Smit v. People

Michigan Supreme Court

Smit v. People

15 Mich. 497, 1867 Mich. LEXIS 44

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedMay 25, 1867

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 15 Mich. 497 (Smit v. People) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Smit v. People, 15 Mich. 497, 1867 Mich. LEXIS 44 (Mich. 1867).

Pincite

Opinion

Campbell J.

This is a certiorari to review the finding of a Circuit Court Commissioner, holding Smit guilty of fraudulently disposing of his property, against the '•'•Fraudulent Pebtor Act”; and it is claimed the complaint did not make out such a case as to give the Commissioner jurisdiction.

It appears, from the showing, that Smit, being called upon by an agent of his prosecuting creditors for an unpaid balance of five hundred and fifty dollars, stated that he then had no money to pay, but had on hand a stock of nine thousand dollars, while he owed between four and five thousand. Upon being requested, he refused to make payment in goods. The next day, hearing Smit had disposed of his property to his brother, the same agent went to the store and found the brother in possession, claiming title by purchase and payment, but refusing to give any information. The day after that, Louis M. Smit was also found, and refused to state the -terms of sale, or to turn over any of the proceeds, and also said he sold out because he feared the agent would sue out an attachment for the debt.

We think this is a very plain case of fraud, which, if true, it would be difficult to extenuate. Nothing but a fraudulent design could be inferred from the facts. The Commissioner was authorized to proceed, and his action should be affirmed, with costs.

Martin Ch. J. and Cooley J. concurred. Christianoy J. did not sit in this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Campbell J.

This is a certiorari to review the finding of a Circuit Court Commissioner, holding Smit guilty of fraudulently disposing of his property, against the '•'•Fraudulent Pebtor Act”; and it is claimed the complaint did not make out such a case as to give the Commissioner jurisdiction.

It appears, from the showing, that Smit, being called upon by an agent of his prosecuting creditors for an unpaid balance of five hundred and fifty dollars, stated that he then had no money to pay, but had on hand a stock of nine thousand dollars, while he owed between four and five thousand. Upon being requested, he refused to make payment in goods. The next day, hearing Smit had disposed of his property to his brother, the same agent went to the store and found the brother in possession, claiming title by purchase and payment, but refusing to give any information. The day after that, Louis M. Smit was also found, and refused to state the -terms of sale, or to turn over any of the proceeds, and also said he sold out because he feared the agent would sue out an attachment for the debt.

We think this is a very plain case of fraud, which, if true, it would be difficult to extenuate. Nothing but a fraudulent design could be inferred from the facts. The Commissioner was authorized to proceed, and his action should be affirmed, with costs.

Martin Ch. J. and Cooley J. concurred. Christianoy J. did not sit in this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 Mich. 497, 1867 Mich. LEXIS 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smit-v-people-mich-1867.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack