been illegally paid by plaintiff, when paid, and what for, are not in dispute, and the ultimate object of the suit is to recover from defendant said money, and defendant's answer states distinctly that it has no claim against the city except certain items for water furnished and a judg ment obtained by it against plaintiff previously, there can be no occasion to invoke the jurisdiction of equity for an accounting. City of Iron Mountain v. Iron Mountain Waterworks, 537.
2. That the construction of a contract, or statute, or other serious questions of law or fact are involved, affords no ground for equitable interference. Id. 538.
3. Where plaintiff's suit by bill in chancery amounted to a demand for a money judgment, for which it has an ade- quate remedy at law, the decree entered will be set aside and the case remanded to the trial court for transfer to the law side of the court, under authority of 3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 12351. Id.
4. A court of equity in proper cases may afford relief from judgments at law, where the facts are such as to invoke its jurisdiction. Becker v. Welch, 613.
5. A court of equity may not, in the exercise of its juris- diction, entertain a bill to set aside a judgment at law on the ground that false testimony was given upon the trial of the issue on the law side of the court. Id.
6. That plaintiff was not familiar with the practice in this State, although he had reputable attorneys employed who were, is not so extraordinary as to invoke equity juris- diction. Id.
7. In equity, that kind of relief will be granted which is best adapted to the situation at the time it is applied for. American Forging & Socket Co. v. Wiley, 664.
See CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS (5); CORPORATIONS (8); SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE (2, 4).
ESSENCE OF CONTRACT-See SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE (3). ESTABLISHING CLAIM-See MASTER AND SERVANT (22). ESTATES OF DECEDENTS-See EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRA- TORS (2); WILLS (5-7).
ESTOPPEL-See CONTRACTS (2); WILLS (3).
1. In an action for personal injuries, where the declaration alleged that said injuries caused a prolapsus of the uterus necessitating an abdominal operation, testimony that in the operation one of plaintiff's ovaries was removed, was admissible, it not being open to the objection that the declaration alleged one injury while plaintiff was per- mitted to prove another. Church v. Larned, 77.
2. In proceedings by a law firm to establish a lien on the proceeds of a judgment for services rendered in said case in pursuance of an oral agreement between said firm and client's brother, acting as her attorney, a memorandum of the agreement, made by one of the members of said firm, was inadmissible in evidence for the purpose of proving the terms of said contract. Boyle v. Waters, 515. See ADVERSE POSSESSION (5); APPEAL AND ERROR (3); AT- TORNEY AND CLIENT; CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS (2-5); CONTRACTS (7); CRIMINAL LAW (1, 3, 5, 9-11, 13, 18, 28, 32, 38-40, 42); DIVORCE (3); EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRA- TORS (2); FRAUD (3); GUARDIAN AND WARD; MASTER AND SERVANT (34, 41); NEGLIGENCE (1, 9); SPECIFIC PERFORM ANCE (5); STREET RAILWAYS (3); WATERS AND WATER- COURSES (1).
EVIDENCE BEFORE EXAMINING MAGISTRATE-See CRIMI- NAL LAW (35, 36).
EVIDENCE OF INDEBTEDNESS-See CORPORATIONS (3).
EXCEPTION-See MASTER AND SERVANT (2).
EXCESSIVE AWARD-See MASTER AND SERVANT (11).
EXCESSIVE VERDICT-See NEW TRIAL
EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY-See FRAUD (5).
EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
1. Section 14117, 3 Comp. Laws 1915, fixing the compensation of administrators, does not apply to special administra- tors whose compensation should be determined by the probate court, considering the services actually rendered; and the amount thereof must be left to the sound dis- cretion of that court. In re Klein's Estate, 243.
2. Testimony by the mother that plaintiff, a son, stayed at home under an agreement to work the farm on shares, but, because they were in debt, his share was applied on the debt with the understanding with the father that he would be compensated later, was admissible for the pur- pose of showing that plaintiff rendered services with the expectation that he would be compensated therefor, in a claim against his father's estate. Fishell v. Fishell, 308.
1. Under 3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 12858, exempting to each householder two cows, and providing that "any chattel mortgage, bill of sale, or other lien created * * * shall be void, unless such mortgage, bill of sale, or lien shall be signed by the wife," etc., the right of the husband to make an absolute sale of such property is not interfered with; his right to convey as security only being removed. Parsons v. Kimmel, 676.
2. Where a heifer 14 months old had been bred at the time of the sale, and was the only cow owned by defendant, the court below should have instructed the jury that, as a matter of law, she was a cow within the meaning of the exemption statute. Id.
EXPUNGED FROM RECORDS-See APPEAL AND ERROR (1).
EXTREME CRUELTY-See DIVORCE (3).
EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE-See CONTRACTS (8).
FAILURE OF CONTRACT-See CONTRACTS (10).
FAILURE OF SALE-See BROKERS (1).
FAILURE TO CONSUMMATE SALE-See SALES (2).
FALSE PRETENSES-See CRIMINAL LAW (37, 38).
FALSE REPRESENTATIONS-See FRAUD (5); FRAUDs, Statute OF (1).
FALSE REPRESENTATIONS IN DOCUMENT ON FILE IN PUBLIC OFFICE-See FRAUD (1).
