Union Trust Co. v. Detroit Trust Co.

• Decision Date: 24 July 1928
• Docket Number: 158.,Nos. 157,s. 157
• Citation: 243 Mich. 451,220 N.W. 728
• Parties: UNION TRUST CO. et al. v. DETROIT TRUST CO. (two cases).
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

243 Mich. 451

220 N.W. 728

UNION TRUST CO. et al.

v.DETROIT TRUST CO. (two cases).

Nos. 157, 158.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

July 24, 1928.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Wayne County; Ira W. Jayne, Judge.

Separate suits by the Union Trust Company, as trustee, and others against the Detroit Trust Company, as trustee of Benjamin Braver, bankrupt. The Union Trust Company as purchaser at the foreclosure sales intervened in both suits. From orders relating to accounting by defendant for certain rents, all parties appeal. Reversed in part, and affirmed in part.

Argued before the Entire Bench.Campbell, Bulkley & Ledyard, of Detroit (Harold R. Smith, of Detroit, of counsel), for appellants.

Lee E. Joslyn, Joseph Beckenstein and Joslyn, Joslyn & Joslyn, all of Detroit, for appellee.

FEAD, C. J.

These cases involve the same parties, indentical facts and issues, although different premises, and are considered together. Other phases of them have been before this court, and are reported in 240 Mich. 646, 216 N. W. 442, and 240 Mich. 654, 216 N. W. 445.

Plaintiff Union Trust Company, as trustee, became purchaser of the premises at bar on sales made August 18, 1926, under decrees in mortgage foreclosure actions in chancery. The statutory period of redemption expired February 18, 1927. By decrees of this court, filed December 16, 1927, the sales were ordered to stand confirmed as of March 28, 1927. The Detroit Trsut Company, as trustee in bankruptcy for the mortgagor, had possession of the premises and collected the rents until December 17, 1927. On December 20, 1927, plaintiffs filed motions in the circuit court in chancery for an accounting, from the Detroit Trust Company, as such trustee, of the rents from and after February 18, 1927. The court made orders requiring defendant to file accounts of rents collected or accruing after March 28th, and made orders denying the motion as to rents after February 18th, except as provided in the orders relating to the rents after March 28th. All parties have appealed.

[1][2] Although challenged, counsel for plaintiffs have not cited an authority which holds that, in a proceeding initiated in the original foreclosure suit after the purchaser at the foreclosure sale has taken possession, accounting can be ordered for rents collected by the mortgagor after the title of the purchaser becomes absolute. In this state, the jurisdiction of equity in proceedings for the foreclosure of mortgages in governed by statute....