State Mut. Rodded Fire Ins. Co. v. Foster
| Decision Date | 04 June 1934 |
| Docket Number | Motion No. 307. |
| Citation | 255 N.W. 174,267 Mich. 118 |
| Parties | STATE MUT. RODDED FIRE INS. CO. v. FOSTER et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Sanilac County; Xenophon A. Boomhower, Judge.
Action by the State Mutual Rodded Fire Insurance Company, a Michigan corporation, against James Foster and others. From an order denying defendants' motion to dismiss, defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
Rob't W. McKenzie, of Sandusky, for appellants.
Leibrand & Leibrand, of Bay City, for appellee.
In June, 1928, the State Savings Bank of Peck, Mich., as principal, and the defendants, as sureties, executed a bond in favor of plaintiff company, the condition of which was that, if the bank would keep, account for, and pay over on demand all moneys that might be deposited in said bank by the plaintiff, then the obligation would become void.
October 26, 1932, plaintiff deposited in said bank the sum of $1,500 and received the bank's certificate of deposit payable upon demand. On June 5, 1933, while the bank was in the custody of the state banking department under the provisions of the emergency banking statute, plaintiff presented this certificate of deposit for payment. Upon refusal of the conservator of the bank and the defendant sureties to pay plaintiff's certificate, the plaintiff brought suit against the sureties on the bond. Defendants moved to dismiss on the ground that the action is barred by Act No. 32, Pub. Acts 1933, which reads in part: ‘Whenever this act operates as a stay of any legal proceedings against any bank or trust company, then a similar stay for a corresponding time shall be in effect as to any surety, sureties, guarantor or guarantors of such bank or trust company.’ Section 4.
The act elsewhere provides: ‘During the period of such management and possession by the said commissioner, no actions and remedies at law or suits in equity of any creditor or stockholder or party in interest against any such bank or trust company, or any property of whatsoever kind or nature in the control and custody of the commissioner as aforesaid shall be commenced without the consent of said commissioner and approval of the governor, and the statute of limitations against such claims shall be suspended during such period.’ Section 4.
The plaintiff contends that the act is invalid in so far as it purports to bar this suit because: (1) The title contains no reference to a stay of proceedings against sureties; (2) the emergency justifying the act no longer exists; (3) the act impairs the obligations of contracts; (4) the act discriminates between sureties for defunct banks and other sureties; (5) the act suspends the judicial powers of the courts for an indefinite period.
The lower court held the act unconstitutional on the last ground, and defendants appeal.
As to plaintiff's first contention, this court held in Commerce-Guardian Trust & Savings...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Requests of Governor and Senate on Constitutionality of Act No. 294 of Public Acts of 1972, In re
...in their favor the advocates of all--or what is commonly spoken of as log-rolling in legislation, State Mutual Rodded Fire Ins. Co. v. Foster (1934), 267 Mich. 118, 255 N.W. 174." The particular section at issue in Maki was declared unconstitutional. The title spoke of immunity from governm......
-
Maki v. East Tawas
...combining in their favor the advocates of all--or what is commonly spoken of as log-rolling in legislation, State Mutual Rodded Fire Ins. Co. v. Foster, 267 Mich. 118, 255 N.W. 174.' The title to 1964 P.A. 170 indicates that the act should create immunity for governmental acts of Negligence......
-
Mooahesh v. Department of Treasury
...logrolling in legislation. [Maki v. East Tawas, 385 Mich. 151, 157-158, 188 N.W.2d 593 (1971), quoting State Mutual Rodded Fire Ins. Co. v. Foster, 267 Mich. 118, 255 N.W. 174 (1934).] That the compilers of the law have placed a portion of 1988 P.A. 516 in the tax code and another portion i......
-
People v. Stanley, 90
...N.W. 931. See, also, Adams v. Acme White Lead & Color Works, 182 Mich. 157, 148 N.W. 485, L.R.A.1916A, 283; State Mutual Rodded Fire Ins. Co. v. Foster, 267 Mich. 118, 255 N.W. 174; Arnold v. Ogle Construction Co., 333 Mich. 652, 53 N.W.2d Act 53, P.A.1954, offends article 5, § 21, of the M......