Traverse City State Bank v. Conaway

5 Citing cases

  1. Klimmer v. Klimmer

    66 Mich. App. 310 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975)   Cited 6 times
    In Klimmer, supra, this Court held that a nondefaulting defendant could not be bound by the admission of liability resulting from a codefendant's default.

    E.g., East Side Trust Savings Bank v McGinnis, 197 Mich. 432; 163 N.W. 949 (1917). Traverse City State Bank v Conaway, 37 Mich. App. 647; 195 N.W.2d 288 (1972), and City Finance Co v Kloostra, 47 Mich. App. 276; 209 N.W.2d 498 (1973), do not control the issue on appeal here nor do they necessarily control the ultimate disposition of the case. In Conaway the issue was whether or not the wife was liable.

  2. Matter of Hunter, (Bankr.N.D.Ind. 1990)

    122 B.R. 349 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 1990)   Cited 11 times
    Explaining the "legal fraud" that was being perpetrated by these clever debtors

    Rather than do nothing at all, Indiana, joined by its northern neighbor Michigan, interpreted the law in such a way as to preserve a joint creditor's right to proceed against entireties real estate notwithstanding the fact that one of the two spouses had been discharged. See First Nat. Bank of Goodland v. Pothuisje, 217 Ind. 1, 25 N.E.2d 436 (1940); Echelbarger v. First Nat. Bank of Swayzee, 211 Ind. 199, 5 N.E.2d 966 (1937); Smith v. Beneficial Finance Co. of Indianapolis, Inc., 139 Ind. App. 653, 218 N.E.2d 921 (1966); See also, Edwards Chamberlin Hardware Co. v. Pethick, 250 Mich. 315, 230 N.W. 186 (1930); Traverse City State Bank v. Conaway, 37 Mich. App. 647, 195 N.W.2d 288 (1972). Under their interpretation of the law, the joint obligation of a husband and wife gave rise to three liabilities.

  3. In re Korff

    14 B.R. 189 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1981)   Cited 15 times

    , Morris v. Wolfe, 48 Mich. App. 40, 210 N.W.2d 16 (1973) (Judgment lien creditor can set aside a fraudulent conveyance irrespective of the husband's discharge in bankruptcy.), and Traverse City State Bank v. Conaway, 37 Mich. App. 647, 195 N.W.2d 288 (1972) (Entireties property is subject to a joint judgment creditor notwithstanding the fact that the wife signed the promissory note only as an accommodation maker and the husband had obtained a discharge in bankruptcy.). The leading Michigan case sets forth the general rule and policy behind the Michigan statutes as follows:

  4. In re Trickett

    14 B.R. 85 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1981)   Cited 31 times
    Holding that Congress intended inclusion in estate by fact that 11 U.S.C. ยง 363(h), and (j) set forth procedures for disposal of such property by the trustee

    The Michigan Courts have held that the bankruptcy discharge of one or both spouses under that Act would not affect the rights of joint creditors. Kolakowski v. Cyman, 285 Mich. 585, 281 N.W. 332 (1938); Wesorick v. Winans, 277 Mich. 589, 269 N.W. 609 (1936); McPherson v. Gregory, 271 Mich. 580, 260 N.W. 767 (1935); Edwards Chamberlin Hardware Co. v. Pethick, 250 Mich. 315, 230 N.W. 186 (1930); Traverse City State Bank v. Conaway, 37 Mich. App. 647, 195 N.W.2d 288 (1972). Our neighbor state of Indiana has reached the same result.

  5. City Finance Co v. Kloostra

    47 Mich. App. 276 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973)   Cited 13 times
    In City Finance Company v. Kloostra, 47 Mich.App. 276, 209 N.W.2d 498 (1973), the Court held that the Married Women's Property Act is still the law despite the Michigan Constitution's abolition of the common law disabilities of coverture as to property.

    In Stowers the Court held that a husband cannot compel his wife to accept a doctor-patient relationship. Defendant also cites as controlling Traverse City State Bank v Conaway, 37 Mich. App. 647 (1972). In that case defendants, husband and wife, co-signed a note in return for a loan from plaintiff bank.