Webber v. Ryan
| Decision Date | 11 June 1884 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | WEBBER v. RYAN and others. |
Where by an agreement between a mortgagor and a mortgagee, the services of the mortgagor, when employed by the mortgagee are to be taken in payment of the mortgage debt and interest the burden of proof is upon the mortgagee to show that the mortgagor has been paid for his services; and upon a failure to meet this burden, and to make a complete exposition of the accounts between the parties, the mortgagor having kept no accounts, the remedy upon the note having been barred by the statute of limitations, and the mortgagee having long delayed the enforcement of payment, a court of equity will not decree a foreclosure of the mortgage.
Appeal from Tuscola.
Frank L. Fales, for defendants.
The bill in this case is filed to foreclose a mortgage given by defendant John Ryan and Mary Ann, his wife, to Jesse Hoyt, to secure the payment of a note of $1,000, with 10 per centum interest, dated November 25, 1873, and payable in one year thereafter. The mortgage bore even date with the note. The bill was filed April 13, 1882, and it claimed the whole amount of the note, with interest, as unpaid. The defendants answered, insisting that the whole amount of the note had been paid, and the circuit court so found on the evidence. The complainant appealed.
It appears from the evidence that the mortgagee resided in New York, but was a large property owner in the Saginaw valley and carried on lumbering and other operations there. Mr. William J. Bartow was his general agent in the charge of his property and of these business operations. Ryan was a laboring man, and took jobs of clearing land, building fence, and getting in saw-logs. He had such jobs from Bartow as agent for Hoyt in 1870 and 1871. In 1872 Bartow applied to him to take an unfulfilled contract for lumbering off the hands of one Weaver, who was likely to fail in its fulfillment, and Ryan consented to do so. But he was without much means, and required advancements to enable him to meet the expenses before the contract was fully completed, and the note and mortgage now in suit were given for moneys advanced by Bartow for this purpose. A further sum of $800, advanced for the same purpose, was secured by a chattel mortgage.
Ryan claims that during the winter of 1872-73 he got out for Hoyt a quantity of logs, which were not sent forward by river, as was intended, the following season, but which he was to be allowed...
To continue reading
Request your trial