FALSE TESTIMONY IN SUIT AT LAW INSUFFICIENT TO INVOKE JURISDICTION-See EQUITY (5).
FEDERAL CONTROL-See TELEGRAPHS AND TELEPHONES. FEDERAL STATUTES-See TELEGRAPHS AND TELEPHONES.
FEED FOR STOCK-See LANDLORD AND TENANT (1).
FELLOW SERVANT-See MASTER AND SERVANT (36).
FELON-See MASTER AND SERVANT (8).
FICTITIOUS NAMES-See CONTRACTS (1); CRIMINAL LAW (32). FIDUCIARY RELATIONS-See CORPORATIONS (8, 9).
FINAL ORDER-See APPEAL AND ERROR (12).
FINDING BY INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT BOARD-See MASTER AND SERVANT (7, 9, 35, 38, 41, 42).
FINDINGS OF COURT-See APPEAL AND ERROR (2, 3); FRAUD (4).
FIRE INSURANCE-See CRIMINAL LAW (32, 33); INSURANCE (2).
FIRES-See LANDLORD AND TENANT (2).
FLOWING LANDS-See WATERS AND WATERCOURSES (1).
FORECLOSURE-See CORPORATIONS (6).
FORECLOSURE, STOCKHOLDER'S SUIT TO SET ASIDE-See
FORGERY-See BANKS AND BANKING.
1. The right of the public to rely upon the statements in the articles of incorporation on file in a public office or in the annual report of a corporation to the secretary of State is not affected by the fact that the question arises in an action at law rather than in a proceeding in chan- cery. Ver Wys v. Vander Mey, 500.
2. In an action against one of the original incorporators of a corporation for fraud and deceit based upon false state- ments in the articles of incorporation on file in a public office, and signed by defendant, where the record con- clusively shows that there was not actually paid in in cash the amount set forth in said articles, and that the corporation was not possessed of property worth the amount therein set forth, which facts were known to defendant, held, sufficient to establish the fraud relied upon. Id.
3. Evidence, held, sufficient to warrant the finding of the court below that plaintiff relied upon said statements. Id. 4. Held, that the findings of the court below were not against the great weight of the evidence. Id.
5. On a bill to reform a contract for an exchange of real property on the ground of fraud, if the representations were actually made and were false it is unnecessary to determine whether they were made in good faith. Hillier v. Carpenter, 594.
6. No duty to discover the fraud is imposed upon the in- jured party.
7. Where plaintiff had no knowledge as to the value of the property he was to receive, he had a right to rely on the representations of defendant in regard thereto. Id.
8. Where the record contains propositions of settlement from counsel for both parties based upon a rescission of the contract, in view of these offers and the opinion of this court that plaintiff was defrauded and that rescission is the appropriate relief, the pleadings will be amended and rescission decreed in lieu of the relief granted plain- tiff by the court below. Id.
See CANCELLATION OF INSTRUMENTS (2); CORPORATIONS (2); FRAUDS, STATUTE OF (1, 2); HOMESTEADS (2); RES JUDI-
1. Under 3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 11983, where a false repre- sentation is made by one who does not derive any per- sonal benefit from the resulting transaction, the repre- sentation, to be actionable, must be in writing over his signature. Ver Wys v. Vander Mey, 499.
FRAUDS, STATUTE OF-Continued.
2. Representations as to the credit of a corporation are within this statute; but if the action is brought against the corporation itself for fraud, verbal representations by its officers and agents may be shown. Id. 500.
3. Statements in the articles of incorporation of a corpo- ration, being represented by the signers thereof as true, and being in writing and signed by them, held, to fulfill the requirements of this statute authorizing a suit against the signers individually, by any one relying upon the representations and extending credit to the corporation, if damaged thereby. Id.
4. A contract for the sale of land described as "All that certain piece or parcel of land situate in the township of Byron, in the county of Kent and State of Michigan, described as follows, viz.: The east half of the southeast quarter and the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter, less one acre (E. 1⁄2 S. E. 4 and S. E. 4 of N. E. 4, less 1 A) of township 5 north of range 12 west, containing 119 acres of land, more or less, according to the government survey thereof," was defective under the statute of frauds (3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 11977) for omitting the section, and an action for the breach thereof could not be maintained. Droppers v. Marshall, 560.
Where an affidavit in garnishment failed to state that it was made by plaintiff, his agent or attorney, as required by the statute (3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 14361), it was ab- solutely void, and conferred no jurisdiction upon the jus- tice. Carter v. Babcock, 169.
"GENERAL ELECTION"-See JUSTICES OF THE PEACE (3). GOOD CHARACTER-See CRIMINAL LAW (6, 7).
GOOD FAITH-See FRAUD (5).
GUARANTY-See CONTRACTS (10).
In proceedings to have plaintiff's guardian discharged, and to have plaintiff declared mentally competent to have the care, custody, and management of his estate, evidence examined, and held, sufficient to support the finding of the jury that plaintiff was mentally incompetent. Hen- derson v. Henderson, 36.
Where, in an action for the conversion of goods, the court acquired jurisdiction of both the subject-matter and the parties, and a writ of capias ad satisfaciendum was issued out of said court following a judgment against defendant by default, said judgment is not open to collateral attack
« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια » |