Smith v. Mitchell

12 Mich. 180, 1863 Mich. LEXIS 87
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 5, 1863
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 12 Mich. 180 (Smith v. Mitchell) 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
Smith v. Mitchell, 12 Mich. 180, 1863 Mich. LEXIS 87 (Mich. 1863).

Opinion

By the Court:

The assignment is not void on its face for excepting property. exempt from execution, without specifying it. A. bona fide selection is as practicable here as under a levy.

[191]*191Evidence that goods were at the railroad depot, directed to the insolvent firm, which they claimed and disposed of after the assignment, was improperly excluded, as it had a bearing on the good faith of the assignment as a general assignment.

The sale of said property by the firm, and evidence showing the assignee’s knowledge and consent, should not have been excluded, as it bore upon the question of fraud.

Evidence of what the property brought at auction is admissible, as having some tendency to prove value.

Evidence that the property levied on was held and sold under a former levy, was admissible to show that the constable had not damnified the claimant, and had not converted the goods.

Evidence that goods levied on were sold for charges which were a prior lien, would discharge the constable from any liability on account of those goods, on two grounds: first, that they were incumbered to their value; second, that he never took or converted them; the lien being adverse, and he never completing his levy by possession.

The Court erred in not charging that the assignment was void if it did not fairly bona fide assign all of the assignors’ property liable for the payment of their debts.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered.

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

Related

Meier v. Blair
282 N.W. 884 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1938)
Engel v. Tate
170 N.W. 105 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1918)
Barbrick v. White Sewing Machine Co.
147 N.W. 493 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1914)
Shoup v. Marks
128 F. 32 (Ninth Circuit, 1904)
Harmon v. Walker
91 N.W. 1025 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1902)
Citizens National Bank of Des Moines v. Converse
75 N.W. 506 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1898)
White v. Pease
49 P. 416 (Utah Supreme Court, 1897)
Parker, Holmes & Co. v. Cleveland
37 Fla. 39 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1896)
Wilson v. Perrin
62 F. 629 (Sixth Circuit, 1894)
McCulloh v. Price
36 P. 194 (Montana Supreme Court, 1894)
Frank v. Myers
97 Ala. 437 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1892)
Red River Valley Bank v. Freeman
46 N.W. 36 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1890)
Muhr v. Pinover
10 A. 289 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1887)
Bates v. Simmons
22 N.W. 335 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1885)
Wooldridge v. Irving
23 F. 676 (U.S. Circuit Court, 1884)
Parsell v. Patterson
11 N.W. 291 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1882)
Richardson v. Marqueze
59 Miss. 80 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1881)
Dyer v. Rosenthal
8 N.W. 560 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1881)
Hubbard v. McNaughton
5 N.W. 293 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1880)
Rosenthal v. Scott
2 N.W. 909 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1879)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 Mich. 180, 1863 Mich. LEXIS 87, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-mitchell-mich-1863.