), county of Genesee, this state, except six feet off the east side thereof, subject to a mortgage of $700 on said interest; and also at the same time said Parker made, executed, and delivered to Zachariah Stringer and Edgar J. Osband a bill of sale of his interest in the stock of goods of the firm of Parker & Stringer; such firm name being immediately changed to M. L. Stringer & Co.

'(3) All of said conveyances and transfers of property made by said Parker were wholly without consideration, and were made and taken for the purpose of hindering, delaying, and defrauding the creditors of Parker & Dunstan, including the complainant. The said defendants severally participated in such fraud. That said Marshall L. Stringer, Zachariah Stringer, and Edgar J. Osband assisted, aided, and abetted the said Parker in perpetrating such fraud on the complainant and other creditors.

'(4) All of said defendants so conspired, concerted, and confederated together so that all the property of the said Parker that might have been reached and taken to satisfy the claim of such creditors was placed and kept out of the reach of creditors, and that said defendants thereby hindered, delayed, and defrauded such creditors in the collection of their just demands.

'(5) The above-described real estate at the time of such transfer was incumbered by a mortgage held by the Genesee County Savings Bank, and the said Marshall L. Stringer, claiming to own a half interest in said real estate, paid such mortgage indebtedness, and the same was discharged from record. Thereafter, in the year 1894, and while the interest of said Parker therein remained in the name of Zachariah Stringer and Edgar J. Osband, of record, the two defendants last named made, executed, and delivered to the said defendant Marshall L. Stringer a mortgage on an undivided half interest in said real estate, and that said mortgage was thereafter foreclosed, and said premises sold thereunder, and a sheriff's deed given therefor to said Marshall L. Stringer; said mortgage being recorded in Liber 118 of Mortgages, at page 538, Genesee county records, and said mortgage being for the consideration therein named of $813.25. That said sheriff's deed was recorded in Liber 1 of Sheriff's Deeds, page 538, Genesee county records.

'(6) The said Marshall L. Stringer, while participating in and aiding in the fraudulent transaction as herein stated, was guilty of fraud in taking and recording said mortgage and in foreclosing the same, and in obtaining and recording said sheriff's deed.

'(7) The payment by the said Marshall L. Stringer of the mortgage on said premises so held by the Genesee County Savings Bank was voluntary, and made at a time when the said Marshall L. Stringer, Zachariah Stringer, and Edgar J. Osband had control and apparent ownership of all the property of the said Grant Parker.

'(8) The executing and recording of said mortgage from said Stringer & Osband to Marshall L. Stringer operated a still further hindrance, delay, and defraud of the said complainant and other creditors of Parker & Dunstan.

'(9) On the 17th day of April, A. D. 1893, the said complainant obtained a valid judgment against the said Grant Parker and John W. Dunstan for the sum of $254.88 damages and $29.40 costs of suit, and that said judgment remains of force and unpaid both at the time of a filing of a bill of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Salemonson v. Thompson
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 26 d5 Fevereiro d5 1904
    ...Beidler v. Crane, 135 Ill. 92, 25 N.E. 655, 25 Am. St. Rep. 349; Garland v. Rives, 25 Va. 282, 4 Rand. 282, 15 Am. Dec. 756; Morley v. Stringer (Mich.) 95 N.W. 978; Davis Leopold, 87 N.Y. 620; Menton v. Adams, 49 Cal. 620; Stovall v. Bank, 8 Smedes & M. 305, 47 Am. Dec. 85; Pettibone v. Ste......
  • Salemonson v. Thompson
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 26 d5 Fevereiro d5 1904
    ...v. People, 146 Ill. 275, 34 N. E. 148;Mattingly v. Nye, 8 Wall. (U. S.) 370, 19 L. Ed. 380;Newman v. Willitts, 60 Ill. 519;Morley v. Stringer (Mich.) 95 N. W. 978;Pabst Brewing Co. v. Jensen, 68 Minn. 293, 71 N. W. 384;Moore & Handley Hardware Co. v. Curry, 106 Ala. 284, 18 South. 46;Bain v......
  • Holden v. Walker
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 29 d6 Abril d6 1933
    ... ... 655, 25 Am. St. Rep. 349; Garland v ... Rives, 4 Rand. 282, 15 Am. Dec. 756; Morley v ... Stringer (Mich.) 95 N.W. 978; Davis v. Leopold, ... 87 N.Y. 620; Menton v. Adams, 49 ... ...
  • Blixt v. Janowiak
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • 9 d2 Maio d2 1922
    ...for taxes paid in Lamb v. McIntire, 183 Mass. 367, 370, 67 N. E. 320. The same rule is recognized as valid in Morley Bros. v. Stringer, 133 Mich. 690, 694, 95 N. W. 978. To the same effect Hutchinson v. Park, 72 Ark. 509, 82 S. W. 843;Sheridan v. McCormick, 39 N. D. 641, 168 N. W. 59, 8 A. ......
  • 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