Shelden v. Walbridge
| Decision Date | 06 October 1880 |
| Citation | 44 Mich. 251,6 N.W. 681 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | SHELDEN v. WALBRIDGE, Administrator. |
Where a claim against an estate has been passed upon by the commissioners, and appeal taken, a court of equity has no power to examine into the subject. The powers of the probate court are ample. A bill of discovery can no longer be filed in this state.
Appeal from Clinton.
O.W Barker and O.L. Spaulding, for complainants.
H. & H.E. Walbridge, for defendants.
The bill in this case is filed by complainants, as creditors, who have proved a claim against the estate of Lafayette Brown deceased, which is under settlement in the probate court of Clinton county. The bill, which is sworn to merely on information and belief, and contains no important facts verified on the merits, avers that Walbridge, as administrator, took possession of some chattels and collected some debts, and that decedent had a stock of goods worth about $1,000, on which his widow, who is a defendant, claimed to hold a mortgage, under which she sold the goods by Walbridge's advice, and did not prove the debt before the commissioners. Complainants claim, on information and belief, that she was indebted to her husband, and that he held notes of $6,000 and $300 against her, which were destroyed by her with the assent of Walbridge.
The bill further claimed that Walbridge had suppressed and not filed the report of claims, amounting to over $10,000, of which complainants were allowed $808.12, and had failed to account, though cited. The bill claims that the mortgage was fraudulent, and that Walbridge had been offered an indemnity to sue the widow. The bill prayed an account and an application of assets, and for the filing of the report.
It appears, however, that the report has been filed, and that claims of the widow against the estate were allowed by the commissioners, and that complainants have appealed from the allowance to the circuit court. The question of the rights of the estate against her, or of her claim against the estate having already been passed upon by the commissioners, and still being in course of litigation on the appeal, there can be no power in a court of equity to examine into the subject. Whatever remedy exists against her is a legal remedy for money had and received, or for the value of the chattels sold, in the one case, and on the notes in the other. The remedy in the probate and circuit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lafferty v. People's Savings Bank
... ... 624, 7 N.W. 182; ... Clark v. Davis, 32 Mich. 154; Barry v ... Davis, 33 Mich. 515; Shurbun v. Hooper, 40 ... Mich. 503; Shelden v. Walbridge, 44 Mich. 251, 6 ... N.W. 681; Patrick v. Howard, 47 Mich. 40, 10 N.W ... 71; Aldrich v. Annin, 54 Mich. 230, 19 N.W. 964; ... ...
-
Draper v. Brown
...of deceased persons, or to administer estates, especially after the subject has been entered upon in the probate court. Shelden v. Walbridge, 44 Mich. 251, 6 N. W. 681;Lafferty v. People's Savings Bank, 76 Mich. 35, 68, 43 N. W. 34, and cases cited; Dickinson v. Seaver, 44 Mich. 624, 7 N. W......
-
Bird v. Detroit Trust Co. (In re Jeffers' Estate)
...of deceased persons, or to administer estates, especially after the subject has been entered upon by the probate court. Shelden v. Walbridge, 44 Mich. 251, 6 N. W. 681;Dickinson v. Seaver, 44 Mich. 624, 7 N. W. 182;Lafferty v. People's Savings Bank, 76 Mich. 35, 43 N. W. 34; Draper v. Brown......
-
Proctor v. Plumer
... ... granted, for the reason that a bill of discovery will not ... lie, under our practice; citing Riopelle v ... Doellner, 26 Mich. 102, and Shelden v ... Walbridge, 44 Mich. 251, 6 N.W. 681. It is true that a ... bill of discovery in aid of a suit at law will not lie under ... our practice, ... ...