Betz v. Brenner
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Washtenaw; Ivinne, J. Trover by Lydia Betz against Michael Brenner for property seized by defendant on execution against plaintiff’s husband, and alleged by her to be exempt. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error. Louis Betz, the husband of plaintiff, was engaged in the saloon and grocery business in the city of Ann Arbor.
Read the full summary
Error to Washtenaw; Ivinne, J. Trover by Lydia Betz against Michael Brenner for property seized by defendant on execution against plaintiff’s husband, and alleged by her to be exempt. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error. Louis Betz, the husband of plaintiff, was engaged in the saloon and grocery business in the city of Ann Arbor. His stock was of the value of about $1,100. He became insolvent, and on July 23, 1893, left his home, saying that he was going to Whitmore Lake, a small summer resort 10 miles from Ann Arbor, to engage rooms for himself and his wife, and would…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). We think it conclusively appears that .Mr. Betz had abandoned his business. He had absconded under false statements, and if is apparent that he did not intend to return to continue his business or to demand any exemption in the goods. The object of the exemption of stock in trade is wel! stated in Harris v. Haynes, 30 Mich. 140. It was held in Charpentier v. Bresnahan, 62 Mich. 362, that the husband might sell, mortgage, or release to the execution creditor, his right to this exemption. It is vested solely in the husband, and he may use or dispose of it as he sees…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harris v. HaynesMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Miller v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Charpentier v. BresnahanMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re National Grocer Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1910
- J. L. Hudson Co. v. No-Name Hat Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Spence v. RambuschWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898