From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sears, Roebuck Company v. Thomas

Michigan Court of Appeals
Jun 28, 1966
143 N.W.2d 153 (Mich. Ct. App. 1966)

Opinion

Docket No. 1,082.

Decided June 28, 1966.

Appeal from Common Pleas Court of Detroit: Vokes (David C.), J. Submitted Division 1 February 10, 1966. (Docket No. 1,082.) Decided June 28, 1966.

Declaration by Sears, Roebuck Company, a New York corporation, against Robert Thomas for failure to pay an installment charge account. Defendant's motion for judgment granted at the close of plaintiff's proofs. Plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Balfour D. Peisner, for plaintiff.

Adams Sims ( Wallace A. Sims, of counsel), for defendant.


The late Judge WATTS concurred in the results of this decision and the reasoning set forth herein, although he did not sign the opinion prior to his death.

Plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant with counts in assumpsit and trespass, alleging in the latter count that the defendant fraudulently incurred credit in excess of limitations imposed by plaintiff at the time the defendant was originally authorized to make credit purchases. After suit was commenced, but before trial, the defendant was adjudicated a bankrupt in the United States district court. At trial, on July 8, 1965, in view of the adjudication of bankruptcy, the defendant was immune from judgment based on an assumpsit action. At the conclusion of plaintiff's proofs, the defendant moved for judgment of no cause for action. The trial court resolved the issues of fact in favor of the defendant and granted the defendant's motion.

As pointed out in Kevreson v. Michigan Consolidated Gas Company (1965), 374 Mich. 465 at page 467, we adhere to the holding set forth in Schneider v. Pomerville (1957), 348 Mich. 49, Northwest Auto Co. v. Mulligan Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. (1957), 348 Mich. 279, and in Barnes v. Beck (1957), 348 Mich. 286. The record amply supports the trial judge's finding that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant fraudulently incurred the indebtedness.

See, also, GCR 1963, 810 (373 Mich xlviii). — REPORTER.

Affirmed. Costs to defendant.

FITZGERALD, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Sears, Roebuck Company v. Thomas

Michigan Court of Appeals
Jun 28, 1966
143 N.W.2d 153 (Mich. Ct. App. 1966)
Case details for

Sears, Roebuck Company v. Thomas

Case Details

Full title:SEARS, ROEBUCK COMPANY v. THOMAS

Court:Michigan Court of Appeals

Date published: Jun 28, 1966

Citations

143 N.W.2d 153 (Mich. Ct. App. 1966)
143 N.W.2d 153

Citing Cases

Thomas v. Burke

The trial court found that the Thomases knew nothing of the assignment and that evidence indicating the value…

Port Investment Co. v. Anderson

This Court will not disturb the findings of a trial judge sitting as the trier of fact unless they are…