Stahl v. Mitchell
| Decision Date | 24 July 1889 |
| Citation | 41 Minn. 325 |
| Parties | WILLIAM G. STAHL <I>vs.</I> JOHN J. MITCHELL and others. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Plaintiff brought this action, in July, 1885, in the district court for Ramsey county, to quiet his title to the S. W. ¼ of the S. E. ¼ of section 18, town 29, range 22, vacant and unoccupied land, in that county. The defendants other than Mitchell, (who did not appear,) are the widow and heirs-at-law of one James Blakely, late of Allegheny county, Pennsylvania, who died in June, 1882. The plaintiff also claims under James Blakely, his chain of title being as follows: On November 25, 1857, James Blakely, being owner in fee of the land, made a deed of assignment of all his property (his wife joining) to the defendant Mitchell, (also of Allegheny county,) in trust for the benefit of his creditors. At the time of making the assignment Blakely owned large tracts of land in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kansas, and Nebraska, and a large amount of personal property. Mitchell accepted the trust and acted as trustee till February, 1858, when the court of common pleas of Allegheny county, at his request and pursuant to his resignation, discharged him from the trust. On March 9, 1858, the same court appointed one William H. Campbell, of the same county, as trustee in his place. Campbell accepted and qualified as trustee, and acted as such with the full knowledge and consent of Blakely and his creditors and all persons interested in the trust. On December 12, 1861, Campbell, as trustee and in execution of the trust, sold and conveyed the land in fee to one Wm. Badger for $202, which was its fair value, the deed being executed and delivered at Pittsburgh, Pa. On January 18, 1862, Campbell filed in the same court of common pleas his final account as trustee, in which he duly accounted for the price received on the sale to Badger, and on February 22, 1862, after notice as required by the court, his account was confirmed without objection. On October 11 1862, Campbell, having fully executed the trust, applied to the same court for his discharge, and the court set the matter for hearing on November 8, 1862, ordering notice to be given, etc. On November 8, 1862, notice having been given as required, the court made an order discharging Campbell. On April 9, 1885, Badger conveyed the land in fee to the plaintiff.
Upon these facts, and the findings as to the laws of Pennsylvania recited in the opinion, Simons, J., (before whom the cause was tried without a jury,) ordered judgment for plaintiff, on the ground that as the land had been appropriated to the payment of James Blakely's debts, pursuant to his intention in making the assignment, his widow and heirs are estopped from claiming title thereto. On defendants' motion a new trial was granted on the ground that it was not found as a fact, and did not appear by the evidence, that Badger, when he bought, was ignorant of the true state of the title or was in any way deceived in relation thereto, and therefore an essential element of equitable estoppel was wanting. From the order granting a new trial the plaintiff appeals.
H. C. Eller and W. A. Barr, for appellant.
J. W. Pinch and W. C. Goforth, for respondents.
From the findings of the court below the following facts appear:
On the 25th of November, 1857, one James Blakely, then a resident in the county of Allegheny and state of Pennsylvania, and the owner of large tracts of land situated in the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Iowa, and Wisconsin, and the territories of Minnesota, Nebraska, and Kansas, made, his wife joining, a voluntary deed of assignment, conveying all his property, wherever situated, to one John J. Mitchell, also a resident in said county and state, in trust for the benefit of his creditors.
The statutes of Pennsylvania then in force provided:
"The assignee or assignees aforesaid shall, as soon as the inventory or appraisement shall have been filed, give a bond or bonds, with at least two sufficient securities to be approved by one of the judges of said court, in double the amount of the appraised value of the estate so assigned." "The bond so given shall be taken in the name of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the conditions thereof shall be as follows, viz.:" "And such bond shall be filed in the office of the prothonotary of the said court, and shall by him be entered of record, and shall be issued to the use of all persons interested in the property assigned."
"The court having jurisdiction as aforesaid shall have power, upon the application by bill or petition of any assignee or trustee setting forth such facts as in equity would entitle him to relief, to discharge him from the trust: provided, that no such discharge shall take place unless the accounts of said assignee or trustee shall have been duly settled or confirmed as aforesaid so far as he shall have acted in the trust, nor unless notice of such application shall have been given to all parties interested, either personally or by advertisement in such public newspaper as may be directed by the court, nor until such assignee or trustee shall have surrendered the trust estate remaining in his hands to some other assignee or trustee, or other person appointed by the court to receive the same, and shall have performed all such other matters as may be required in equity."
"The several courts having jurisdiction as aforesaid shall have power to appoint assignees or trustees as aforesaid in the following cases, viz., when any sole assignee or trustee shall die, or be dismissed by the court from the trust, or shall be discharged by the court therefrom." "The power of appointment as aforesaid may be exercised on the application by bill or petition of any person interested in the estate or property which is the subject of the trust, and not otherwise, and after due notice to all parties concerned." "Every assignee appointed by the court aforesaid shall be liable to the same duties, shall have the same powers and authorities in relation to the trust or to the future execution of the same, as the case may be, and shall be subject to the jurisdiction and control of the court in the same manner and to all intents and purposes as his predecessor or predecessors in the trust." "Upon the appointment by the court of any assignee or trustee as aforesaid, and upon his giving security if he shall be so required by the authority of the laws, all the trust estate and effects whatsoever shall be forthwith and without any act or deed passed to and be vested in the succeeding trustee or assignee."
The said John J. Mitchell duly accepted said trust and entered upon the discharge of his duties as assignee under said deed of assignment, and continued under such to act as such assignee until the 13th day of February, 1858, when he presented his petition to the court of common pleas of said county of Allegheny, praying to be discharged from said trust. Thereupon said court, on said 13th day of February, 1858, accepted the resignation of said Mitchell, and entered an order in the records of said court discharging him from said trust. It does not appear from the evidence that any notice by publication or otherwise was given to the parties interested in the matter of said trust, of the application of said Mitchell to be discharged therefrom, nor does it appear that the said Mitchell made a formal conveyance of said trust estate, or any part thereof, to W. H. Campbell, his successor in said trust as hereinafter stated.
On the 9th day of March, 1858, after due notice to the said James Blakely and his creditors, the court of common pleas of said Allegheny county duly appointed one William H. Campbell, a resident of said county, assignee in place of and as the successor of John J. Mitchell in said trust. Said Campbell duly accepted and duly qualified as such trustee, and thereafter, with the full knowledge and consent of the said James Blakely and of the creditors of said Blakely and all persons interested in said trust, proceeded to act as such trustee or assignee in the place of said Mitchell, and in all respects to carry out and fully execute the trusts originally created by said deed of assignment.
In December, 1861, Campbell, as such assignee, conveyed the land in controversy (lying in this state) to one Badger, and the latter afterwards conveyed it to plaintiff.
In addition to the findings of the court as to the statutes of Pennsylvania, it was agreed on the argument here that the court might refer to those statutes, and the brief of each party has numerous references to them. On consulting them we find that the courts of common pleas were courts of...
To continue reading
Request your trial