Commonwealth v. Mitchneck
198 A. 463 (1938)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The crime of fraudulent conversion requires the defendant to have converted money or property that legally belongs to another person; a mere failure to pay a debt, even after a novation agreement changes the creditor, does not satisfy this element because the debtor retains title to their own funds.
Facts:
- Mitchneck, a coal mine operator, employed several workers, including Hunsinger, Derr, and Steeley.
- These employees purchased goods on credit from a store owned by A. Vagnoni.
- The employees executed written orders directing Mitchneck to deduct the amounts of their store bills from their wages and pay those amounts directly to Vagnoni.
- Mitchneck agreed to this arrangement with his employees and Vagnoni.
- Pursuant to the agreement, Mitchneck deducted an aggregate of $259.26 from the wages of eleven employees.
- Mitchneck then failed and neglected to pay the deducted money to Vagnoni.
Procedural Posture:
- The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania prosecuted Mitchneck for fraudulent conversion in a trial court.
- During the trial, Mitchneck's counsel moved for a directed verdict of acquittal, but the court refused the motion.
- A jury found Mitchneck guilty of fraudulent conversion.
- Mitchneck (appellant) appealed the judgment of the trial court to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an employer's failure to remit payment to a third-party creditor, after deducting the corresponding amount from an employee's wages per an assignment agreement, constitute fraudulent conversion under a statute criminalizing the conversion of property belonging to another?
Opinions:
Majority - Keller, P. J.
No. An employer's failure to remit such payments is not fraudulent conversion because the money withheld remains the property of the employer, who is merely a debtor. The gist of fraudulent conversion is that the defendant converts money or property belonging to another. Mitchneck did not have possession of any money that belonged to his employees or Vagnoni; he simply owed them money. His deduction from their wages and agreement to pay Vagnoni was a novation, which only changed the identity of his creditor from the employees to Vagnoni. The money itself, however, was still legally Mitchneck's, and his failure to pay was a civil breach of contract, not a criminal act.
Analysis:
This case establishes a crucial distinction between criminal fraudulent conversion and a civil failure to pay a debt. By focusing on the legal title and ownership of the funds, the court prevents the criminal justice system from being used as a mechanism for debt collection. The decision clarifies that for conversion to be criminal, the defendant must be holding funds that are the actual property of the victim, not simply owe a debt that they have failed to pay. This precedent protects debtors from criminal liability for what is fundamentally a breach of contract.
Unlock the full brief for Commonwealth v. Mitchneck